Poll: Teen Shot dead after attempting to mug man

[Warachia]

I did read it thank you. Please don't troll. He shot 8 times to kill someone clearly going for his valuables. He could have fired a warning shot. He could have ran. He had choices - and yes he would be afraid but he didn't know if they were armed or not but pulled his weapon first escalating it and making him the one who made it life or death. Is it understandable? Yes. But should killing someone with intent be something you get away with no repurcussions? No.
Also it doesn't say he could hardly see - "blurred vision" is what it says, which is in his interests to play up - that could mean anything from seeing nothing to a merest haze. It's sad when the article is right there and people still try to make stuff up about how things happened.

A few things wrong there, he didn't shoot 8 times to kill, when you are panicked you don't count your shots, Although I will agree the number of shots was rediculous, you just want to get rid of whatever is attacking you, to shoot to kill is aiming at the person deliberatly to make sure they won't survive, he also used hollow pointed bullets, meaning he never wanted anything he shot with the gun to be killed. In the darkness, with blurred vision and within arms reach of a mugger, you don't have the luxery of a warning shot, or running away, either would probably end in you losing the gun.

Also, if you have blurred vision from somebody punching you in the face, regardless of who it is, you can't see shit.

 

[MrJohnson]

read first


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1346574/Jogger-Thomas-Baker-shot-dead-unarmed-mugger-released-charge.html


I've heard about this, and alot of people are putting the blame on Baker, what's you opinion on this matter?

I believe he had a legitimate reason to fire, he had a CCW permit, he was attacked by 2 people, and feared for his life. Simple, don't want to get shot? don't mug people. He deserved it.

OH NO! PEOPLE ARE BLAMING THE PERSON WHO CARRIED A GUN AROUND AND USED IT TO FUCKING SLAUGHTER TWO PEOPLE THE FIRST TIME HE HAD A REASONABLE DEFENSE!

Holy shit. I remember why people think of nerds as the sweat sociopaths taint of society. For fucks sake.

 

[DalekJaas]

I don't think it was necessary for Baker to kill the kid, sure he had been hit but it is highly unlikely the muggers would have killed him. And if he was jogging I doubt he would have had money or valuables on him. What sort of person goes jogging at midnight?

But then I am from Australia where we don't have a shooting massacre every 2 weeks because people aren't allowed guns.

 

[Doctor Glocktor]

8 shots isn't self defence.
Also, I don't think being mugged qualifies as "reasonable" belief he would die - and risking killing someone over valuables is generally not seen as proportionate or necessary. Not when he saw no weapon (sorry about the double negative).
So I would say he was wrong. And would hope he would be put in jail if it happened in here in the UK - which he probably would. It isn't like he shot to miss as a warning and accidently killed them - he shot to kill.
It is understandable, but I don't think you should be allowed to do that kind of thing.

The guy came out of nowhere with a buddy in the middle of the night, punched him in the face; without any demands, no words saying that he was after his money.

It was more than reasonable.

And don't forget, at least for those of us who actually read the article, after being punched in the face he couldn't see straight. Anybody with a brain can understand that he shot eight times because he could hardly see and had no idea if he hit the guy or not, or if they were doing anything in return.

It's sad when the article is right there and people still try to make stuff up about how things happened.

I did read it thank you. Please don't troll. He shot 8 times to kill someone clearly going for his valuables. He could have fired a warning shot. He could have ran. He had choices - and yes he would be afraid but he didn't know if they were armed or not but pulled his weapon first escalating it and making him the one who made it life or death. Is it understandable? Yes. But should killing someone with intent be something you get away with no repurcussions? No.
Also it doesn't say he could hardly see - "blurred vision" is what it says, which is in his interests to play up - that could mean anything from seeing nothing to a merest haze. It's sad when the article is right there and people still try to make stuff up about how things happened.

How is him disagreeing with you trolling in any way?

He shot 8 times, but only 4 of them hit. Its not hard to hit the trigger more than once, especially when you've just been smashed in the face for no reason and are shocked and terrified of getting shot or gutted. Warning shots are bullshit. The bullet has to go somewhere, if he shoots it in the air, it could hit an innocent guy up to a mile away. He shoots it in the ground, he could harm himself.

As for the blurred vision, I have been hit in the face, and your eyesight gets pretty damn blurred and hard to see. So I really doubt he's bullshitting.

 

[joshthor]

jackass attempts to mug man - gets shot. seems fair. if i were in that situation i would do the same thing.

 

[theSovietConnection]

It's quite simple, the guy was in fear for his life, at that point, the courts let damn near any weapon slide as a weapon of opportunity, whether you like it or not. If I were in that situation, I would use whatever I had in my power to keep that person from causing me harm.

 

[TriggerOnly]

now i personly belive he wanted this to happen but that is my opinon how ever i STRONGly feel that he is as mutch to blame if not more...

I could personally believe that the Earth is flat, but all evidence says otherwise.[/quote]

ok let me start again.

now as i have said i do not care for laws and i really do not care for american laws

law is not human its preset rules that dont take every aspect of live into acount so if you going to give me the law crap its wasted

now i look at this event as simply think i didnt need to heppen... planty of bad ppl and stupid ones out there.

every one has a choise you always have a choise i belive

now the mugers made theres this is ture, but it is not the mugers i am talking about as the question was is the man that shoot another human right given the positoin he was in.

now a personly do not think a gun is not self defence just my view that part of all this/

but as i said every one had a choise and by taking a gun by going out when he knew when any one that age would know is putting your self as some risk. He went and did it any way and now as a result lives have ended.

and wile no your not asking for it. but hell its not like trying to minizie the risk of getting in sutch a situation

 

[X10J]

No and this is why.....

1 you go jogging affter midnight with a gun

2 you get hit ONE time in the face

3 the action you take is to SHOOT the person not RUN or THREATEN with the gun

I say bs he wanted to get attacked he wanted it to end that way, and i get the feeling his ether regreating it (dought it) or his loving it....

Maybe it was poor judgement on his part, but when you think about it, the worst you're accusing him of is vigilantism. Since he didn't provoke the attack, no one can say that he was trying to entrap the muggers...

By the way, I think it's bad to make such a judgement of his character. You don't know what was going through his mind when he drew and used his weapon.

lets look at this man

this man is a jogger so the chance of out running is pritty good i would say

now he pulled a gun out... think about that he PULLED it out he had time to get to it take safty off. So why not threaten? why not put out a warning shot if your feeling or cowboy...

the fact is we can only asume we can only judge that is why we are all here talking that is what the queston is about is he right.....

given this mans choices going out affter dark,late, with a modifed gun..

now i dont care about laws.. laws are broken and can bend.. i care about what i think is right and what i think is wrong... to me this man understood what he was doing...

legal murder mate.

If I may advocate for the devil.

Lets look at this man.

This man was jogging, and so could possibly have been winded already. He was also dazed from a strike to the face and potentialy outflanked by multiple opponents. Making escape difficult.

He was training to join the military, and clearly new his way around a weapon. He could probably draw a weapon and remove the safety relatively quickly. He also may know that threatening someone with a weapon isn't always enough http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80703761/. Also, warning shots have to land somewhere

He was out late, after dark which realy isn't a surprize. Lots people excercise before they take shower, usualy either rather early or rather late, I imagine that the latter was more convinient. He brought a gun incase he needed to defend himself, unfortunately he did.

I doubt that he was going out in an atempt to kill someone. I doubt that as he was leaving his house he was thinking "man, I hope I get mugged tonight," nor can I see his getting punched in the face as part of his plans for the night.

 

[s0m3th1ng]

Jesus, SO many misconceptions in this thread about firearms... I'll just address a couple of them.
1st: CCW holders are taught to shoot to kill. Shooting to wound is an admission that your life was not in danger. It's also pretty much impossible to hit specific body parts when under duress while at night. Firing warning shots is also illegal in most cities.
2nd: 8 Shots fired from anyone remotely familiar with their weapon will take 2 seconds at most.
3rd: Hollow points are recommended for ALL self-defense guns. They cause more damage to the target and do not penetrate to unintended targets.
4th: A laser sight does not make the gun "Modified". It's an accessory that increases accuracy under duress when you don't have time to sight properly, in situations such as this.

The guy deserved whatever defense the jogger could muster. Be it via fist, pepper spray or bullet. I am NOT saying he deserved to die. The jogger was completely in the right of our laws. Whether that becomes a moral issue should be saved for another thread, as we are mixing emotional and factual arguments in this one.

 

[X10J]

Whether that becomes a moral issue should be saved for another thread, as we are mixing emotional and factual arguments in this one.

I disagree mate. The entire point of the thread is whether He's right or not. Morality falls into that, I think.

 

[TheTim]

With his lip cut and suffering blurred vision he said he pulled out a handgun that was fitted with a laser sight and fired eight times.
Mustelier was hit four times with hollow pointed bullets fired from the .45calibre weapon.

Bit of an overreaction, don't you think?
I don't think it's what I'd do

You'd be suprised what people do when they believe they could lose their life.

 

[Rensenhito]

Something about this doesn't add up. For one thing, according to the article, "Baker was out jogging alone after midnight." Doesn't that seem odd to anyone else?
Also, while Baker may not have violated any self-defense laws, he most DEFINITELY used excessive force. "he pulled out a handgun that was fitted with a laser sight and fired eight times," hitting the mugger four times with hollow-point bullets. I don't know if you guys know about hollow-points, but they basically explode on impact. I've always been of the opinion that hollow-points should be outlawed because they basically constitute unnecessary force in and of themselves.
So, in the end, even if this whole thing really played out the way it was reported, Baker's still on shaky legal ground with me.

 

[crudus]

How was the jogger to know if the muggers weren't going to pull weapons? Some bank robberies never pull any weapons. They just give the teller's threatening notes and have their weapon concealed. I can totally get behind the guy shooting. I may have not unloaded my clip. I can't say for sure, though. I have never been in this situation.

OK im new here to posting but whatever.

I almost called bullshit when I read that. There is someone else with you exact avatar. I found it hilarious.

 

[Broken Orange]

It is a shame the kid had to die, but Baker felt that his life was in danger and had the right to enact lethal force. Sure, in hindsight, it is easy to say that it was excessive shooting someone 8 times.

Yet, for all the people who say he should've fired a warning shot or shot in the leg, just keep that in mind next time you play "Left 4 Dead" or "Call of Duty" and you get bummed rush by a group of hostiles. You panic and spray rounds at anything that could be a threat. I know that video games is nothing like real life, but it is a good way of getting my point across to anyone who hasn't been in a life or death situation.

 

[Darkauthor81]

Sorry but I have to disagree with a lot of people here. It was just a couple of kids and the guy shot him eight times. He could have fired a warning shot, I mean hes clearly capable of handling himself if hes applying for the military and keeps fit. The kid had his whole life to turn around, but now he won't get that chance. People who do bad things can change, and I don't think it was necessary to shot him eight times so he was sure he would be dead.

Yes because when you're attacked, struck in the face, you have those kind of cognitive skills and you're totally not scared to death you're about to die.

Those boys very well easily have killed him trying to knock him out for his money.

This isn't a movie. It's not a video game or an anime. The threat, the fear, and the pain were real.

You're obviously someone who's never been robbed or victimized. I envy your innocents. The real world doesn't work the way you hope it does kid.

 

[FollowUp]

I say Yes*.
The asterisk because eight shots with HOLLOW POINTS is overkill. he unloaded that weapon into his mugger, but that might even be blamed on the circumstance. It would have been best if the mugger was not killed, but in situations like that, shooting at all is shooting to kill, especially with a gun with that much stopping power.