Poll: Teen Shot dead after attempting to mug man

[Moromillas]

What do you mean by "Was Baker right?" Baker doesn't have a quote anywhere in the article, right about what?

8 shots is 100% reasonable, justifiable, and understandable, he was afraid for his very life.

 

[Nexus4]

Moral of the story: make sure the guy your about to mug isn't packing Stupid kid

 

[Zenthunder]

its horrible that anyone died they where just stupid and young not an exuse just a waste

 

[Jonabob87]

So it's better that a young man dies than a middle aged man loses the cash he's carrying?

Just another reason why gun control is completely necessary. When your first reaction to a threat is to take someones life there's something very wrong. There's a huge difference between self-defense and murder/manslaughter.

 

[Atheist.]

i hate to use the "slippery slope" fallacy, but well... it is. where do you draw the line? in Montana, where i live, a Wal-mart employee recently shot another when they got in an argument. the state had recently passed a law similar to Florida's "stand your ground" law, and he claimed he felt his life was in danger (even though they were both at work, in Wal-mart...). who's to say if he was right or wrong? all i know is someone got shot at Wal-mart over a stupid disagreement and a potentially dangerous law, setting an even more dangerous precedent.

granted, in Baker's case, his life was more clearly in danger, but shooting him 4 times seems excessive. idk... not gonna pass judgement here. on one hand the mugger deserved it, but i just see this leading to bad things.

I agree. What if the shooter simply pulled out his gun? Would the mugger have fled upon realising the danger to his life? Or even just a bullet to the leg. I don't think the shooter should be punished but this is a case of excessive force.

Unfortunately it's real life. You really cant just "shoot someone in the leg" it's not that easy. In a struggle when the bad guys are at close range multiple shots are the only real option.

This. When incredibly stressful situations present themselves, humans often act in excess. His primary goal was to protect himself from danger, above preserving the assailants life.

Also, I couldn't care less that some of the incredible quantity of scum is wiped from this planet. We need better methods of criminal population control. If we executed every criminal, I bet we would see a serious drop in crime... Sticking people in prisons for years as we do in America accomplishes nothing.

 

[Valiard]

I disagree with some of the posters here who think that a criminal has the right to take by force what you earned with honest labour. The idiot got what he deserved case closed.

 

[QuantumT]

So it's better that a young man dies than a middle aged man loses the cash he's carrying?

Just another reason why gun control is completely necessary. When your first reaction to a threat is to take someones life there's something very wrong. There's a huge difference between self-defense and murder/manslaughter.

How is defending myself from someone who came up and assaulted me unreasonable in any way?

Baker didn't even know they were just after his money. All Baker knew was that some person he didn't know had just punched him in the face, and he feared for his life.

 

[bpm195]

I disagree with some of the posters here who think that a criminal has the right to take by force what you earned with honest labour the idiot got what he deserved case closed.

Yeah, being against lethal force is exactly the same as supporting criminals.

Anyway it's unfortunate that a child got killed, but his actions were idiotic and it was all his fault. Mugging is a big boy crime, and it seems like he made the childish mistake of thinking he could knock out a guy in one hit.

Oh well, live and learn....

 

[Jonabob87]

So it's better that a young man dies than a middle aged man loses the cash he's carrying?

Just another reason why gun control is completely necessary. When your first reaction to a threat is to take someones life there's something very wrong. There's a huge difference between self-defense and murder/manslaughter.

How is defending myself from someone who came up and assaulted me unreasonable in any way?

Baker didn't even know they were just after his money. All Baker knew was that some person he didn't know had just punched him in the face, and he feared for his life.

So the first response isn't to, say, punch him back? No it's to end his life. Can you honestly defend that decision to kill someone for hurting you? It's not so much fear as it is cowardice.

 

[QuantumT]

So it's better that a young man dies than a middle aged man loses the cash he's carrying?

Just another reason why gun control is completely necessary. When your first reaction to a threat is to take someones life there's something very wrong. There's a huge difference between self-defense and murder/manslaughter.

How is defending myself from someone who came up and assaulted me unreasonable in any way?

Baker didn't even know they were just after his money. All Baker knew was that some person he didn't know had just punched him in the face, and he feared for his life.

So the first response isn't to, say, punch him back? No it's to end his life. Can you honestly defend that decision to kill someone for hurting you? It's not so much fear as it is cowardice.

It isn't just that he hurt Baker. Baker had no way of judging whether or not his very life was at stake, so he stayed on the safe side and defended himself.

Anyone who's actually done any real self defense knows that it isn't a time when you pussyfoot around. You hit full force with everything at your disposal, because to do anything else jeopardizes your own life even further. You don't do nonsensical stuff like just punch him, try and disarm him, shoot him in the leg, or whatever other nonsense you can think of. You try to end it as quickly as possible, with whatever means are available.

And go ahead and call him a coward if you want. We'll see how brave you are when some person randomly assaults you.

 

[Saulkar]

A) who the hell carries a revolver (with hollow point and a laser sight he must think hes a hit man or something..) going out on a late night run..? And its was a concealed weapon, who other than the police and the army carry licenses for a pistol and to also conceal it..?

B) who goes out on late night runs, just ludicrous..

C) if you have a license for said concealed gun then why isn't he trained to use it properly and knee-cap his attacker instead of shooting them, 4 times, in the chest..

D) these muggers were unarmed and posed a seriously limited effect to his life and so fatal force was unnecessary.

E) also carrying $500 in cash whilst on a run.. this seems extremely fishy to me, more fishy than fishy, McFish..

F) death is not a suitable punishment for battery, if it was then the death rate by state execution would amount to something like several hundred thousand per year whereas its only about 100 or more currently..

Overall, stupid that people are allowed to go around carrying guns like that and also that he has been let off for murder (or at least manslaughter) he has intent to harm and possibly kill and also he has killed someone so I would charge him guilty of manslaughter.. or at least if it had been in the UK that would have been the verdict.

It is the mail though so they probably over exaggerated the information..

EDIT: also soldiers, are always told to inform any civilians that they will open fire if said civilian does not surrender. Kinda proves that no-one outside of law-enforcement and the army should be allowed a gun, and these groups having guns is debatable as well..

Agreed. To jog at night, with $500 in cash, in what might have been a fishy neighborhood (or at least somewhere you don't frequent at night), doesn't fit with the common sense i thought most people were taught.
And for a former military man to do so with a powerful weapon, clearly ready to use it in an emergency, to be unable to use said weapon responsibly (8 shots in a daze is NOT responsible, but how i expect an untrained terrified civilian to act) seems strange. Maybe he was old, and it's been a while. But why keep such a powerful weapon if you are not sure you can handle such a situation calmly?

It said he was 28 and he was getting in shape to join the military, he never had any military training.

 

[beniki]

Yes, he was right to defend himself, but he still needs to be punished for killing someone. It will help him get over what he's done.

Even though it was totally justified, you still need to deal with the fact you've done something horrible. A bit of jail time will help him get through that, without him doing something stupid in the name of punishing himself.

 

[Amphoteric]

not enough information to decide

 

[katsabas]

I do not think that Carlos deserved to die over someone's wallet but he did try to rob that someone. Self-defense. That-shot eight times-thing is also a bit floopy. If Baker was punched and he couldn't see right, yeah, I would fire many shots as well to be sure.

But there are things that do not make sense here. 1)If you go out jogging at night, do you do it while carrying a small fortune in your wallet?

2)Hollow point bullets? I am not a gun expert but I know that these things kill quite easy. Aren't there plastic or air bullets or something?

3)Only Baker can know about the state of his vision. We do not know if he lied or not.

 

[the trooper]

i agree with that, although i think he may have just panicked and wasn't thinking straight when he fired 8 shots. I do think he was in the right to defend himself But this goes to show that the law for carrying guns for civilians should be scrapped. It only happened caz he thought the teen had a gun, something that strikes me as a easy purchase in usa

 

[TinariKao]

You people need to consider something.

The man was punched in the face hard enough that even with a laser sighted pistol in apparent melee range, with eight shots he only landed four.

People can very much get knocked out in a single hit. If you're surprised and not ready for it, you're even more likely to bite the dirt. If this fellow did indeed just jump the guy and hit him in the skull region then the man was very likely dazed, confused, scared and shocked. I am no gun expert but if I am trying I can do better than 50% accuracy at 10 yards with any handgun I've used.

 

[bpm195]

Yes, he was right to defend himself, but he still needs to be punished for killing someone. It will help him get over what he's done.

Even though it was totally justified, you still need to deal with the fact you've done something horrible. A bit of jail time will help him get through that, without him doing something stupid in the name of punishing himself.

If you're justified in your action then there reason to punish you in the name of justice.

Jail is not a place to send somebody for post traumatic stress syndrome, furthermore he hasn't even been diagnosed with that. Sending him to jail for his own good is moronic. If he does for some reason need therapy that has NOTHING to do with the justice system.

 

[Firia]

A point that is brought up in the article is, "how is 8 shots self defense?" I see this question echoed in this thread more than a few times.

I've fired a real handgun before. My very first time, it was a 9mm glock with a friend of my dads. I thought, wow, this thing is cool. I'm going to drill that block of wood, and everyone is going to be so impressed (I was 12, I think). I emptied the whole clip (and hit nothing but dirt) before my dads friend could tell me to slow down. That was a 15 shot clip, and it was gone in a second.

The rational mind, the thing you're using here and now reading this thread, is not the same as the adrenaline saturated mind that you become drugged by in a dangerous situation. For anyone that's faced sudden and immediate danger, your mind panics. You don't make rational choices. You just act in a way that your instinct tells you to to save your ass. This goes for a kitchen fire, a mugging, a rape, a cave in, whatever.

It doesn't surprise me that after getting clocked in the face, Baker squeezed out 8 shots. He hit 4 times, and that was probably all luck, considering the lighting conditions and the blur effect of being punched. He feared for his life, and acted in panic to defend himself. 8 shots is the act of a panicked man.

Now, was he right to kill a man? Well I won't judge that. But at the same time, if it happens to me, it would probably go down the same way.

 

[Superior Mind]

I think at the moment the muggers decided to commit the crime they forfeited their right to safety - but their lives? I don't know. If the killing was absolutely necessary than I would condone it - however the story seems to suggest that it was not. Then again not knowing the circumstances of the incident I can only speculate, maybe there was a real belief that his life was in danger, but I think that taking a life should be an ultimate last resort regardless of the circumstances.

The case is interesting as it is one of the very few examples around of a victim of a crime defending himself successfully with his own firearm. The only question is did he really need to kill the kid? Hindsight would inform us that he didn't but at the time - who knows right, anything could have happened.

I don't think this case speaks as an advocate for firearms. Even if it did considering the recent Arizona shooting it kind of loses its sting a bit.