Poll: Teen Shot dead after attempting to mug man

[Cyberjester]

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.

LIES!

Warning shots are for people outside of knife range. If someone attacks you right up close, and you think they're going to pull a weapon on you, firing a warning shot and "can you please not attack me sir? I have some money I'd rather not lose" is pretty stupid. It's funny.. I'm one of those passive regressive hippy types. On the one hand, I think that hurting people is bad and shooting someone is just not in. On the other hand.. Well, "excuse me sir, I'm just calling the police, would you mind not stabbing me for a bit?" doesn't cut it. So.. Mental conflict but I'm going to go with, good on the guy. If you're going to shoot someone may as well do the job right, no point deductions for a warning shot or polite objection, points for staying with the kid and instantly calling the police/ambo.

'shrugs'

He did good lol

Oo, like to point out that he fired eight times, hit the kid four times. I'm guessing the guy panicked? "Blurred vision", shock, all that. So he would have squeezed till there was just clicks. Which removes your theory of a mean, callous man shooting the person, watching them fall on the ground, then standing over and emptying the pistol into them.

 

[chunkeymonke]

i think the shooter had a right to pull his wepon out but really should've shown mroe discretion with pulling the trigger.
if he had just threated and gone to the police no lives would've been lost, but he had the right to shoot if he felt threated

 

[Brandon237]

He should of just pointed the gun at him,not shoot him!This is what happens when you buy a gun without thinking about why you actually need it.No Baker wasn't right,atleast when buying a gun learn how to use it.You can't just go around killing everyone who tries to mug you,sometimes you should just go with it(Or buy something safer like a taser or pepper spray).

"Killing everyone who tries to mug you?" The article states that TWO youths assaulted Baker while he was out jogging. Baker shot and killed only ONE.

Also, when Baker saw two males approaching him when it was dark, how could he have known what ages they were? Then when one of them said "I'm going to bam him.. I'm gonna knock him out," who is to say in what way they meant it. 'Bam' could easily be interpreted as shooting or something involving a gun. Though 'knock him out' is clearer in its meaning, blunt trauma to the skull often results in more than just a temporary loss of consciousness. Baker could have been facing serious brain damage or death even if the youths weren't armed.

Overall, the article doesn't really give enough to go on; however, I feel more certain that the 5 hour police interview got most of the details and they probably made the correct, most informed decision based on the laws of Florida.

He shot him 8 fucking times this isn't self defence , this is "shoot to kill".It would of taken him only one shot to scare of the attackers.And c'mmon who the fuck goes jogging after midnight carrying 500$ and a hand gun.Normaal ppl wake up at 5 in the morning and go jogging with no money and no guns,but this guy just had to push his luck.I'm sure he was just looking to buy some drugs and that's the reason he brought his gun and his money.Whatever the reason is Baker isn't clean at all.they should send him to jail for attleast 5 years.

The dude had just been disorientated by a blow to the face, I've had that, you can't see or think straight for jack, and 1 bullet is only enough to maim in most cases, IF IT HITS AT ALL. He shot eight bullets, only four hit, that tells you it would have taken AT LEAST two bullets average to scratch the mugger. And if the muggers had been doing their thing for a while, they sure as hell would not give up just because he was armed, they would try to kill him. What he did was justified, no two ways about it.

 

[goldendriger]

C- There was no need to fire, he over reacted. Im sure they would of backed off if he pull out his gun and waved it around, like i said in an earlier post if they reached for something when he did that, then fired, well fair enough, but he had no reason to assume they had any kind of weapon. In fact it would of been unlikely, if someone tried to mug someone they use what the have, they have a knife they put it against the victims throat, they have a gun they'd show it, but since they just hit him then its unlikely they WERE armed.

Plus why should we think "Yep, they just wanted his money and his iphone, shoot the bastards" really? does that really justify death?

Here's an age old question used in modern times, if a boy steals a loaf of bread to feed his starving family, does he deserve to be shot? according to these posts, it seems so.

It was close range and there was two of them. Very easy to take a gun off someone in those circumstances. Which there's a good chance they would try to do, not smart to turn your back on someone who just pulled a gun. Why should he risk having his own gun turned on him. Should he have waited until they had really kicked the shit out of him before firing? He didn't know he was being mugged, he was attacked without warning. They didn't ask for money they just attacked him. Again, should he have waited to see what happened and risked serious harm to himself. Remember, we can say all that happened in hindsight but look at it from his eyes.
All he knew was he was being randomly assaulted by two people who had him at a disadvantage. They could be armed. In that instance you draw and use your weapon before they use theirs.

Very much doubt i would, see im not a pussy so i dont carry a gun. And again they just attacked him? so its clear they didnt have a weapon, if they had a gun he'd be dead, he wouldnt get punched in the face, he's of lost a leg or worse.

 

[Withall]

Pulling out the gun, loudly announcing "I have a weapon. Back off" would have been "proper" behaviour. Shooting (at) the kid eight times (hitting him four times) with hollow points? That's bloody vindictive! Literally.

Actually, if you've been trained with a handgun, they teach you to empty the magazine into people. Single bullets don't kill people very easily, and accuracy with a handgun in a hectic environment is bloody awful. So, you're told that if you're going to shoot someone, you might as well shoot them to hell. It's not overkill unless he reloaded.

While your point is indeed correct;I didn't not mean it as "*pull gun, empty clip in nearest aggressor*", I meant it as what it initially sounded like: "Back off- or I will shoot you".

A verbal, and very real threat against the kid's safety in the context it would have been given would have been the proper response. With that said, I don't have any firearms or "hostile scenario" training to speak off- I'm just being rhetorical here.

 

[goldendriger]

So lets see if i got this right, Guy A gets punched in the face by guy B, Guy A pulls out a gun and shoots Guy B? well if i got that right, arrest guy A, its call "Excessive force" if he pulled out a gun and told them to back off, and 1 reached for something, fair enough, but he basically went "Oh no a fist fight, BANG!"

That's total bullshit right there.

So what, if you're alone at night and one of two people punch you in the head with the intent to mug you, you're gonna look for a fair fight or say to yourself "Hurr...well he only punched me so I guess it wouldn't be fair to use everything in my means to defend myself"?

Ah i suppose you're right, if someone punches me in the face first think i think of is "Someone touches me? yeah they deserve to die over that, too bad guys" i dont think id have a problem A- Running, you have your adrenalin (CBA With Spelling) pumping so you'll run faster, or B- just punching them back, but then again im not a total pussy who needs to carry a gun around WHILE GOING FOR A RUN, suspisious much?

 

[Shotgunjack1880]

Most .45's are a 7+1 weapon. Meaning 7 rounds in the mag plus an extra in the chamber totaling 8. He just emptied the mag, most likely in shear reaction or panic. If he would've had a 9mm he might have shot more because it holds more.

"If he had a 9mm" or "If he'd had a 9mm"
not "If he would have(/would've) had ..."

Sorry, huge pet peeve.

OT: I don't think it was morally correct to shoot the kid, let alone kill him, even if the death was unintentional.

However he has the legal right to do so. Which is why I'll never spend any more time in the United States than I have to.

Thats the funny thing about morals. Everyone has them, even serial killers. Just everyone has there own personal set of morals. As for the correction, I appreciate it, though I'm not writing a term paper here. Thirdly, the fact some waste of carbon idiot kid got fragged, who gives a good goddamn. Lastly, I find it sad that you don't like being in our country, for reason I'm not sure. Don't mug a guy with a gun buddy, and you'll be fine. It's not like we're getting in shootouts all the time over here, you got a better chance of dying in a car.

 

[Acalla]

You know he could of just pistol whipped him, or shot him in the leg in self defence, rather than shoot him eight times with the intention of making him dead.

So no, I don't think he had a right to kill him (no one has the right to kill anybody no matter what they do).

Yah, cause its so easy to take aim after you have been hit in the face or really think someone is going to kill you. This isn't TV or the movies, you fire in a panic because you are trying to save your life.

And really, no one has the right to kill anybody no what they do? So if these kids had knives on him, that doesn't make it justified?

 

[anthony87]

So lets see if i got this right, Guy A gets punched in the face by guy B, Guy A pulls out a gun and shoots Guy B? well if i got that right, arrest guy A, its call "Excessive force" if he pulled out a gun and told them to back off, and 1 reached for something, fair enough, but he basically went "Oh no a fist fight, BANG!"

That's total bullshit right there.

So what, if you're alone at night and one of two people punch you in the head with the intent to mug you, you're gonna look for a fair fight or say to yourself "Hurr...well he only punched me so I guess it wouldn't be fair to use everything in my means to defend myself"?

Ah i suppose you're right, if someone punches me in the face first think i think of is "Someone touches me? yeah they deserve to die over that, too bad guys" i dont think id have a problem A- Running, you have your adrenalin (CBA With Spelling) pumping so you'll run faster, or B- just punching them back, but then again im not a total pussy who needs to carry a gun around WHILE GOING FOR A RUN, suspisious much?

"Touching"?

You're changing the context for the sake of your argument. He wasn't touched, he was punched in the back of the head. He was disoriented and made a snap decision to defend himself. Carrying a gun has nothing to do with being a pussy, it's the same as people who carry a taser or pepper spray or whatnot. Plus it's not like they said "WARNING! PREPARE TO BE MUGGED!". If you thought that someone meant to kill you and you had a gun on your person, would you not try and kill them first? Or would that be too much of a pussy thing to do according to you?

 

[macfluffers]

While your point is indeed correct;I didn't not mean it as "*pull gun, empty clip in nearest aggressor*", I meant it as what it initially sounded like: "Back off- or I will shoot you".

A verbal, and very real threat against the kid's safety in the context it would have been given would have been the proper response. With that said, I don't have any firearms or "hostile scenario" training to speak off- I'm just being rhetorical here.

Fair enough. In this case, he thought that they had a gun because it looked like they were reached for something, so I don't think he had the time for it, but in a calmer situation a warning might be appropriate.

WARNING! PREPARE TO BE MUGGED!

HAHAHAHAHA

There should be a law requiring all muggers to shout this before attacking someone.

 

[goldendriger]

So lets see if i got this right, Guy A gets punched in the face by guy B, Guy A pulls out a gun and shoots Guy B? well if i got that right, arrest guy A, its call "Excessive force" if he pulled out a gun and told them to back off, and 1 reached for something, fair enough, but he basically went "Oh no a fist fight, BANG!"

That's total bullshit right there.

So what, if you're alone at night and one of two people punch you in the head with the intent to mug you, you're gonna look for a fair fight or say to yourself "Hurr...well he only punched me so I guess it wouldn't be fair to use everything in my means to defend myself"?

Ah i suppose you're right, if someone punches me in the face first think i think of is "Someone touches me? yeah they deserve to die over that, too bad guys" i dont think id have a problem A- Running, you have your adrenalin (CBA With Spelling) pumping so you'll run faster, or B- just punching them back, but then again im not a total pussy who needs to carry a gun around WHILE GOING FOR A RUN, suspisious much?

"Touching"?

You're changing the context for the sake of your argument. He wasn't touched, he was punched in the back of the head. He was disoriented and made a snap decision to defend himself. Carrying a gun has nothing to do with being a pussy, it's the same as people who carry a taser or pepper spray or whatnot. Plus it's not like they said "WARNING! PREPARE TO BE MUGGED!". If you thought that someone meant to kill you and you had a gun on your person, would you not try and kill them first? Or would that be too much of a pussy thing to do according to you?

Well he should defend himself, im saying there was no need to fly off the handle like he did, he didnt think he pulled out a gun and killed someone, if i was him (And i HAD to use the gun) id threaten with it, things id think "Ouch, my head...ouch, what the hells happening? oh someone just punched me" so naturally id turn around and if i HAD to pull out my gun, i would id point it at them and say something like "Right, who's the smart ass now then? back off" i wouldnt go "Argh omg! kill everyone" lets look it it another way, he fired 8 shots and missed with a few of them, so what if a stray bullet hit and killed an innocent person, should he be arrested? i bet most on this forum would say "Oh no, he didnt MEAN to kill them innocent" i just think of it as "You reacted backly to a situation, made the wrong call, jail time" i wouldnt let this guy go free.

 

[chunkeymonke]

i like how lightly people are treating this, it was self defence but he still murderd this kid, yes the kid was horrible to try to mug someone and deserved jail but he didnt deserve death he was a kid. You dont need to shoot him just warn them or pull it out andp oint it at them but no need to murder him, Baker didn't even know if they were armed when he shot them if he had seen a knife or gun he had his right to kill him but it was two unarmed versus one guy with a gun, i'm not saying the mugger is a victim or poor mugger but a crime of assult and petty theft doesnt deserve death. Everyone has stolen something in their life or punched someone, now imagine the second you stole something or punched that person they pull out a gun without warning and shot you 8 times its a little extreme

 

[macfluffers]

Well he should defend himself, im saying there was no need to fly off the handle like he did, he didnt think he pulled out a gun and killed someone, if i was him (And i HAD to use the gun) id threaten with it, things id think "Ouch, my head...ouch, what the hells happening? oh someone just punched me" so naturally id turn around and if i HAD to pull out my gun, i would id point it at them and say something like "Right, who's the smart ass now then? back off" i wouldnt go "Argh omg! kill everyone" lets look it it another way, he fired 8 shots and missed with a few of them, so what if a stray bullet hit and killed an innocent person, should he be arrested? i bet most on this forum would say "Oh no, he didnt MEAN to kill them innocent" i just think of it as "You reacted backly to a situation, made the wrong call, jail time" i wouldnt let this guy go free.

"Smartass"? This wasn't an annoying slap to the back of the head, it has an disorienting attack. He didn't have the time or concentration to do what you say he should have done.

You shouldn't threaten someone with a gun. It's a weapon, and you having it out and pointing it at someone means that you want that person dead. That's how handguns are supposed to be used.

You can't send someone to jail for fighting for their life. He made his decisions in the frame of about a second. No jury would convict him.

Think of it this way: if he did what you asked him too, and the muggers turned out to be experienced and armed, they wouldn't run away. They'd shoot him, and we'd instead be talking about how having a gun is useless since he got shot while having one anyway.

 

[Unesh52]

snip

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.

I disagree. The guy was laying on the ground with a busted lip. He says he had "blurred vision." If that's really the case, he couldn't be sure if he was even hitting either of the two assailants he suspected were armed. Firing conservatively in that situation would be more likely to get you immediately shot rather than save your life.

Besides, he wasn't trying to scare them off. He was trying to kill them. We've already discussed how it was legal and reasonable for him to try and kill people he had good reason to think would be armed and trying to rob him, so the number of shots doesn't really matter. Dead is dead, regardless of the number of bullets.

The only thing I don't get is why that idiot was running around after midnight with 500 bucks in his pocket.

 

[The Night Shade]

Someone try to rob him so he pull a gun in self defense.He is the victim

 

[chunkeymonke]

also on the topic of the whole "you were punched you may be disorentated" i've been punched hard just like 90% of the human race has been punched hard before and you have to agrre being punched doesnt instantly make you loopy enough to just pull the trigger without thinking

 

[anthony87]

So lets see if i got this right, Guy A gets punched in the face by guy B, Guy A pulls out a gun and shoots Guy B? well if i got that right, arrest guy A, its call "Excessive force" if he pulled out a gun and told them to back off, and 1 reached for something, fair enough, but he basically went "Oh no a fist fight, BANG!"

That's total bullshit right there.

So what, if you're alone at night and one of two people punch you in the head with the intent to mug you, you're gonna look for a fair fight or say to yourself "Hurr...well he only punched me so I guess it wouldn't be fair to use everything in my means to defend myself"?

Ah i suppose you're right, if someone punches me in the face first think i think of is "Someone touches me? yeah they deserve to die over that, too bad guys" i dont think id have a problem A- Running, you have your adrenalin (CBA With Spelling) pumping so you'll run faster, or B- just punching them back, but then again im not a total pussy who needs to carry a gun around WHILE GOING FOR A RUN, suspisious much?

"Touching"?

You're changing the context for the sake of your argument. He wasn't touched, he was punched in the back of the head. He was disoriented and made a snap decision to defend himself. Carrying a gun has nothing to do with being a pussy, it's the same as people who carry a taser or pepper spray or whatnot. Plus it's not like they said "WARNING! PREPARE TO BE MUGGED!". If you thought that someone meant to kill you and you had a gun on your person, would you not try and kill them first? Or would that be too much of a pussy thing to do according to you?

Well he should defend himself, im saying there was no need to fly off the handle like he did, he didnt think he pulled out a gun and killed someone, if i was him (And i HAD to use the gun) id threaten with it, things id think "Ouch, my head...ouch, what the hells happening? oh someone just punched me" so naturally id turn around and if i HAD to pull out my gun, i would id point it at them and say something like "Right, who's the smart ass now then? back off" i wouldnt go "Argh omg! kill everyone" lets look it it another way, he fired 8 shots and missed with a few of them, so what if a stray bullet hit and killed an innocent person, should he be arrested? i bet most on this forum would say "Oh no, he didnt MEAN to kill them innocent" i just think of it as "You reacted backly to a situation, made the wrong call, jail time" i wouldnt let this guy go free.

The fact is that we could discuss this until The Escapist has to shut down due to some in office sex scandal, but neither one of us can know what we'd do in that situation, you don't know that you wouldn't just panic instead of keeping your cool and thinking "Ouch, my head...ouch, what the hells happening? oh someone just punched me"

Besides, isn't it within the law in America to kill someone if it's in self defense?
(Not American, wouldn't know)

 

[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.

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.

No, you misunderstand.

You can't do something like kill someone and walk away without feeling guilt. The fact of the matter is that killing someone, no matter how justifiable, and no matter what the reason, is still wrong.

Just patting him on the back and saying it's okay won't help him. He'll still carry that guilt around with him. A short spell in jail, like a week or so, let's him recognise that the wrong doing, again which is justified, is paid for, and he can move on. It prevents problems later on, which might have consequences for others, like his family and friends if he tries to drown the guilt in alcohol.

Justification of an action does not preclude a punishment. That's immature. You need to encourage recognition of wrong doing, and a willingness to accept the consequences by breaking societies rules. You don't want to have people thinking they can get away with murder in the right circumstances.

To me that's real justice. Not just assigning blame.

But that has nothing to do with any current legal systems I know. I'm just day dreaming about what I think would be better

 

[macfluffers]

Someone try to rob him so he pull a gun in self defense.He is the victim

I love simplicity. This really is what it boils down to, isn't it? The talk about overkill and warning shots is silly. Mugger = dead is really all it took for me to make my opinion.

 

[Seneschal]

If he didn't have the "presence of mind" to restrain himself from shooting a gun eight times, he shouldn't be carrying a gun.

The only reason I'm accepting of US gun laws is because it's a nation with a past closely tied to firearms, and probably with a population most experienced in their use. Or rather, experienced in gun safety and wise enough to know NOT to use them for every single thing. This obviously isn't the case with this gun nut with laser sights and bad trigger discipline.

Yes, you'd get mugged or knifed in "commie" Europe, and you wouldn't get to shoot. A couple of joggers losing their wallets to petty crime is a small price to pay for the almost absolute lack of any gun violence on the streets in my book.