Poll: Teen Shot dead after attempting to mug man

[Housebroken Lunatic]

No. He was wrong. If someone mugs you, but punches you rather than draw a weapon on you, then you should at least start by threatening them with the weapon you are carrying. A reflexive response to "shoot first, ask questions later", proves why civilians should not be given the power to end peoples live so easily.

That might be reasonable against just one aggressor. When you are outnumbered however, you have to take any course of action that will give you the upper hand or you run a serious risk of getting killed.

And to all of you that say the mugger "deserved to be shot": that's disgusting. Not even if he'd had a weapon (where lethal self-defence is excusable), would he have "deserved" to die. There is no logical explanation that can ever be given as to why a person "deserves" death.

But it is a "logical" claim that someone deserves to live?

I seriously doubt you know what "logic" means. Life or death are not matters of logic.

 

[Mcface]

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.

I understand, and unless we were there, we don't know the specifics, how close was the mugger etc. I just think that shooting the guy 8 times is a tad excessive.

True, but when you take into consideration the hectic situation, and how fast weapons can fire 8 shots can be fired in what.. about 2 seconds? if the guy was really fighting for his life it's not hard to see where the 8 shots would come from.

 

[HellspawnCandy]

I quote
"The statute provides immunity for a citizen who reasonably believes they are in danger of serious bodily injury or death or the commission of forcible felony,"

"That person has the right to use deadly force. They don't have to retreat. They can use deadly force to protect themselves. The key is that belief has to be reasonable."

All that needs to be said, it's a shame that that kid chose to commit a crime out of desperation but that's how it happened. The man was responsible, he may have been dizzy and just slammed his finger on the trigger but he called the police apparently immediately after and that's that.

 

[Zanaxal]

To all those who say no take a stroll down a dark ally with a rolex. If you don't get stabbed etc you must have a hell of a luck.

 

[DanielDeFig]

The fact that this happened and so many people condone it sickens me. Why not just make mugging punishable by the death penalty? It's the equivalent.

Heh. If they were willing to follow through with their logic, which they have proven they are not. Why use that line of reasoning if you can't defend it all the way?

 

[meowchef]

There is absolutely no debate that Baker was in the right. A person has the right to defend themselves... especially when they fear for their life.

 

[WakeTheDead1]

i have no sympathy for muggers, they got what was coming

 

[omega 616]

Did he deserve to die? No.
But at the same time, I don't think the shooter should be punished for defending himself, especially if he had the license to carry the weapon.

And this is coming from someone who thinks America's right to bare arms is ridiculously outdated.

I agree on the out dated thing.

I am kind of in the middle on who's wrong here though. The mugger was wrong for hitting the guy and going to rob him but shooting a kid 8 times for $500?

Seems over the top for self defence, one or two and the kids would have ran but 8 is "I am going to kill you no matter what!".

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

The fact that this happened and so many people condone it sickens me. Why not just make mugging punishable by the death penalty? It's the equivalent.

No it isn't an equivalent. A robbery case actually going to trial has the benefit of hindsight and afterthought. It also implies that both parties survived the crime.

When you are being held up however you have no way of knowing if the muggers who assault you are going to let you get away with your life. For all you know, they could kill you as soon as you've handed over your wallet. I.e, when the crime occurs, the victim doesn't have the luxury of afterthought or hindsight. He or she is right there in the moment and has to make a tactical choice ON THE SPOT that insures that he or she walks out of the situation in one piece. If that means killing one of the muggers with a gun, then that's the only right course of action to take.

Or perhaps you'd prefer a society where mugging is perfectly okay? Yeah, let's make the lives of muggers EVEN EASIER!

 

[DanielDeFig]

But it is a "logical" claim that someone deserves to live?

I seriously doubt you know what "logic" means. Life or death are not matters of logic.

How are you supposed to reason if you don't use logic? And how can you come up with ethical and moral arguments if you don't use reason?

 

[Leg End]

The fact that this happened and so many people condone it sickens me. Why not just make mugging punishable by the death penalty? It's the equivalent.

Well, when you are fucked in the back of the head with a hard hit, you would have the assumption that your life is in danger. Therefor, lethal means to defend yourself.

I don't like the fact that he died, but, he knew it was a possibility someone would be armed and the guy was freaked the hell out.

Although, I don't exactly like the fact that he fired 8 Hollow Point rounds like that but, I can't blame him.

Though, I would have handled it a little differently.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

If shit like this happened more often, there would be far fewer muggings. I say good on the guy for sending a clear message. Those of opposing opinion may think that it was unnecessary force against someone who was unarmed, but seriously, who the hell waits around to see just how much of a threat someone is when they're already attacking you? If you've already been jumped, you give those fuckers everything you've got.

 

[emeraldrafael]

...The guy was being mugged. His assailants were physically attacking him and he had a permit to carry the weapon. Baker was in the right from my perspective. The only problem I see is that he shot the teenager 4 times, but that's about it.

The only reason I can think of is maybe he thought the kid was coked up or something. I know a few police officer in training and seen some of the statements they've made where people like that dont know they've been shot once.

OT: I dont blame Baker. You could say what is he doing out at midnight, well, he's jogging. if its 3 am and I cant sleep, I'll go for a late night walk. Besides it said he wnated to get in shape to serve his country. He had the permit to carry and reacted as he saw fit to defend himself, after both hearing a threat and having the threat committed against him. maybe the four bullets was obsessive, but as I mentioned above, you can never know.

The teen on the other hand had no reason to be out at 12 (i'm assuming there's a curfew there), threated to rob him. physically assaulted him, and present a threatening image with a friend. So while its sad that he died, I dont feel the same pity that I think most would if they just heard the story and only heard what the title said.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

Hmmmm... Eight times? Seems a bit much. Granted, he panicked, but if you're going to panic in those situations you shouldn't have a damned license. I think he should get some form of punishment, although not a large one.

 

[e2density]

Seriously?

Some idiot kid tried to mug someone, then he got his ass shot and it's the victims fault?

That little bastard got what he deserved.

Also, 8 gunshots isn't that bad, to be honest. There's was an event where a man was shot 4 times in the heart region and still managed to kill two people before he died.

 

[BlueberryMUNCH]

I hate how the article makes the mugger seem like the victim here...

...He deserved it; moral of the story is, don't bloody mug people:/.

At least the Baker had the decency to stay with the boy...if it was the other way round...well, I don't even need to say it.

 

[Gudrests]

What i find funny is they complaints of 8 shots...of you think you are being mugged and you more or less panic, thinking your life is in danger, do you count the shots. or do you make sure you stay alive? He did the right thing afterward also. He stayed with the jackass who tried to mug him.

 

[Trildor]

The fact that this happened and so many people condone it sickens me. Why not just make mugging punishable by the death penalty? It's the equivalent.

No it isn't an equivalent. A robbery case actually going to trial has the benefit of hindsight and afterthought. It also implies that both parties survived the crime.

When you are being held up however you have no way of knowing if the muggers who assault you are going to let you get away with your life. For all you know, they could kill you as soon as you've handed over your wallet. I.e, when the crime occurs, the victim doesn't have the luxury of afterthought or hindsight. He or she is right there in the moment and has to make a tactical choice ON THE SPOT that insures that he or she walks out of the situation in one piece. If that means killing one of the muggers with a gun, then that's the only right course of action to take.

Or perhaps you'd prefer a society where mugging is perfectly okay? Yeah, let's make the lives of muggers EVEN EASIER!

Killing someone for mugging is an overreaction, and that people defend it as being perfectly valid is a sick reflection of society. Why bother building a society free of muggers when it's easier to just shoot the lot of them?