Poll: Teen Shot dead after attempting to mug man

[Acting like a FOOL]

You people are idiots who don't get out of the house, you think anyone that has ever resorted to mugging someone is some sort cretin of society that deserves to be killed on sight! How can you justify ending one's life over the contents of your pocket? How can you justify Shooting him eight times? How can justify not fighting on equal grounds and trying to fight the kid who is much younger than his military trained self?

I am glad i can separate myself from you sadistic self righteous assholes by saying i wouldn't shoot.

when you're the victim of an act of random violence you don't know why you're being attacked. You don't know what your assailant is armed with. Half of the time you don't know what's going on.

All you know is that at the least you do not want to be injured, killed, or sexually assaulted and If you truly don't want those things to happen to you, you will not react with a pacifistic surrender.

It's not not about moralizing what you do to protect your personal well being. it's simply protecting your personal well being.

most people want to live peacefully and unharmed. Some people are willing to disturb the peace and do harm to innocents in order to gain for themselves.when that occurs there are people who WILL say "FUCK...NO!" and lay that perpetrator to waste by "ANY MEANS NECESSARY."

if you are willing to sacrifice your well being to "live and let live" I applaud you, but I cannot and will not say I would follow suit.

 

[Burningsok]

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?

Guess what buddy... Shit.. Fucking.. Happens. Please tell me you would actually try and think everything over while getting your face beaten in. I'm sure as hell not gonna stand their and let the little punks walk all over me. Hey if the fear of death is enough to scare criminals away then so be it.

It sickens me that people try to justify things like this; It makes them look like push-overs. At what point are you gonna put your damn foot down and say "NO!"?? Life and death isn't enough for you??

 

[FlyAwayAutumn]

To start with, that article lists the dead man as 'victim'. Not alleged anything, not deceased, not anything with any HINT of journalistic objective. This is biased against Baker in the first place so any details you get from this article are going to paint him in a bad light.

Secondly, everyone here who's never fired a gun needs to stop acting like they know what they are talking about. In fact, someone who is scared is MUCH more likely to fire multiple times without even thinking about it, let alone if they've been punched in the head and are possibly dazed and can't tell if the attacker is down yet. Also, your mind instinctively aims for the bigger target when you're not sitting there telling it to go somewhere else. Biggest target on a human is the torso, so that's where Baker's instinct led him. It would only be reasonable to expect an arm or leg shot if Baker came across the mugger attacking someone else and therefore had time to sit and line up the shot.

And lastly, this unarmed business is bullshit. How was Baker supposed to know this? This kid was outside the norm since almost all muggers have SOME kind of weapon even if it's only a pocketknife. Baker had every reason to believe his life was in danger and every reason to fire.

I agree with everything you said up until the arm or leg shot. It wouldn't be reasonable to expect anyone under any situation to hit a perfect arm or leg shot, first try. Besides it would end up killing the guy anyway.

 

[Gindil]

I may not like guns but people have a right to carry them so long as they are responsible with them.

In terms of escalation of force, if it's late, I'm jogging and someone's just punched me in the face, I'm breaking an arm, cracking a neck, or pulling out a gun and shooting. Someone messing with my routine like that must have bad intentions. I am NOT taking chances on my life so someone can rob me of $500 dollars that I had in my pocket.

Well that sounds damn reasonable to me. =) It wasn't being critical of you or anything, was just mean to be thought provoking. People seem to forget that, ya know, the guy went up and hit Baker with no provocation as far as we know.

I'd say attacking someone without provocation is a much larger escalation of force than shooting an attacker too.

And for sure man, I completely respect people not liking guns. If that's the case, don't carry one. You seem to be one of few that can have his own opinion without trying to shove it down everyone's throat. I commend you.

No offence taken.
I just think there's a number of people that are trying to play the morality card. I don't think that works in this situation. I don't WANT to take human lives. I'll do everything I can to avoid it. But the fact of the matter is that MAKO, Levitas, and a few others want to say it's excessive force without looking at the circumstances involved. If I were in the same situation with the same options, it would happen exactly the same way.

Technical Pacifism works far better than Pacifism for all.

 

[thatsnotchocolate]

shoot to disarm, not to kill. Christ, you americans play too much COD

 

[crazypsyko666]

You could easily plead self-defense but charge him with undue force. Not as bad as murder, but I think that's the best option.

 

[Acting like a FOOL]

shoot to disarm, not to kill. Christ, you americans play too much COD

The intent is not disarming or killing. It is surviving. when caught in the frenzy of an assault, not many people are left considering the well being of their assailant.

people just want to live with their body and property intact. a lot of people are in financial straits as of now. Money could have pushed the kid to mug somebody, money could have been what the shooter was worried about the most!

 

[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?

Guess what buddy... Shit.. Fucking.. Happens. Please tell me you would actually try and think everything over while getting your face beaten in. I'm sure as hell not gonna stand their and let the little punks walk all over me. Hey if the fear of death is enough to scare criminals away then so be it.

It sickens me that people try to justify things like this; It makes them look like push-overs. At what point are you gonna put your damn foot down and say "NO!"?? Life and death isn't enough for you??

I'm really, really sorry I offended you. In retrospect, what the hell was I thinking? It's completely morally acceptable to shoot an unarmed teenager, Baker was just being a responsible gun owner. Muggers do it for fun, you know.

 

[mirasiel]

This is bugging me but...


If the dead MAN stated to his foolish teenage buddy that he simply wanted to 'knock this guy out' and never seems to have asked for money... how the fuck is this a mugging?

Its clearly assault (with intent maybe), an unprovoked attack against an apparently defenceless person (whoops, bad mistake) for the purposes of what?

entertainment?

practice?

 

[Trildor]

I'm really, really sorry I offended you. In retrospect, what the hell was I thinking? It's completely morally acceptable to shoot an unarmed teenager, Baker was just being a responsible gun owner. Muggers do it for fun, you know.

Your sarcasm does not hide the fact that you completely missed (or disregarded) the point.

I don't want to address the point because I'm sick and tired of this senseless debate that leads nowhere. I'm not going to change my opinion on this matter because of a forum discussion, and I don't think anyone else will.

 

[Acting like a FOOL]

I'm really, really sorry I offended you. In retrospect, what the hell was I thinking? It's completely morally acceptable to shoot an unarmed teenager, Baker was just being a responsible gun owner. Muggers do it for fun, you know.

Your sarcasm does not hide the fact that you completely missed (or disregarded) the point.

I don't want to address the point because I'm sick and tired of this senseless debate that leads nowhere. I'm not going to change my opinion on this matter because of a forum discussion, and I don't think anyone else will.

yeah this debate is over. Mr.A got punched in the face. Mr.B got shot four times.
Mr.A is a free man. Mr.B is a dead man. nothing said here or anywhere can or should change that outcome because our moral deliberations do nothing for the situation which occurred perfectly within the laws of physics. THE END.

 

[pretentiousname01]

8 shots a little much.

Was he okay in shoot? yes.

Deserve to die? well probably not, however you did just punch a total stranger in the face. A man that he knew nothing about.

I am a firm believer in kids these days needing an ass whooping. We've gone too soft on them. People need to be straightened out when they're being assholes. so that maybe they won't be assholes in the future.

also captchas suck

 

[mklnjbh]

It depends on how big the clip is. If it was a Glock 13, then it was a good idea to keep a few rounds just in case the other kid came back.

 

[Trildor]

I'm really, really sorry I offended you. In retrospect, what the hell was I thinking? It's completely morally acceptable to shoot an unarmed teenager, Baker was just being a responsible gun owner. Muggers do it for fun, you know.

By this logic, if I break into your house at night, you get up and try to stop me and I physically assault you by say, punching you in the face or kicking you in the crotch... What would you do to stop me? Honestly, I'm not trying to be offensive, but if you had no way to call the cops, you were just attacked and you thought for sure someone was pulling a weapon on you, what would you do exactly? It's not about whether someone was doing it for fun or not, hell, desperate enough people rob a bank, would it make it wrong for the cops to open fire on them if they physically assault a civilian? What COULD you do in a situation like that besides shoot them?

Not trying to offend you, but I am always tired of hearing arguments like this and then hearing people say, "That guy who killed an unarmed teen was in the wrong!" It didn't matter if the teen was unarmed or if he was young, when he attacks someone and actually draws blood, it shows he knows the risks and is willing to take them.

You're not offending me in the least. I understand your argument, it makes sense and I respect the fact that you stand by it. You've outlined your position a lot more clearly than other people. What I don't agree with is jumping to the conclusion that the aggressor is armed and out to kill you.

I really don't want to continue this discussion, though.

EDIT: Yes, it was sarcastic. Perhaps excessively. And no, you don't come off as snotty.

 

[ToxinArrow]

Anyone who tries to violate the most basic human rights of others automatically waive theirs. Good riddance to such worthless scum, and anyone who thinks this Baker fellow is wrong for defending himself is obviously some fool who thinks defending the rights (or lack there of rather) of criminals are somehow morally superior to people defending the rights of law abiding citizens.

 

[theevilsanta]

Having been mugged several times I can say that that kind of situation is extremely adrenaline boosting crazy. Looking down the barrel of a gun or being hit and having cold steel pointed at your heart is a mind-fucking thing. You think you're going to get hurt. You suddenly run the numbers on the likelihood of yourself dying and come up with numbers like 1/3. You pull the trigger until whatever threat is coming at you is down. It's not like a video game where you calmly aim at an opponents legs and fire on the required amount of times. THIS IS REAL LIFE.