Poll: Teen Shot dead after attempting to mug man

[macfluffers]

well then by that logic i may as well shoot to kill with exploding round's because im shooting to kill.

the fact is that hollow point's cause more damage to the person they hit, and you talk about collateral damage. The guy fired 8 bullets only 4 hit the target what if one of those other bullets hit an innocent, they'd be fucked where as they may have a chance if it's only a normal bullet.

There is no need for overkill a normal bullet would have been enough especially for self defence, if your so worried about collateral damage don't use a gun with such a large calibre, or firing power.

I don't think you understand. Since people shoot to kill (experts say that you should never try to shoot to wound, it's pointless), the standard for "overkill" is quite high. Yes, hollow points cause more damage, but more importantly, they do not pass through the target. When you shoot with a full-jacketed weapon, there's a good chance it will pass through the target, possibly hitting objects behind the target, which is of course a bad thing.

The quip about exploding rounds is silly, since those would cause more collateral damage, and one of the purposes of HP rounds is to reduce collateral damage. It's not like there's a gradient that goes full jacket->soft nose->HP->explosive. The differences between the bullets are their situational purposes. If a gangster wanted to kill a cop, he'd use full jacket rounds, not HP rounds, since full jacket rounds have better armor-piercing. So, please don't say that Baker should have been carrying around normal rounds, because normal rounds are better at going through body armor. When they're described that way, don't they sound excessive?

And for the record, a .45 may be on the larger side, but it's not "such a large calibre". If Baker were packing a Desert Eagle or a .500 revolver, I'd agree with you, but a .45 is very normal.

 

[Ryujisama]

A shame the kid had to die, but he wasn't in the wrong. Not that I have experience in this, but don't expect people to just sit there and take it if you attempt to mug someone.

 

[Obsidian Rocker]

OP's article is from the Daily Mail? I stopped reading as soon as I saw that. I refuse to believe anything that pathetic 'newspaper' puts out.

Both sides were in the wrong. The kid shouldn't have been trying to mug someone and Baker used excessive force by the sounds of things. Shooting the kid 4 times? As far as American law, self-defence is using enough force to incapacitate your assailant. Killing them is too far and brings a charge of manslaughter. Or that's how it should work anyway

 

[alinos]

The quip about exploding rounds is silly, since those would cause more collateral damage, and one of the purposes of HP rounds is to reduce collateral damage. It's not like there's a gradient that goes full jacket->soft nose->HP->explosive. The differences between the bullets are their situational purposes. If a gangster wanted to kill a cop, he'd use full jacket rounds, not HP rounds, since full jacket rounds have better armor-piercing. So, please don't say that Baker should have been carrying around normal rounds, because normal rounds are better at going through body armor. When they're described that way, don't they sound excessive?

Well one could also argue that the likely hood of collateral damage in self defence is minimal due to the fact that in most situation's logically your being mugged because no one else is around

and again when your blind firing 8 bullet's if there were people there, someone getting shot in the leg with a loose bullet might live, most likely when the hollow point hits there leg it's gonna rip apart there femoral artery and the body will pump most of it's blood out before the ambulance arrives

 

[macfluffers]

Well one could also argue that the likely hood of collateral damage in self defence is minimal due to the fact that in most situation's logically your being mugged because no one else is around

and again when your blind firing 8 bullet's if there were people there, someone getting shot in the leg with a loose bullet might live, most likely when the hollow point hits there leg it's gonna rip apart there femoral artery and the body will pump most of it's blood out before the ambulance arrives

Although that's very true, there are two things you're missing. Firstly, you can't see past the thing you're shooting at, and that's the main problem with allowing bullets to pass through targets. That's very dangerous, because the shooter cannot tell if someone is behind the shootee. HP rounds take that entire dynamic out of the equation.

And secondly, it's pointless to talk about what might have happened if the circumstances were different, because if people were around, then the muggers wouldn't have attacked Baker, and the whole situation wouldn't have happened anyway. Then, the headline would read "A man went on a jog and nothing happened".

 

[Malyc]

Police in America maintain one edge that is a ***** to argue with: They are allowed the use of fully automatic submachine guns AND military type assault rifles, if the situation requires it. I can tell you that I would not enjoy going up against a SWAT team, even if I had the same guns they did. They also have another edge that would allow them to overcome even the most determined criminal: training. The proper amount of training can just about guarantee that you win the gunfight, even if all you have is a knife.

Our Tactical Response Group has exactly the same thing. PLease forgive me though I want my police to have ALL advantages not just one.

Not saying i disagree with you, but training is about the best advantage you can possibly have.

 

[Malyc]

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.

Not strictly true, as a fairly large number of the polymer frame handguns have room for as many as 15 rounds (14 in the mag, 1 in the chamber). That being said, any self defense instructor will tell you that you keep shooting until the threat is no longer a threat.
I believe the mugger's family is overreacting over the amount of rounds fired.

OK, I'll clarify. Most single stack magazine that a 1911 Model firearm are 7+1. Some of your newer model firearms with a double stack style magazine can hold more than that. Sorry I had not clarified to which model I was referring too. I also didn't mention 8, 12, 15, 30, and 50 round magazines either.

Also true, and neither did I... Anyway, I am going to be carrying as much ammo as I can easily conceal. There is nothing more useless than an empty gun.

I agree. My conceal holster is a shoulder holster. I carry one in the gun and 2 extra mags. I have a total of 22 rounds on me when wearing that particular rig. Some of my other ones. I can carry ALOT of ammo.

When i get my rig, I'm going to end up with at least 27 rounds. The ruger sr9c has a good capacity for a sub compact. Unfortunately, ruger hasn't shrunk down their .40 cal handgun down to compact size, so it's a bit big for me to be carrying around.

Yeah I'm 6'7" 260 lbs. I carry a full size 1911 for my conceal carry weapon. I'm a damn good shot though. I hopefully will never need more than one magazine.

True, but its better to have the ammo and not need it than need it and not have it.

 

[thatsnotchocolate]

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

You watch to many action movies. It's boarder line impossible to shot a knife or gun out of someone's hand without causing injury even under the best conditions. You shoot until they stop.

By disarm i meant remove your assailants capacity to attack you. its not impossible to shoot their feet and its not impossible to just shoot once, correct me if i'm wrong but your standard pistol isn't an automatic and it what spam off a s#!tload of bullets from one trigger pull. Also one trigger pull makes a big bang that scares the cr*p out of most people

It's not impossible to shoot a foot, no, but under those circumstances it'd be so incredibly unlikely that he'd be better off just not firing.

He fired 8 shots with a gun with a laser pointer, yet only half of them hit from a pretty short distance. That should give you an idea of just how hard it is to hit someone especially while being assaulted. Him shooting only once would have had a fair shot of missing, and that still doesn't get into the next point that I'm about to make.

There are many documented cases where an attacker is shot 2 or more times in the chest but *continues to attack* for seconds to minutes on sheer adrenaline (or drugs, in some cases) before finally collapsing. Shooting once could very well have been useless had the mugger been on some sort of drug or just really hyped up.

Your assertion that "guns are loud and would scare him off" is also unsupported. We have no idea what was running through the mind of the mugger, and while he may have surrendered in the face of a gun, he may also have just tried to grab it. The distance between the parties was implied to be very small, and the second or two hesitation in firing more rounds could very well be enough time for the mugger to grab a hold of it.

Try going to a range sometime, test out firing a few weapons. You'd be surprised.

You sir, i respect. You've told me gun knowledge in an informative and non-condescending tone which sends your message well. These other guys i got a negative vibe from. Then again, I did make a rather rude dig at americans.

 

[Sikachu]

All you people saying he deserved it?

Yeah, I'm embarrassed for you. Of course he didn't deserve it for fuck's sake! Death for a mugging, hardly a fair trade.

Note that I'm not defending the mugging, or attacking the shooter, but saying he deserved it is utterly ludicrous.

Get a fucking sense of proportionality.


Also: I'm curious why he shot so many times, and why he'd think someone was armed if they'd just punched him in the face. And further more, aren't hollow-point bullets designed to cause more damage? Why is a man walking around with a handgun full of those? And no, I don't care if he has a license. The whole need in America to have armed civilians is just ludicrous.

1. Hollow points are used against people. What are you saying? that he should have a handgun full of armor piercing rounds? How many criminals have you seen use kevlar? Kevlar is used during the big heists like bank robberies, not simple muggings.

2. In close range multiple shots are needed. You can't aim very well if you're in a rush.

3. Oh yes having civilians who can fight back is bad. What if some scumbag mugger wants quick cash? Face it, criminals go into that life expecting to either:

A) Die.
B) End up in prison.
C) Hospital.

Hell most gangs (they are mostly seen in the larger and more widely known international gangs) use this as the "three points" and tell you clearly what you are getting into. He knew that it will end with him in a coffin, it was no secret among criminals and is widely used in tags. Anyone who knows anything about the criminal world can tell you that. As wrex always said "Anyone that gets in our way is either on saren's payroll or stupid. Killing the former is business, killing the latter is a favor to the universe". It may seem harsh, but the mugger had it coming. Its hard to feel sympathy for a mugger that likely knew he would die. If he didn't knew he could die than he must not have known much about the criminal world, and must have been one of those kids who wanted to act all "gangsta". Either way, sympathy for the mugger is impossible.

So ignorant and conceited. Is your world always so black and white? Perhaps this is a situation where too many videogames have lulled someone into a 'goodies' and 'baddies' mindset. At nearly 17 years of age you really ought to have enough life experience to realise that there is no homogeneous group of 'criminals', so I suspect going further would probably be a waste of my time as your mind is set. Please do let me know if I'm wrong on this point.

 

[Sikachu]

So ignorant and conceited. Is your world always so black and white? Perhaps this is a situation where too many videogames have lulled someone into a 'goodies' and 'baddies' mindset. At nearly 17 years of age you really ought to have enough life experience to realise that there is no homogeneous group of 'criminals', so I suspect going further would probably be a waste of my time as your mind is set. Please do let me know if I'm wrong on this point.

Oh please the excuse of "the criminals have a good soul" is bullshit. That crap is reserved for the bleeding hearts who likely live in middle class communities or somewhere away from a crime ridden area where gunshots are heard on a daily basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mara_Salvatrucha

When was the last time you saw these guys do charity work? Don't try to put age into the subject matter as anything can happen (and be learned) at any age. If a 5 year old is molested, would you say she is too young to be molested since that is an adult situation? nope. Age is a number, and to try to estimate life experience using age is just retarded. By that logic a starving 2 year old in Africa isn't starving because "he isn't old enough to know true starvation".

For the record, have you ever been the victim of crime? Or even seen multiple arrests? Or anything?

I didn't make a "criminals have a good soul" argument, I made a 'criminals, like every other group of humans, can't be cast as a homogenous group who ALL think something, or ALL behave a certain way, or ALL have the same motivations'. The plurality of acts that count as crimes alone guarantees this, even if individuality didn't already do so.

I'm not going to bother addressing your adolescent ramblings about age being a number or your extravagant and pointless rhetoric about starving children or raped victims except to say that a more mature mind might try to save these examples for more appropriate situations and may recognise that greater opportunity for life experience is likely to have a pretty strong correlation with life experience.

I will, however, indulge your closing question; yes I have, I've been mugged a couple of times, had my house broken into on more than one occasion, called the police when witnessing an attack once, had a knife pulled on me (I live in a country that doesn't get its gun control laws from the 18th century so there are very few guns) so yes, I have been extensively exposed to crime. And yet that hasn't robbed me of my ability to realise that every criminal is a person, and therefore complex to understand.

 

[Sikachu]

Okay, you win and you're right. All criminals are the same, and muggers deserve to be shot to death because I got robbed a couple of times and that makes me upset. Bravo big man, I have indeed never made millions selling games as a 14 year old, I guess that does mean a forty year old hasn't had twice as much opportunity as a twenty year old to experience life. I won't be responding to you again.

 

[Safaia]

I think 'deserve' is so completely the wrong word but that is besides the point.

The shooter had every right to defend himself and I know I would have feared for my life if two people started attacking me.

EDIT: I'd also say the multiple shots were probably just adrenaline and instinct not intended aggression.

 

[Valiard]

Ultimately it should be that if someone is attempting to harm you, you should reply in equal or greater force, if your survival is not a priority then who's is?

 

[smeghead25]

I'm completely, 100% against gun ownership.

HOWEVER, Baker was in the right, because in a society where everyone could have a gun on their person, I too would be paranoid that an attacker would pull one out and take my life.

In Australia this would not be acceptable as guns are not a threat here, because gun permits aren't given out without damn good reason. In America, yeah, that is acceptable, because guns are a real threat there.

 

[Sweeney94]

You Americans actually make me sick. How the FUCK does he deserve it? You don't kill somebody cause they punched you in the face. This has seriously disgusted me. I have been mugged before and never even felt enough hate to want to punch my mugger in the face, let alone shoot him. The guy should be put in jail for minimum 10 years. The very fact he carries a handgun is sick in the mind, especially with hollow bullets - but he then proceeded to shoot the kid EIGHT times. Fucking sickening waste of life.

 

[^=ash=^]

You Americans actually make me sick. How the FUCK does he deserve it? You don't kill somebody cause they punched you in the face. This has seriously disgusted me. I have been mugged before and never even felt enough hate to want to punch my mugger in the face, let alone shoot him. The guy should be put in jail for minimum 10 years. The very fact he carries a handgun is sick in the mind, especially with hollow bullets - but he then proceeded to shoot the kid EIGHT times. Fucking sickening waste of life.

1. Swearing doesn't help make your point.
2. Don't assume everyone who posts something you don't like is American.
3. He was shot 4, not 8 times.
4. In fear for his life he acted to preserve it.

Before you flame me, I agree that the mugger didn't deserve to die but it happened and no amount of yelling at the internet is going to change it.

 

[Sweeney94]

You Americans actually make me sick. How the FUCK does he deserve it? You don't kill somebody cause they punched you in the face. This has seriously disgusted me. I have been mugged before and never even felt enough hate to want to punch my mugger in the face, let alone shoot him. The guy should be put in jail for minimum 10 years. The very fact he carries a handgun is sick in the mind, especially with hollow bullets - but he then proceeded to shoot the kid EIGHT times. Fucking sickening waste of life.

1. Swearing doesn't help make your point.
2. Don't assume everyone who posts something you don't like is American.
3. He was shot 4, not 8 times.
4. In fear for his life he acted to preserve it.

Before you flame me, I agree that the mugger didn't deserve to die but it happened and no amount of yelling at the internet is going to change it.

1. Swearing doesn't matter.
2. Generally people giving a view on this topic will be American since it happened in America. I am generalising here as I don't have time or the resources to survey how many people on here are American.
3. The article provided said 8 times.
4. He wasn't fearing for his life, if he was, there's no justification to shoot someone. I have feared for my life as about 10 people I know of came up to me with an agressive Rottweiler, doesn't mean I whipped out a weapon and killed them all.

 

[^=ash=^]

stuff

I'm not going to bother getting into this with you, except for two things: Re-read the article, it clearly states that the attacker was shot 4 times he was shot at 8 times.

Secondly, having people you know "come up to you" is not the same as being hit in the head by a stranger at night.