Poll: Teen Shot dead after attempting to mug man
- Thread starter RamirezDoEverything
- Start date
Ok fair enough, I misread that. Erm actually it's kinda worse when they wanna beat the shit out of you cause one of them likes the girl you just dumped and you're 13-years-old without any protection.[/quote]Sweeney94 said:
Oh dears, not to make this into a competition but I've had a knife held to me with no explanation as to why. My only reassurance was that the gentleman was a bully I had come across before. If it was a stranger and I had a weapon I would have used it.
That being said I'm done here.
Oh dears, not to make this into a competition but I've had a knife held to me with no explanation as to why. My only reassurance was that the gentleman was a bully I had come across before. If it was a stranger and I had a weapon I would have used it.^=ash=^ said:
That being said I'm done here.[/quote]
Mm, yes not to make it a competition, but I've had a knife held to me 3 times by people I don't know, I would never in my life have shot them, even if they stabbed me.
Is he right? fuck no. But at the same time if you try to mug someone you might get killed, in other words, i have no sympathy for the kid but I do think baker could have handled the situation better. No one here was right........plus what kind of prick carries a gun anyway?
I'm much more afraid about 10 people and a dog in all honesty. At least with a person you can reason with them, but with a dog there's no way to talk with them, and gang mentality is very dangerous. All the situations I've been in I've managed to talk them out of it.^=ash=^ said:
I think a lot of people here don't realize how hard it is to act in such a quick life or death situation. Single precise shots to the leg are easy to pull off in a videogame, sitting comfortably and safely. But in a situation where you are being violently attacked, it's very difficult to think or act clearly.
One minute Baker was jogging, the next he was being beaten. 8 shots might seem excessive, but in the confusion and terror of that situation, it only takes a few seconds to fire 8 shots.
I don't think the kid deserved to die, but I sure as hell am not going to mourn the loss of some jerk who thinks it's fun to beat and rob random strangers.
One minute Baker was jogging, the next he was being beaten. 8 shots might seem excessive, but in the confusion and terror of that situation, it only takes a few seconds to fire 8 shots.
I don't think the kid deserved to die, but I sure as hell am not going to mourn the loss of some jerk who thinks it's fun to beat and rob random strangers.
1. So then why bother using it?Sweeney94 said:
2. See #1.
3. Glad we've covered this. Nothing to say here.
4. Yeah, I'm sorry he didn't have the balls of steel you have, Sweeney, but different people judge situations in different ways. The consensus here seems to be that it was a life-threatening scenario for him and would have been for most people.
While I'm a firm believer in flight as opposed to fight, I don't begrudge Baker for what he did. Clearly he was not ok with the end result or he would not have called the police while remaining next to the kid the whole time. Do guns suck? Yes. Are they a threat to the average person? Absolutely. The question here isn't "are guns bad?" though. It's "was he justified in taking action the way he did?" and in the end I feel he was. There seems to be this mindset amongst many people here (not you specifically) of gun owners as yodeling texans with absolutely no self restraint, but I can guarantee you he wasn't jumping for joy after firing those shots.
I don't care whether or not he or others felt it was a life threatening situation. Killing somebody is never right, I don't care who or what they are, it's just that sometimes people go over the top, as did Baker. I'm not saying that if my life really was in danger I wouldn't harm the other person, but if I were to kill them when I didn't truly feel threatened, then I would take my punishment. I'm very surprised that people feel this was a life threatening situation - Mustelier was unarmed and only punched him in the face.artstsym said:
Also it's clear that Baker had premeditated his actions. To instantly pull out a gun and fire straight after being punched in the face, and to have the gun at all, shows that he didn't care whether or not he shot someone on any night of his life, which in itself is an odd and careless decision to make.
I'm not saying I have balls of steel, I'm a pussy compared to a lot of people I know, I'm just saying my experiences have never led me to harm somebody else or even want to. Yeah by the way I'm 16 aswell, which shows you how immature Baker was.
And if you did feel threatened? Say, because two people jumped you at night and started assaulting you?Sweeney94 said:
Not life threatening my ass. Someone punched him--that alone is potentially lethal.
http://www.police.qld.gov.au/programs/personalSafety/situationalAdvice/onePunch.htm
And yeah, they only got off one hit--what if he hadn't fought back? Would they have taken another swing, risking his life a second time? His life was in danger. He was being actively attacked with potentially deadly force.
Or it shows that A)he understands that life isn't like the movies and being assaulted is in fact an extremely serious situation, and B)he prefers to be prepared to defend himself should the need arise, which it did.
Saying that having a gun means he "didn't care whether or not he shot someone" is ludicrous. The man didn't go on a rampage killing innocents, he defended himself against people who could have killed him.
1465 posts? Really.
As of this post. 2586 people polled
90.3% say yes it was self-defense.
9.7% say no it was not.
He was attacked. What the attacker had does not matter. Martial Arts Masters can kill without weapons. Heck, even basic hand-to-hand tactics can kill. 66lbs on the neck and 'snap' you are dead. It was self-defense.
What is left to say?
As of this post. 2586 people polled
90.3% say yes it was self-defense.
9.7% say no it was not.
He was attacked. What the attacker had does not matter. Martial Arts Masters can kill without weapons. Heck, even basic hand-to-hand tactics can kill. 66lbs on the neck and 'snap' you are dead. It was self-defense.
What is left to say?
BS on the first part. Your moral convictions don't matter (unfortunately in this context) and are contradictory at best. You're saying you wouldn't kill and yet... If someone were to come to punch you in the face, you won't feel that your life is threatened? That's kinda borked.Sweeney94 said:
Second, Baker didn't know if Mustelier was armed or not. Knives, guns, etc. are easy to hide. I don't know what he was wearing but the "style" among young hoodies in training are baggy pants, jackets with hoods and no belt. If someone magically comes to punch you in the face, do you wait for them to pull a gun on you? If your reply is "yes" in any way, you have a problem. You may be dead in the next few minutes or you're likely to be hit a lot for thinking as if you're a pacifist in a situation that needs a threat of violence.
Third, you seem to have glossed over WHY he did what he did:
If he got robbed, he was losing that money. Someone punches him in the face, elevating the situation. He's going to stand his ground. Period. He had reason to believe that this situation was not a good one. He had not hit first, and would have kept jogging without Carlos' provocation. Premeditation? I don't that means quite what you think it means.
Finally, Carlos was 18. His brother was 16. 18, here? You are an adult and responsible for your actions. Carlos should have been better with his.