Two Teens Killed In Home Invasion

[BillCA]

SCOTUS has ruled that the death penalty for someone who was under 18 at the time of his crime is cruel and unusual punishment under the 8A.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roper_v._Simmons

Well, too bad for a couple of them.
Instead of getting The Big Needle, they'll live the rest of their lives getting The Big Sausage.

[BillCA]

Got them while they are young, now they cannot grow up to be pro criminals.

To some this might seem to extreme an action to take, but I would say that if I had a crystal ball there criminality would progress to worse things. Events could of turned out far worse for the home owners if they had not been armed.

And I agree, who in there right mind even with a low IQ would consider braking in to any house in Texas, seems completely reckless even suicidal to do so.

While you are probably right and I think stats show that punks like these are 80% likely to go on to even worse crimes later on, we don't know that for sure. This may have seemed like a good idea after they smoked that weed ... or it may have been the start of their careers. We have no way (at present) to know for sure.

Breaking into an occupied home anywhere in America is a high risk job and doing it in Texas it becomes a near certainty!

[glockwise2000]

Gentlemen, I'm not going to revel in the loss of young lives. Surely this is devastating news for their families. I grew up in San Antonio, and know the San Marcos area. And I know the homeowner was well within their rights, but taking lives is always tragic. Further this story is incredibly short on specifis and details. Based on the way the article is written, sure it seems like a good shoot, but we don't know what really happened. All this to say it is my hope home owners who are protecting their families and properties use deadly force as a last resort and not the old adage of shoot first ask questions later.

What do you think those teenagers are doing 20 miles away from their home and on someone else's property forcing their way in?

Offering brand new door locks?

I would have done the same thing. I would rather kill someone first in defense than me being 6 feet under. I am not going to wait for them to push their way in.

I wish Cali was like Texas. Shoot first before asking (when someone forces their way in at my home).

[rabagley]

I don't think it has anything to do with sociopathy. The fact that a thug comes armed and breaks into a person's home shows a complete disregard for the "rights'' of another human, and therefore precludes them from being treated as a sane rational peer with the same rights. The actions of the thug makes him sub-human, and to care even one wit about taking his life shows little regard for one's own life or the lives of the people you would potentially be protecting (ie. family, friends, etc). It is not sociopathy to be emotionless in ending the life of a person/s who holds no value on life. One can wish that the situation were otherwise, that all men cared enough about their own lives to extend that benevolence towards others. But when we are confronted by a violent act, the last thing to do is to care about the attacker, as they have not earned that regard during or after. It is this irrational emotional regard for the criminal element that has ruined our penal system and allowed, child molesters, rapists and murderers back on the streets to do more harm.

Oh and I do speak from experience, and in no way do I profess or promote the idea that others are somehow the scapegoats to my inequities or troubles, and therefore cannot be defined as a sociopath.

You're making an intellectual and rational argument. What we're talking about here is emotional responses (the ability to sleep well afterward).

Not knowing your circumstances, I've been in a situation where if the other guy hadn't run away I would have had to shoot him. I was ready and willing to do it. And I would have rationalized it by saying that the perp forced me to make a decision between him and someone I love.

But that very rational argument and firm knowledge that I was 100% in the right and that it was a "good shoot" wasn't going to be enough for me (and most of the population) to sleep well for a while afterwards. Hell, I didn't shoot him and I still had trouble sleeping for a week.

You say you're not a sociopath, fine. But your definition is strange and extremely narrow to the point of uselessness. I'm discussing individuals who feel no remorse for their actions, justified or not.

[M. Sage]

There are folks who don't feel remorse when their actions are justified, though.

[Flopper]

I wish Cali was like Texas. Shoot first before asking (when someone forces their way in at my home).

This refrain keeps being repeated, so I have to call FUD.

In CA, it is assumed that an uninvited person who forces their way into your home means to cause great bodily harm to it's occupants, and therefore deadly force is allowed.

Of course there are circumstances (there always are) that might complicate this (the person is known to you, etc), but as long as an uninvited person unknown to you has forcibly entered, the shoot should be ruled justifiable, per the PC.

[gunsmith]

thank you

This refrain keeps being repeated, so I have to call FUD.

In CA, it is assumed that an uninvited person who forces their way into your home means to cause great bodily harm to it's occupants, and therefore deadly force is allowed.

Of course there are circumstances (there always are) that might complicate this (the person is known to you, etc), but as long as an uninvited person unknown to you has forcibly entered, the shoot should be ruled justifiable, per the PC.

its true even in SF!

[SAN compnerd]

This refrain keeps being repeated, so I have to call FUD.

In CA, it is assumed that an uninvited person who forces their way into your home means to cause great bodily harm to it's occupants, and therefore deadly force is allowed.

Of course there are circumstances (there always are) that might complicate this (the person is known to you, etc), but as long as an uninvited person unknown to you has forcibly entered, the shoot should be ruled justifiable, per the PC.

Yes but in this retarded state the home owner who was completely justified under the penal code, would loose his home and perhaps his job and livelyhood due to the civil case that would inevitable be brought against him.

I don't revel in the loss of young lives. I despair at the necessity for these lives to be lost. However, I see no alternative as prison and the legal system generally is no deterrant, and people who do this sort of thing when young are usually a menace to society when older.

Not sure if shooting them dead is a deterrant, but it sure makes certain that they won't offend again. And it might deter others.

If the prision and legal system were a deterrant then they would not have been there and would not be worm food. In fact, the potential to encounter an armed home owner does not seem to be much of a deterrent, even in a state like Texas where the HO has much greater protections under the law and the perps SHOULD be scared s***less to approach someones home. Just another reason why we need less gun law restrictions and better protections for HO's in this state.

[hawk81]

To bad, so sad.

[rabagley]

There are folks who don't feel remorse when their actions are justified, though.

Yup. And those individuals are fundamentally different from me and people like me. I'm not some sort of expert on what's going on under the covers in a sociopath's brain, but someone who can pull a trigger on another human being, no matter what the circumstances, and not be shaken by the experience, is not "normal" as I know it.

[ns209]

Someone breaks into my house at 2am their going to get smoked period!

[supersonic]

I don't get this sometimes. If I just shot someone who was trying to rob, rape or kill me, I'd like to think I'd shrug my shoulders, consider my self better off and head for bed.

And you never will 'get it' unless you have to actually let that hammer go on someone. God forbid, I wouldn't wish it (PTSS or PTSD) on any innocent, law-abiding citizen. No matter how much one trains & prepares for the worst, knowingly cutting a man down right in front of you is just so...............un-natural. That's one of the reasons the aftermath is often much worse than the incident itself. Like a previous post said "But SLEEP?... FORGET IT." Oh, and the appetite goes out the window for quite some time, too. Physical illness sets in, and you just have to 'force -feed' yourself to keep a [relatively] 'even' keel and maintain some semblance of health. Psycotherapy and time are the only 2 roads to salvation.

[M. Sage]

Someone breaks into my house at 2am their going to get smoked period!

Depends on the situation... If it looks like I have a good drop and I might be able to convince them to get on the floor on their own, I might go for it.

Any money they've got on 'em is mine in either case, though.

[supersonic]

But that very rational argument and firm knowledge that I was 100% in the right and that it was a "good shoot" wasn't going to be enough for me (and most of the population) to sleep well for a while afterwards. Hell, I didn't shoot him and I still had trouble sleeping for a week.

You say you're not a sociopath, fine. But your definition is strange and extremely narrow to the point of uselessness. I'm discussing individuals who feel no remorse for their actions, justified or not.

+100%

[scrat]

Good thing it wasn't here in CA, everyone in the home would have been hauled off for jail while the media bellyaches over the untimely deaths of these poor youths...

Yeah, who probably knew the house they were breaking into was occupied, I wonder what their intentions were?

Your right sad but so true