Darwin strikes again; Teen Who Hit SUV With Eggs Slain

[exdeath]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: exdeath
Like I said, that whole post was directed at no particular person or post. I stated that clearly.

What you do in response to your property being vandalized is your business, it doesn't bother me; what irks me is people who think that because they wouldn?t do anything that nobody else should be allowed to do anything either.

That?s really the problem with the world, nobody is content with their own views or beliefs unless they can force everyone else in the world to do what they would do. I don't smoke therefore nobody else should be allowed to smoke even in their own homes? No that is total bullsh1t of course.

In a strictly legal sense, if you went after them and they pulled a gun on you you'd be justified in shooting at that point if you chose to do so. Completely and totally regardless of what they did or why you are chasing them in the first place, as long as they instigated something unlawful first. Some would say it's justified that they use a gun against you because you are chasing them but if that was they case it would be ok for criminals to shoot at police because they fear going to jail or being subdued :roll:.

There is lawful and unlawful threat of force, and threat of force to defend oneself from being held accountable for participating in unlawful, destructive, or dangerous activity against other individuals that they know is wrong is considered unlawful threat of force; in fact its called extortion and coercion. That?s like saying you wouldn?t chase a rapist who is kidnapping your wife because it may provoke him and cause him to pull out a gun when he might not otherwise have done so. Or that you wouldn?t bother getting out of bed and getting your gun if someone was in your house in the middle of the night because it might provoke them to pull a gun also. Threat of force is typically only lawful when it is applied to another who has already committed an unlawful act.

This is where the idea of 'citizen's arrest' or 'citizen's detention' (use of physical force for as long as necessary for authorities to arrive) comes from. Even in Euope: "in France and Germany, a person stopping a criminal from committing a crime, including crimes against belongings, is not criminally responsible as long as the means employed are in proportion to the threat"

Point being, the original offender is not in the lawful or rightful position to escalate the situation, and them pulling a gun on you becomes a completely separate incident from the egging and is re-evaluated under totally new circumstances. And I wonder what an underage teenager would be doing egging cars and carrying an illegally possessed handgun hmm?

Where does chasing down an unarmed teen and shooting him 5 times in the chest fall? You cannot, in our society, chase down someone and kill them because they did something to your property. That is an unjustified shooting and you will lose your ass in a court of law. Oh, and I'm fine with that. I don't want citizens taking the law into their own hands to protect something as trivial as a freaking car. Not when there are lives at stake.

What this guy did was completely unjustified and he should rot in prison for a long long time for it.

For the 100th time, I never said I felt this guy was justified in chasing the kid down and shooting the kid. I believe in propotionate response and feel the kid deserved some kind of retaliation, but definately not being chased down and gunned down in cold blood.

How many times do I need to write a novel on the differences between lawful, proportional and unlawful, disproportional use of force?

Maybe I need to use smaller words and shorter posts on anandtech forums from now on...

🙁

Ok heres the run down:

1) kid eggs car
2) driver chases kids

Now here are the possibilities assuming both have guns:

a) driver pulls gun first, shoots kid not displaying gun: driver is in the wrong, disproportionate use of force

b) driver pulls gun first, kid shoots driver only because he pulled a gun: self defense against disproportionate use of force in favor of kid

c) driver chases kid without displaying gun, kid pulls first and shoots driver: unlawful use of force against an authority figure while commiting a crime (in this case the driver is an adult chasing a minor caught vandalizing property, and a citizen acting of sound mind and without criminal intent, therefore and authority figure until police arrive to take over)

c) driver chases kid without displaying gun, kid pulls first but driver shoots kid: self defense against disproportionate use of force in favor of driver



In this instance we observed a)

 

[renaldoriggs]

Originally posted by: OVerLoRDI

Originally posted by: KDOG
Well, if they weren't throwing eggs at cars, it wouldn't have happened. They brought it upon themselves....

Agreed, I don't care what all the others are saying that they shouldn't have died for it. Some people spend a lot of time and money on their cars. Or in my case do not have the money to repair damages to my car. If you are stupid enough to be throwing eggs at other people's stuff they are setting themselves up for something like that.

Someone should have taught these kids to respect other's property.

Yeah, because you never pulled a prank or did anything stupid when you were a kid. And that was sarcasm, by the wayl.

 

[Praxis1452]

he got what he deserved.

Sure it's disproportionate but when you make a choice you take all the consequences of it. Whether it maybe simply eating a lot of food or throwing an egg at a car. The obese man may die and the child throwing the egg may die. Both got what they deserved.

A choice is a choice and once made cannot be taken back. If your not a mind reader generally it's better if you don't try to do things which may have a greater risk of unpredictable consequences.

I don't think the shooting was in equivalence with the crime but he brought the shooting upon himself and sympathy in any manner is kept to myself or people I know.

edit: personal experience. I've egged cars before. When I was 9. Me and my cousin and his friend lived across from a church. Mischief night or day since it was still bright we all hit cars and ran. Had someone come out and shot me I would have gotten what I deserved. However being I was 9 maybe it was disproportionate in your opinion. I would have felt sympathy but only because I would have died.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: renaldoriggs

Originally posted by: OVerLoRDI

Originally posted by: KDOG
Well, if they weren't throwing eggs at cars, it wouldn't have happened. They brought it upon themselves....

Agreed, I don't care what all the others are saying that they shouldn't have died for it. Some people spend a lot of time and money on their cars. Or in my case do not have the money to repair damages to my car. If you are stupid enough to be throwing eggs at other people's stuff they are setting themselves up for something like that.

Someone should have taught these kids to respect other's property.

Yeah, because you never pulled a prank or did anything stupid when you were a kid. And that was sarcasm, by the wayl.

some of us were actually smart enough at a young age not to fvck with other people, especially something dumb like this