If you try and stop 2 illegals from stealing your property you go to jail

[kranky]

Jury nullification could trump the decision to charge the old man.

 

[dahunan]

"whats if's" are fucking useless and contribute nothing to the argument.

if he kills a innocent? same t hing that if a police officer does. they should get involuntary manslaughter and go to jail. if you are going to fire know what the fuck you are firing at and behind it.

you need to step away from life for a minute

If that old man shot at the people stealing his hunk of steel and bullets from his gun he aimed at the thieves hit and killed an innocent child or mother or someone.. he should just get Involuntary Manslaughter???

you are under the influence of way too much emotion...

 

[Siddhartha]

I have three questions:

1. Do you really want people firing their guns like that? What if he had shot someone besides the people he was aiming at?

2. Why does it matter that the people he shot at were "illegals"?

3. What does Mr Obama have to do with the law in Colorado?

 

[ModestGamer]

This is what you get with liberals in places of power.

this is one of the dumbest things I read on a dialy basis. explain how libertarians cuased this ?

 

[Patranus]

"whats if's" are fucking useless and contribute nothing to the argument.

if he kills a innocent? same t hing that if a police officer does. they should get involuntary manslaughter and go to jail. if you are going to fire know what the fuck you are firing at and behind it.

The funny thing is you keep falling back on a "what if".

 

[woolfe9999]

Use of deadly force is severely restricted in every state I believe. Its use to prevent property theft is universally frowned upon, and it has been that way for some time. It is nothing new brought on by Obama or any "looney libruls".

The fact that the perps were illegal aliens has nothing to do with the charges filed against the old man. Why they were not charged immediately is beyond me, but even that is a local issue.

That said, I have always felt some ambivalence about how such things are handled. Many States have their laws set up so that prosecutors can intentionally overcharge for for a crime (since under such systems, you can be found guilty of "lessor, included offenses") to stack the deck and make a plea bargain seem the lesser of 2 evils for the accused, compared to going to trial and facing huge penalties.

While I wish people had more legal options to defend themselves against property crime, I'm old enough to know of people making stupid mistakes in using deadly force. And it's hard to properly compensate the dead for an "oops!".

I have thought for a long time that the improper use of deadly force in the case of property theft should be its own class of crime. Such a class would have the State admit up front that the act was "hot blooded", the result of provocation. Ordinary charges such as murder, attempted murder, etc. not only ignore this, but imply malice and put an additional burden of proof on the defendant to prove a state of mind. Possible penalties should reflect that there was some level of "mitigating circumstances" inherent in the act.

I hope the old man gets a very sympathetic jury and the prosecutor is not over-zealous.

The burden of proof of mens rea is not on the defendant. It is on the prosecution. If they want to prove attempted murder here, it is a specific intent crime. The prosecution would have to prove the intent to kill. The man could argue that he only wanted to scare them, injure them, or disable their vehicle, and it would be tough for the prosecution to meet its burden. And if they want to prove pre-meditation and deliberation, it's going to be a lot tougher.

Your point about prosecutorial discretion is a good one. Prosecutors can and do often overcharge, the purpose being to gain leverage in a plea bargain process. Under our system, prosecutors have virtually unchecked charging discretion.

My guess here is that this guy will plead to some kind of felony endangerment plus an aggravated battery, and will receive 3-5 years and do 2. I would also bet that the thieves will get charged, if for no other reason because the case has received publicity.

- wolf

 

[Hacp]

Since when does the theft of a piece of steel necessitate trying to kill someone?

If either thief admits this
Wallace did not want to talk on camera, but when we asked him if the two men threatened him he said, "They almost ran me over."

^^ then the old man can get probation or something

If someone steals a piece of steel from you then your life is not in danger. You do not have the right to put a bullet in their brain. EVER!

I go in a bank and start stealing green pieces of paper, you don't think the cops will shoot me dead?

 

[Xcobra]

I don't see the fact of them being illegal being relevant. Illegal or not I'd shoot the bastards. People jack shit all the time. However, him being charged is beyond ridiculous.

 

[ModestGamer]

I don't see the fact of them being illegal being relevant. Illegal or not I'd shoot the bastards. People jack shit all the time. However, him being charged is beyond ridiculous.

I see 2 beaners making a b line into my house and I have my gun handy. those mother fuckers are dead. Chance are I would persue and kill them.

fuck these peice of shit. they need to be dead.

You fuck with my castle you get the fucking artillery pointed in your direction.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Pirating music is a felony

i never said it wasn't. i simply said that copyright infringement (ie, pirating music/movies) and theft (stealing physical goods) are two different crimes.

What's wrong is that it's illegal in Colorado to defend property with lethal force, just like stealing is illegal.

[/QUOTE]

then the law needs changing. there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to defend your property when you are literally on your own land.

 

[jackschmittusa]

woolfe9999

Prosecutors will often argue that the act of firing the weapon in the direction of a person is sufficient to assume harmful intent (they often presume to be mind readers anyway). This then burdens the defendant with convincing the jury that this assumption is incorrect. A new class of of "defense of property" crimes might make it clear that the defendant may have pursued any of several avenues of thought before concluding to use a firearm. The prosecutor would have to present compelling evidence instead of mere assumptions as to the intent. Too many jurors (particularly those with little experience with firearms) are too willing to believe that the only use for a firearm is to kill. A law that recognizes in writing that there might be several intended uses during an attempt to prevent obvious property theft could be quite instructive to such people.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Read the source, the two thieves have not yet been charged, don't say let free. GEEEEZZZZ!!!!

 

[ModestGamer]

woolfe9999

Prosecutors will often argue that the act of firing the weapon in the direction of a person is sufficient to assume harmful intent (they often presume to be mind readers anyway). This then burdens the defendant with convincing the jury that this assumption is incorrect. A new class of of "defense of property" crimes might make it clear that the defendant may have pursued any of several avenues of thought before concluding to use a firearm. The prosecutor would have to present compelling evidence instead of mere assumptions as to the intent. Too many jurors (particularly those with little experience with firearms) are too willing to believe that the only use for a firearm is to kill. A law that recognizes in writing that there might be several intended uses during an attempt to prevent obvious property theft could be quite instructive to such people.

someone trys to break into my home. I intend to harm them.

Make sure you kill them in the door or living room though.

We have castle laws were I live.home invasions are down oddly since it is now totally legal to blast these shit fucks with heavy rounds and kill them.

 

[Double Trouble]

This is why I like the way the law in Texas is set up. Illegal or legal doesn't matter: if these pieces of shit go onto his property to steal the stuff he worked for, they deserve to get shot in the process and everyone would be better off.

The fact that they are illegal is just a reflection on the idiots we've had in DC that have refused to secure our border over the past 50 years.

 

[ModestGamer]

This is why I like the way the law in Texas is set up. Illegal or legal doesn't matter: if these pieces of shit go onto his property to steal the stuff he worked for, they deserve to get shot in the process and everyone would be better off.

The fact that they are illegal is just a reflection on the idiots we've had in DC that have refused to secure our border over the past 50 years.

IKE packed them up and sent them home under operation beautiful ray of sunshine

 

[JTsyo]

How are they still in the country if they're illegals and have an arrest history?

 

[hal2kilo]

Use of deadly force is severely restricted in every state I believe. Its use to prevent property theft is universally frowned upon, and it has been that way for some time. It is nothing new brought on by Obama or any "looney libruls".

The fact that the perps were illegal aliens has nothing to do with the charges filed against the old man. Why they were not charged immediately is beyond me, but even that is a local issue.

That said, I have always felt some ambivalence about how such things are handled. Many States have their laws set up so that prosecutors can intentionally overcharge for for a crime (since under such systems, you can be found guilty of "lessor, included offenses") to stack the deck and make a plea bargain seem the lesser of 2 evils for the accused, compared to going to trial and facing huge penalties.

While I wish people had more legal options to defend themselves against property crime, I'm old enough to know of people making stupid mistakes in using deadly force. And it's hard to properly compensate the dead for an "oops!".

I have thought for a long time that the improper use of deadly force in the case of property theft should be its own class of crime. Such a class would have the State admit up front that the act was "hot blooded", the result of provocation. Ordinary charges such as murder, attempted murder, etc. not only ignore this, but imply malice and put an additional burden of proof on the defendant to prove a state of mind. Possible penalties should reflect that there was some level of "mitigating circumstances" inherent in the act.

I hope the old man gets a very sympathetic jury and the prosecutor is not over-zealous.

I found the initial story in the local newspaper of the incident, but the only source I can find that the AG actually charged the guy with several charges of first degree murder is a local FOX station. Of course This is being echoed throughout cable Fox, and all the right wing blogs. Color me paranoid but I'll make a comment as soon as I can find a different source for the story.

 

[dahunan]

When will the death for theft crew step-up and feel the same way about the politicians who reach into your paycheck or bank account and steal tons of money from you and your family and all americans -

 

[Zebo]

This is why I laugh at fools trying to get out of jury duty. Probably the only real power we have left as citizens.

 

[Sclamoz]

How are they still in the country if they're illegals and have an arrest history?

How do you think? They get deported and just come back like every other illegal immigrant.

 

[ayabe]

His home was not invaded and he was not personally threatened so if he violated the LAW in his state regarding that well, then he fucked up.

I do sympathize with him but the law is the law, change it if you don't like it.

I'm not sure that would even fly in FL and we have some of the rootin' tootin'ist laws in the US in regards to this.

 

[ayabe]

How do you think? They get deported and just come back like every other illegal immigrant.

Right just like all the others caught under the AZ law will.

But at least we/they'll be spending non-existent treasury funds on it, I'll sleep better at night.

 

[Ronstang]

When will the death for theft crew step-up and feel the same way about the politicians who reach into your paycheck or bank account and steal tons of money from you and your family and all americans -

Are you asking if we would support killing crooked politicians? The answer to that question would be ABSOLUTELY.

 

[Zebo]

Use of deadly force is severely restricted in every state I believe. Its use to prevent property theft is universally frowned upon, and it has been that way for some time. It is nothing new brought on by Obama or any "looney libruls".

The fact that the perps were illegal aliens has nothing to do with the charges filed against the old man. Why they were not charged immediately is beyond me, but even that is a local issue.

That said, I have always felt some ambivalence about how such things are handled. Many States have their laws set up so that prosecutors can intentionally overcharge for for a crime (since under such systems, you can be found guilty of "lessor, included offenses") to stack the deck and make a plea bargain seem the lesser of 2 evils for the accused, compared to going to trial and facing huge penalties.

While I wish people had more legal options to defend themselves against property crime, I'm old enough to know of people making stupid mistakes in using deadly force. And it's hard to properly compensate the dead for an "oops!".

I have thought for a long time that the improper use of deadly force in the case of property theft should be its own class of crime. Such a class would have the State admit up front that the act was "hot blooded", the result of provocation. Ordinary charges such as murder, attempted murder, etc. not only ignore this, but imply malice and put an additional burden of proof on the defendant to prove a state of mind. Possible penalties should reflect that there was some level of "mitigating circumstances" inherent in the act.

I hope the old man gets a very sympathetic jury and the prosecutor is not over-zealous.

Not true. 16 states you can be shot dead for stealing stuff on peoples property and many more have similar statutes in the works.

Then for the others - I'm sure many of times it has come down to the homeowners word versus the dead guy... Chose wisely or better yet say nothing till you talk with attorney.

 

[OutHouse]

Kind of messed up, but I guess that's the law in Colorado. No duty to retreat only applies in your dwelling, a criminal stealing something from your yard apparently isn't justification for force.

Don't know how the criminals aren't facing charges, though. Maybe the police are still building their case, I'd hope they plan to make these guys answer for whatever crimes they've committed.

the two illegals tried to run him over so he shot at them. one of the illegals even admited as such to the wheatridge cops.

so tell me why is the victim in jail and the two illegal/theifing/attempted murdering asshats walking free?