• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Lady shoots home invader

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
If this didn't involve an old woman, tons of questions would have come up:
1) why was she up at 1am?
2) did the man break in violently? (kicking down the door, waving a hatchet)
3) why didn't the old woman give him a few seconds to leave?
4) why didn't the woman call the cops 1st, then address the criminal?
5) why did the woman invest in a gun, but not an alarm system?

The heart does not bleed for this man.

And, if it was any other combination (young white woman, young black man), these questions would have popped up.
 
Single woman alone in the house, regardless if she's lying about the warning I have no problem with her actions.
 
Macamus Prime said:
If this didn't involve an old woman, tons of questions would have come up:
1) why was she up at 1am?
Because she didn't have work the next day and had to catch up on all the jersey shore she had taped.
2) did the man break in violently? (kicking down the door, waving a hatchet)
I think you're wrong, this question would not have came up even if it wasn't an old lady. They would just look at the point of entry.
3) why didn't the old woman give him a few seconds to leave?
Cause he interrupted her show.
4) why didn't the woman call the cops 1st, then address the criminal?
She probably preferred the cops take his body out in a bag instead of hers, just a guess.
5) why did the woman invest in a gun, but not an alarm system?
She didn't invest in either, the gun was her late husbands.

The heart does not bleed for this man.

And, if it was any other combination (young white woman, young black man), these questions would have popped up.
Click to expand...

You're retarded.
 
Macamus Prime said:
If this didn't involve an old woman, tons of questions would have come up:
1) why was she up at 1am?
2) did the man break in violently? (kicking down the door, waving a hatchet)
3) why didn't the old woman give him a few seconds to leave?
4) why didn't the woman call the cops 1st, then address the criminal?
5) why did the woman invest in a gun, but not an alarm system?

The heart does not bleed for this man.

And, if it was any other combination (young white woman, young black man), these questions would have popped up.
Click to expand...

1) who fucking cares why she was up?
2) he was in her house. not his..he had no right to be there
3) he had long enough for her to load and aim.
4) WTF? call the cops first? are you fucking stupid? sure she can offer him tea while she waits the 15 minutes for them to get there..the cops have no duty to protect you.
5) gun is $300 a alamr system cost more then that. not just in setting it up, monthly payments and such
 
I'd give a medal to the old lady. Save the tax payers money and eliminate trash from our society. We need more people like her, if more criminals get shot like that, we'd have less criminals around and our jails would be less crowded.
 
Macamus Prime said:
If this didn't involve an old woman, tons of questions would have come up:
1) why was she up at 1am?
2) did the man break in violently? (kicking down the door, waving a hatchet)
3) why didn't the old woman give him a few seconds to leave?
4) why didn't the woman call the cops 1st, then address the criminal?
5) why did the woman invest in a gun, but not an alarm system?

The heart does not bleed for this man.

And, if it was any other combination (young white woman, young black man), these questions would have popped up.
Click to expand...

Don't you have an old lady's house to break into?
 
Good for her for protecting herself but too bad she has to probably relive the nightmare of it all for the rest of her life.
 
This one, in my opinion, is a case where is a very fine line between self defense and murder. And its all contained in half of a sentense, "She removed a firearm from a drawer and told the subject to leave, but he did not, so she fired, striking the subject in the head."

And usually the test is does the suspect have a weapon and is the suspect attacking.

Asking the suspect to leave, and upon refusal immediate firing lacks the moving toward her of a attack or the running away that would constitute murder.
and
 
<hearing aid not turned up>
"Get outta here now!"
"But grandma, it's me!"
<bang>
 
dud said:
I tend to be conservative on issues like this but I tend to agree with most of what you said here. the lady is most probably lying. Hers is the only voice that can be heard since the boy's has been taken. She could make up just about anything that makes sense and it would probably be believed.

Unfortunately two lives have been taken here. The kid is dead and the woman has to live with killing him for the rest of her life.
Click to expand...

Well then maybe he shouldnt have entered her house illegally. Doesnt matter if she is lying or not. I highly doubt she went on the streets. Sought this person out. Shot them and drug them back into her house just so she can say he was trying to rob her.
 
Lemon law said:
This one, in my opinion, is a case where is a very fine line between self defense and murder. And its all contained in half of a sentense, "She removed a firearm from a drawer and told the subject to leave, but he did not, so she fired, striking the subject in the head."

And usually the test is does the suspect have a weapon and is the suspect attacking.

Asking the suspect to leave, and upon refusal immediate firing lacks the moving toward her of a attack or the running away that would constitute murder.
and
Click to expand...

Breaking into anothers home carries no weight in your legal world.
 
Lemon law said:
This one, in my opinion, is a case where is a very fine line between self defense and murder. And its all contained in half of a sentense, "She removed a firearm from a drawer and told the subject to leave, but he did not, so she fired, striking the subject in the head."

And usually the test is does the suspect have a weapon and is the suspect attacking.

Asking the suspect to leave, and upon refusal immediate firing lacks the moving toward her of a attack or the running away that would constitute murder.
and
Click to expand...



There's not enough detail in the story to say one way or the other.


Having said that: There's a legal concept called 'Disparity of Force', which may be useful to keep in mind here. What that basically means is the equation is unbalanced enough that one side has a reasonable fear of death or serious injury at the hands of the other; and therefore a response is justifiable. There are some situations the courts have traditionally recognised as amounting to DoF:

Examples:

Ex 1 - Bar fight: 1 on 1. two healthy adult males. There is no 'Disparity of Force' here. Therefore there can be no justification.


Ex 2 - Some days later, The winner from my first example gets confronted on the street by the loser... and 3 or 4 of the loser's buddies. 1 v 4 is *not* balanced, and therefore the winner of ex 1 may be justified in (shooting, whatever) in order to defend life/limb.


Other examples are situations like a Healthy Adult versus the Elderly or Handicapped. A Healthy Adult versus a Child. Or a Man versus a Woman.

In this case, we have a healthy adult male versus an elderly woman. Therefore it's very likely a court would find 'Disparity of Force' exists....
 
Last edited:
Beev said:
Firearm opinions all aside, how stupid do you have to be to NOT leave when someone pointing a gun at you asks you to do so?
Click to expand...

too many people watch movies and assume incidents with firearms are the same. 90% of the time someone gets seriously injured/killed.
 
Scotteq said:
There's not enough detail in the story to say one way or the other.


Having said that: There's a legal concept called 'Disparity of Force', to keep in mind. What that basically means is the equation is unbalanced enough that one side has a reasonable fear of death of serious injury; and therefore a response is justifiable.

Examples:

Ex 1 - Bar fight: 1 on 1. two healthy adult males. There is no 'Disparity of Force' here. Therefore there can be no justification.


Ex 2 - Some days later, The winner from my first example gets confronted on the street by the loser... and 3 or 4 of the loser's buddies. 1 v 4 is *not* balanced, and therefore the winner of ex 1 may be justified in (shooting, whatever) in order to defend life/limb.


Other examples are situations like a Healthy Adult versus the Elderly or Handicapped. A Healthy Adult versus a Child. Or a Man versus a Woman.

In this case, we have a healthy adult male versus an elderly woman. Therefore 'Disparity of Force' exists....
Click to expand...

Agreed, never thought of that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top