Man to spend life in prison for killing teens in burglary

[chihlidog]

Ugh. Still we're at this.

Let me explain, for those that dont get it fully, why I support this guy to an extent. And I think I probably reflect several others in the thread's feelings as well.

WE'RE TIRED OF THE THUGS.

This guyh took it a bit too far. But WE'RE TIRED OF THE THUGS. I'm sure, as the poster above me said, that HE was sick of the thugs. THREE TIMES they break into his house. THREE TIMES.

At what point does that become NOT OK? At what point do we say "OK, at this point it is pretty clear that these people are bold, brazen, uncaring criminals". Why do we CARE that they were shot?

Some people in this thread are acting like he murdered Charlie Brown and Lucy. Fine, he lost it. Fine, he violated the letter of the law. But why are we looking at HIS actions instead of looking at a soft-ass system that ALLOWED them to break into his home a third time?? Why is it "this guy is so terrible" and not "our system SUCKS when these people can break into an old man's house for a THIRD TIME".

That's why a lot of us are jumping to defend him. I see more injustice in the fact that creeps like these are on the street and able to break into a house for the third time than I do in the fact that he went crazy and shot them. Guess what, if someone broke into my house for a THIRD TIME I would want to hurt them. Yeah, I said it. Would I KILL them? No. I would not premeditate a murder over it. I can see the desire to hurt them however. So how can I judge this guy? Push a man too far, ya know?

I think it deserves SOME punishment. It was cold. It wasnt the best thing he could have done. But I, and many others, at least sympathize with the frustration. And I get frustrated when the rest of the country DOESNT see that, and it seems to me becomes more and more sympathetic to criminals.

 

[fskimospy]

I finally listened to the tape. This is some creepy shit. Sounds like something out of a movie. Could literally be a script from Texas Chainsaw. His wispering adds to the creepiness.
I also think he is a sociopath or had a mental breakdown.

After hearing about its contents I haven't been able to bring myself to listen to it. From everything I've heard though it appears that he's a deeply disturbed individual.

 

[fskimospy]

Ugh. Still we're at this.

Let me explain, for those that dont get it fully, why I support this guy to an extent. And I think I probably reflect several others in the thread's feelings as well.

WE'RE TIRED OF THE THUGS.

This guyh took it a bit too far. But WE'RE TIRED OF THE THUGS. I'm sure, as the poster above me said, that HE was sick of the thugs. THREE TIMES they break into his house. THREE TIMES.

At what point does that become NOT OK? At what point do we say "OK, at this point it is pretty clear that these people are bold, brazen, uncaring criminals". Why do we CARE that they were shot?

Some people in this thread are acting like he murdered Charlie Brown and Lucy. Fine, he lost it. Fine, he violated the letter of the law. But why are we looking at HIS actions instead of looking at a soft-ass system that ALLOWED them to break into his home a third time?? Why is it "this guy is so terrible" and not "our system SUCKS when these people can break into an old man's house for a THIRD TIME".

That's why a lot of us are jumping to defend him. I see more injustice in the fact that creeps like these are on the street and able to break into a house for the third time than I do in the fact that he went crazy and shot them. Guess what, if someone broke into my house for a THIRD TIME I would want to hurt them. Yeah, I said it. Would I KILL them? No. I would not premeditate a murder over it. I can see the desire to hurt them however. So how can I judge this guy? Push a man too far, ya know?

I think it deserves SOME punishment. It was cold. It wasnt the best thing he could have done. But I, and many others, at least sympathize with the frustration. And I get frustrated when the rest of the country DOESNT see that, and it seems to me becomes more and more sympathetic to criminals.

"It wasn't the best thing he could have done" is not how I would describe the cold-blooded execution of two people.

How would this apply to other crimes? Charles Manson "had a party that got out of hand". Jim Jones had a "punch bowl malfunction".

 

[Genx87]

After hearing about its contents I haven't been able to bring myself to listen to it. From everything I've heard though it appears that he's a deeply disturbed individual.

I have seen and heard a lot of things via the internet. This is making my hair stand on end. I don't think Hollywood could write a more creepy dialogue and put it in a movie. He is going on and on about why he did it. And he is fixated on cleaning up this mess. That the mess is worse than vomit or poop. And he does it while whispering.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

"It wasn't the best thing he could have done" is not how I would describe the cold-blooded execution of two people.

How would this apply to other crimes? Charles Manson "had a party that got out of hand". Jim Jones had a "punch bowl malfunction".

Just spit out my coffee!

 

[chihlidog]

"It wasn't the best thing he could have done" is not how I would describe the cold-blooded execution of two people.

How would this apply to other crimes? Charles Manson "had a party that got out of hand". Jim Jones had a "punch bowl malfunction".

And that's exactly what I'm talking about.

Nobody egged Charles Manson on to do the things he did. None of Jim Jones' followers committed crimes victimizing him. Repeatedly.

You dont see the difference? THAT'S why some of us are defending this guy to an extent. Because even though it WAS wrong of him...I feel so strongly that criminals NEED the message "STOP being a criminal or BAD BAD BAD things can happen to you and it's YOUR fault when they do". They've become SO BOLD in this country.

 

[SheHateMe]

After hearing about its contents I haven't been able to bring myself to listen to it. From everything I've heard though it appears that he's a deeply disturbed individual.

Just listen to it so you have a better reason to ignore some of the people in this thread who are acting like what he did wasn't that bad.

Everybody involved in this story was wrong, but this guy took it to the extreme after he very clearly incapacitated both teens during the recording. He knew they were unarmed and posed no threat to him after they had been shot and fell down the stairs.

 

[fskimospy]

And that's exactly what I'm talking about.

Nobody egged Charles Manson on to do the things he did. None of Jim Jones' followers committed crimes victimizing him. Repeatedly.

I was talking about how your description of two monstrous and psychopathic murders as going 'a bit too far' is totally out of line with the horrific nature of the crimes he committed.

You dont see the difference? THAT'S why some of us are defending this guy to an extent. Because even though it WAS wrong of him...I feel so strongly that criminals NEED the message "STOP being a criminal or BAD BAD BAD things can happen to you and it's YOUR fault when they do". They've become SO BOLD in this country.

How do you square this with the fact that crime rates in the US are at lows not seen for decades and decades?

 

[chihlidog]

I was talking about how your description of two monstrous and psychopathic murders as going 'a bit too far' is totally out of line with the horrific nature of the crimes he committed.



How do you square this with the fact that crime rates in the US are at lows not seen for decades and decades?

That makes it OK? That makes it acceptable for these 2 to have done what they did, to have ZERO regard for his property? That's what I am talking about, not crime rates, but BRAZEN willingness to just do whatever they want to do because of the sympathy they get from the public.

 

[Rakehellion]

If someone cuts you off on the freeway can you shoot them in the face?
If someone punches you, can you mow them down with an M-16?
If someone keys your car, can you run them through with a bayonet?
If some one eggs your house, can you toss them into a wood chipper?

Serious questions. I just want to know where the line is drawn.

 

[fskimospy]

That makes it OK? That makes it acceptable for these 2 to have done what they did, to have ZERO regard for his property? That's what I am talking about, not crime rates, but BRAZEN willingness to just do whatever they want to do because of the sympathy they get from the public.

1.) No one is arguing that breaking into the house was ok. We have condemned the cold blooded murder of those individuals by a dangerous psychopath.

2.) On what metric are you basing your idea that criminals have become more brazen?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

It was wrong for the two perps to break into the man's house. However, it was far worse what the man did after he wounded them for breaking into his house.

Dragging people after they're wounded/incapacitated to another room and executing them was premeditated murder..........period. The jury should have recommended the death penalty for these murders. I would fully support him being executed by lethal injection.

 

[GoPackGo]

I'm not saying he should have killed them....but I understand.

 

[Rakehellion]

I'm not sure that in a home invasion a home owner can ever say the threat was neutralized, at least until the police are there or the perps are dead. There's always the potential of a hidden weapon or an additional perp coming into play.

If you have the wherewithal to drag them to a second location, you're clearly not afraid of them pulling a dagger on you.

 

[WelshBloke]

That makes it OK? That makes it acceptable for these 2 to have done what they did, to have ZERO regard for his property? That's what I am talking about, not crime rates, but BRAZEN willingness to just do whatever they want to do because of the sympathy they get from the public.

But no ones said that what they did was OK.

 

[Genx87]

It was wrong for the two perps to break into the man's house. However, it was far worse what the man did after he wounded them for breaking into his house.

Dragging people after they're wounded/incapacitated to another room and executing them was premeditated murder..........period. The jury should have recommended the death penalty for these murders. I would fully support him being executed by lethal injection.

No death penalty in MN. One of the few things this state gets right.

 

[CitizenKain]

Ugh. Still we're at this.

Let me explain, for those that dont get it fully, why I support this guy to an extent. And I think I probably reflect several others in the thread's feelings as well.

WE'RE TIRED OF THE THUGS.

This guyh took it a bit too far. But WE'RE TIRED OF THE THUGS. I'm sure, as the poster above me said, that HE was sick of the thugs. THREE TIMES they break into his house. THREE TIMES.

At what point does that become NOT OK? At what point do we say "OK, at this point it is pretty clear that these people are bold, brazen, uncaring criminals". Why do we CARE that they were shot?

Some people in this thread are acting like he murdered Charlie Brown and Lucy. Fine, he lost it. Fine, he violated the letter of the law. But why are we looking at HIS actions instead of looking at a soft-ass system that ALLOWED them to break into his home a third time?? Why is it "this guy is so terrible" and not "our system SUCKS when these people can break into an old man's house for a THIRD TIME".

That's why a lot of us are jumping to defend him. I see more injustice in the fact that creeps like these are on the street and able to break into a house for the third time than I do in the fact that he went crazy and shot them. Guess what, if someone broke into my house for a THIRD TIME I would want to hurt them. Yeah, I said it. Would I KILL them? No. I would not premeditate a murder over it. I can see the desire to hurt them however. So how can I judge this guy? Push a man too far, ya know?

I think it deserves SOME punishment. It was cold. It wasnt the best thing he could have done. But I, and many others, at least sympathize with the frustration. And I get frustrated when the rest of the country DOESNT see that, and it seems to me becomes more and more sympathetic to criminals.

No, you are jumping to defend because you are mentally broken and need to seek help. Why are suddenly taking this guy at this word that his house was broken into before? Its obvious he isn't the kind of person who would be considered trustworthy on something like this. Also, if we was so worried about them, why did he sit on calling the police for a day? Was it so he could get some alone time with the bodies?
Every one of this guy's defenders are lunatics and I hope they seek help before they do something like this. Or at least they shoot themselves first.

 

[SheHateMe]

If someone punches you, can you mow them down with an M-16?
If someone keys your car, can you run them through with a bayonet?

It depends. Are we asking Spidey?

 

[Bird222]

And that's exactly what I'm talking about.

Nobody egged Charles Manson on to do the things he did. None of Jim Jones' followers committed crimes victimizing him. Repeatedly.

You dont see the difference? THAT'S why some of us are defending this guy to an extent. Because even though it WAS wrong of him...I feel so strongly that criminals NEED the message "STOP being a criminal or BAD BAD BAD things can happen to you and it's YOUR fault when they do". They've become SO BOLD in this country.

We are supposed to be a nation of laws NOT how pissed off or tired we are. The general standard in self-defense is to 'neutralize the threat'. If neutralizing the threat resulted in the person dying, so be it. However, in this case the threat was neutralized and the guy decided to kill them because he was pissed. I don't care if they broke in a 100 times, the standard is the same. Are they an imminent threat to your life or to inflict great bodily harm? If they are not, YOU CAN'T USE DEADLY FORCE PERIOD. I don't care how pissed you are at the perps, at the cops, at the president or whoever. Now maybe a good lawyer could have argued he had some altered mental state or something because of the prior trauma but his recording seems to have removed that option for him. The teens were criminals and the guy shooting them initially to 'neutralize the threat' that they posed was something they definitely deserved, but them being murdered later was not justified. The guy got was he deserved, a long prison sentence.

 

[Bird222]

If someone cuts you off on the freeway can you shoot them in the face?
If someone punches you, can you mow them down with an M-16?
If someone keys your car, can you run them through with a bayonet?
If some one eggs your house, can you toss them into a wood chipper?

Serious questions. I just want to know where the line is drawn.

No to all with the possible exception to number 2. If you think a reasonable person would think you were in jeopardy of 'great bodily harm' maybe. I think it is a long shot, and you would probably end up in prison. Maybe if you were a 90 year old lady and was punched by a 250 pound 20 year old guy. 🙂

 

[BadThad]

If you know that someone is going to commit a crime, you call the police, not become a vigilante. Regardless of where its taking place and to whom.

Yea, then the police show up after your dead....brilliant. The cops can't do shit until a crime has already been committed.

You can be proactive (my choice) or reactive (the victim/cops). Every person has a right to defend themselves and their property. If you're counting on the cops to do this for you, then you're simply a victim. I prefer to NOT be a victim because some POS decides to commit a crime.

 

[BlitzPuppet]

"It wasn't the best thing he could have done" is not how I would describe the cold-blooded execution of two people.

How would this apply to other crimes? Charles Manson "had a party that got out of hand". Jim Jones had a "punch bowl malfunction".

Apples to oranges.

You ask yourself one question...who was supposed to be there and who was not?

These guys broke in looking to steal AGAIN from the guy, and they paid with their lives. This in no way can be compared to Charles Manson's gang barging in and killing innocents. Are you insane?

 

[fskimospy]

Apples to oranges.

You ask yourself one question...who was supposed to be there and who was not?

These guys broke in looking to steal AGAIN from the guy, and they paid with their lives. This in no way can be compared to Charles Manson's gang barging in and killing innocents. Are you insane?

Nope. You should probably read my post again. I was mocking his characterization of a the cold blooded murder of two people as "a little too far". It had nothing to do with comparing the actions of this guy to Charles Manson. Gotta read more closely.

The crime they committed deserved prosecution and jail time. Had he simply shot them while he reasonably felt they were a threat, that's his right. What he actually did was a monstrous crime. He's probably very lucky that he lives in a state without the death penalty. Even though I don't support the death penalty in any circumstances I imagine his life would have been in great danger if that had been an option.

 

[BlitzPuppet]

Nope. You should probably read my post again. I was mocking his characterization of a the cold blooded murder of two people as "a little too far". It had nothing to do with comparing the actions of this guy to Charles Manson. Gotta read more closely.

The crime they committed deserved prosecution and jail time. Had he simply shot them while he reasonably felt they were a threat, that's his right. What he actually did was a monstrous crime. He's probably very lucky that he lives in a state without the death penalty. Even though I don't support the death penalty in any circumstances I imagine his life would have been in great danger if that had been an option.

Fair enough, didn't read the chain of events that lead to your post...your's caught my eye for some reason.

I just think this judgement could have ended fairer. I can't imagine how pissed I'd be if my place of residence was robbed 3 times by the same people.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I just think this judgement could have ended fairer. I can't imagine how pissed I'd be if my place of residence was robbed 3 times by the same people.

I get pissed off when people cut me off in traffic; that doesn't give me the right to do them bodily harm. This guy was perfectly within his rights to shoot home intruders who he believed posed a credible threat. He neutralized the threat; that's when you call the police. You don't drag the wounded people around, telling them that they're about to die, and then execute them, just because you happen to be pissed off.