Three suspected teenage burglars shot dead in US

[rijb]

10 minutes ago, joecoolfrog said:

Ok Rambo

What's your problem with Vietnam vets?  Did you spit at them in the airport?

[Humberstone]

This could be entrapment, has happened before. I will wait until the investigation is finished. 

 

Someone mentioned that poor old fella in the UK who shot an intruder. Well, his conviction was over turned, but he did shoot someone in the back with an illegally acquired pump action shot gun. So no sympathy from me, particularly after selling his story to the tabloids and getting Max Hastings (yes, that creep) to do his publicity.  

[joecoolfrog]

12 minutes ago, rijb said:

What's your problem with Vietnam vets?  Did you spit at them in the airport?

 

13 minutes ago, rijb said:

What's your problem with Vietnam vets?  Did you spit at them in the airport?

Why would I do that and when were they at Gatwick ?☺

[kowpot]

28 minutes ago, Rob13 said:

 

At close range, a 22 would have been enuff. 

True, a .22 does have the ability to kill. But, as a self defense round you couldn't be more wrong.  The close range aspect doesn't make sense, since a .22 round has the capability to travel 1 mile,  1.609344 km.  

 A person shot in the chest by a .22  would stand a better-than-50% chance of the bullet never entering their chest cavity; chances are very good that it would be deflected by ribs, the sternum, or the vertebrae. This person would very probably survive just fine with only a minor wound, with or without treatment. Thus if the person is armed they are still a threat.

A person shot in the chest by a  rifle loaded with .223 or 5.56 mm rounds has a much poorer likelihood of surviving, especially if the bullet penetrates both ventricles of the heart (in which case they're very likely to die long before they can receive any medical attention).
  Just remember, the gun you have is always better than the one you don't.

[klikster]

31 minutes ago, Rob13 said:

 

At close range, a 22 would have been enuff. 

AR-15 rounds are .003 inch larger diameter than a "22" but have significantly more mass.

 

It's not just the diameter of the projectile that is important, but mass ... and velocity resulting from the quantity of powder in the shell casing. In a home invasion, stopping power is important. 

 

Actually I would prefer a belt fed .30 cal Browning machine gun.

[rijb]

18 minutes ago, joecoolfrog said:

 

Why would I do that and when were they at Gatwick ?☺

What do you have against the Brits that were in Vietnam?

[joecoolfrog]

1 minute ago, rijb said:

What do you have against the Brits that were in Vietnam?

What have you been smoking ?

[KhonKaenKowboy]

Maybe the dead should have watched Hang Em High en español....takes place in Oklahoma..1889.  They execute two juveniles in the film, too...white kids...who were accomplices to cattle rustling.  Every county in OK has voted Republican for the last two elections...likely quite a few gun owners out there.  Darwin at work.  Give the shooter three taco stickers for the pick-up truck...one for each kill.

[giddyup]

6 minutes ago, KhonKaenKowboy said:

Maybe the dead should have watched Hang Em High en español....takes place in Oklahoma..1889.  They execute two juveniles in the film, too...white kids...who were accomplices to cattle rustling.  Every county in OK has voted Republican for the last two elections...likely quite a few gun owners out there.  Darwin at work.  Give the shooter three taco stickers for the pick-up truck...one for each kill.

Maybe if they hadn't broken into someone's house armed, they would still be here.

[klikster]

3 minutes ago, KhonKaenKowboy said:

Maybe the dead should have watched Hang Em High en español....takes place in Oklahoma..1889.  They execute two juveniles in the film, too...white kids...who were accomplices to cattle rustling.  Every county in OK has voted Republican for the last two elections...likely quite a few gun owners out there.  Darwin at work.  Give the shooter three taco stickers for the pick-up truck...one for each kill.

Your post should read ".. takes place in Indian Territory .. 1899 .. that is now Oklahoma ..  which became a state in 1907."

[rijb]

19 minutes ago, joecoolfrog said:

What have you been smoking ?

What have you got against Vietnam vets, who smoke?

[RickBradford]

4 hours ago, elgordo38 said:

What can one say the law is the law 3 young people are dead due to their own Ramboness and a 4th is looking at a dead end future. Casting blame is the easy part.The funerals for these young people is the hard part. 

It was their choice.

 

Choices and actions have consequences.

[Sig]

13 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

The shooter is within his rights to do what he did.  Yet, it's a window into the cold-blooded way many US rednecks deal with the world.  It's the same people who voted for Trump.  The shooter could have given a warning and/or shot in the air and/or shot the intruders in the legs, .......   but instead, he purposefully went for 3 kills.   If you get some puppies and they shit on your carpet, do you knock them around with a baseball bat?   Killing the intruders was overkill. 

That's got to be one of the most ignorant things I've read in a long time. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, since you obviously don't have any sort of a clue whatsoever. And your prejudice is showing horribly as well.... You must be a city dweller who has no connection with real life outside of concrete boxes and have obviously never had training with any kind of weapon. I don't know where on earth you get your ideas about shooting in the air or at their legs from, but it is a good way to die fast. These 3 dead malevolent thugs were not puppies! Now I won't give you as much of the benefit of the doubt on this one. That analogy was just sheer stupidity. These guys were armed and breaking into a locked home, they may have been heading for the children's bedroom for all you know! Black clad, masked and gloved, armed men forcing entry into your house at night and you're gonna risk your entire family being killed by thinking of them as puppies!??? Sorry... just too stupid to even begin comprehending. Ideas like yours is why we have idiots running our government. They also think they are better than "rednecks"! As the Christian scriptures say, " Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall". I'm guessing you vote... Please take a vacation during election season in the future. Countries struggle enough as it is with proud politicians, they don't need your help toward that fall.

[elgordo38]

9 minutes ago, Sig said:

That's got to be one of the most ignorant things I've read in a long time. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, since you obviously don't have any sort of a clue whatsoever. And your prejudice is showing horribly as well.... You must be a city dweller who has no connection with real life outside of concrete boxes and have obviously never had training with any kind of weapon. I don't know where on earth you get your ideas about shooting in the air or at their legs from, but it is a good way to die fast. These 3 dead malevolent thugs were not puppies! Now I won't give you as much of the benefit of the doubt on this one. That analogy was just sheer stupidity. These guys were armed and breaking into a locked home, they may have been heading for the children's bedroom for all you know! Black clad, masked and gloved, armed men forcing entry into your house at night and you're gonna risk your entire family being killed by thinking of them as puppies!??? Sorry... just too stupid to even begin comprehending. Ideas like yours is why we have idiots running our government. They also think they are better than "rednecks"! As the Christian scriptures say, " Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall". I'm guessing you vote... Please take a vacation during election season in the future. Countries struggle enough as it is with proud politicians, they don't need your help toward that fall.

I notice you quote the scriptures. Any relation Sig Sauer Pistols

[Sig]

2 minutes ago, elgordo38 said:

I notice you quote the scriptures. Any relation Sig Sauer Pistols

hahaha
I wish! Might get a good discount! :D

[KhonKaenKowboy]

3 hours ago, klikster said:

Your post should read ".. takes place in Indian Territory .. 1899 .. that is now Oklahoma ..  which became a state in 1907."

It was a US Territory, subject to Territorial Laws...as the movie suggests, there were no appeals and executions were swift.

[boomerangutang]

I've thought some more about this case.  It troubles me.  I can see how the first intruder got shot with deadly force.  Justified.   Perhaps also the second was justified, who was also caught within the house.   However, the 3rd young man was shot outside.  Very likely he was running away, cornered, and/or pleading for his life with his hands raised.  In a military situation, a combatant who puts his hands up is supposed to be taken into custody, not shot dead.  Granted, this was not strictly a military scenario, but was similar, in that there were combatants.     If it proves true that the 3rd young man (and possibly also the 2nd) had his/their hands in the air pleading for mercy, .....AND WERE SHOT DEAD,  I think the shooter should be punished - perhaps with a modest fine (suggest $1000) and/or some months in jail.   The charge:  excessive force.

[kowpot]

On 3/29/2017 at 7:10 AM, boomerangutang said:

              There's a recent movie which mirrors that scenario to some degree. I can't recall its name, but I watched in on a flight.

 

            The shooter is within his rights to do what he did.  Yet, it's a window into the cold-blooded way many US rednecks deal with the world.  It's the same people who voted for Trump.  The shooter could have given a warning and/or shot in the air and/or shot the intruders in the legs, .......   but instead, he purposefully went for 3 kills.   If you get some puppies and they shit on your carpet, do you knock them around with a baseball bat?   Killing the intruders was overkill. 

 

I don't consider puppies "crapping" on the carpet life threatening.  So, no!

[boomerangutang]

1 minute ago, giddyup said:

What does your "scenario" have to do with what actually happened? Three armed guys, dressed in black, forced their way into the guys house. He took the appropriate action and shot them. Do you think maybe he should have waited until they raped his wife and kids? No one will know what was in their hearts and minds when they broke in, but they won't be doing it again, we know that.

If you don't know what 'hypothetical' means, look it up.

 

It relates to the scenario in the OP, mostly in relation to the killing of the 3rd intruder, who was shot dead outside the house, very likely with his hands up, pleading for mercy.  It also relates to the woman who was caught driving the get-away car.   If she had been shot dead (sitting in the car), gun-lovers would have fully justified that also.

[steven100]

Totally agree with the home owners actions ...

 

If Australia took the same view there would be alot less burglaries.

 

These three won't be robbing anymore houses.

[giddyup]

3 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

If you don't know what 'hypothetical' means, look it up.

 

It relates to the scenario in the OP, mostly in relation to the killing of the 3rd intruder, who was shot dead outside the house, very likely with his hands up, pleading for mercy.  It also relates to the woman who was caught driving the get-away car.   If she had been shot dead (sitting in the car), gun-lovers would have fully justified that also.

I don't need to look it up, and what you are suggesting is pure conjecture. people like you are very vocal in support of the intruders, but I notice you don't offer anything in way of an alternative action by the home owner. Perhaps he should have made them a coffee and pointed out the error of their ways?

[Berkshire]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

I've thought some more about this case.  It troubles me.  I can see how the first intruder got shot with deadly force.  Justified.   Perhaps also the second was justified, who was also caught within the house.   However, the 3rd young man was shot outside.  Very likely he was running away, cornered, and/or pleading for his life with his hands raised.  In a military situation, a combatant who puts his hands up is supposed to be taken into custody, not shot dead.  Granted, this was not strictly a military scenario, but was similar, in that there were combatants.     If it proves true that the 3rd young man (and possibly also the 2nd) had his/their hands in the air pleading for mercy, .....AND WERE SHOT DEAD,  I think the shooter should be punished - perhaps with a modest fine (suggest $1000) and/or some months in jail.   The charge:  excessive force.

Boomer, I respect your opinions and I'm with you most of the time.  I lean liberal and hate Trump as much as the next guy (well, sane guy anyways).

 

But honestly, if every armed intruder were shot dead every single time they broke into someone's home, I would have no problem with that.  It might even have a deterrence effect.  It doesn't matter to me if they were 16 yrs old or 36.  The world is a better place without these thugs.  Sure there are exceptions, but this case is pretty clear cut.  As for your theory about the "3rd young man"....he made a decision to break into these people's home.  He's not innocent. 

 

This article contains the photos of the shooter and all three victims, as well as the getaway driver.  Not sure if already posted.

 

http://heavy.com/news/2017/03/zachary-peters-broken-arrow-oklahoma-home-invasion-burglars-robbers-shot-rifle-ar15-son-father-photos-self-defense/

 

[Andrew Dwyer]

Just to clarify

" He armed himself with an AR-15 rifle and opened fire on the trio when he confronted them in a hallway after they briefly exchanged words, police said. Two of the burglars died in the home’s kitchen, while a third escaped to the driveway, where he collapsed and died. "'

There is no mention that the third intruder was shot outside ( hands up, pleading for mercy etc ).

[55Jay]

6 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I've thought some more about this case.  It troubles me.  I can see how the first intruder got shot with deadly force.  Justified.   Perhaps also the second was justified, who was also caught within the house.   However, the 3rd young man was shot outside.  Very likely he was running away, cornered, and/or pleading for his life with his hands raised.  In a military situation, a combatant who puts his hands up is supposed to be taken into custody, not shot dead.  Granted, this was not strictly a military scenario, but was similar, in that there were combatants.     If it proves true that the 3rd young man (and possibly also the 2nd) had his/their hands in the air pleading for mercy, .....AND WERE SHOT DEAD,  I think the shooter should be punished - perhaps with a modest fine (suggest $1000) and/or some months in jail.   The charge:  excessive force.

You've got an active imagination and seem to distort what you read to fit the scenario that satisfies your bias and wishful thinking.  Just like one of those dumb red neck Trump voters you loathe and criticize so much.  Ironic, ain't it?  555!  Yee-Haw! 

 

Here you present totally made up nonsense, then concoct more BS and pile it on top cause you think you're clever, and the readers will just nod and go along with it.  Hey isn't that what Trump does? You know, Trump... that guy you seem to loathe and criticize all the time.  Ironic, ain't it?  555!   Yee-Haw! 

 

Back on topic... you are wrong...AGAIN.  Far as I can see in the news stream today, it's still 3 confronted and shot inside the house.  2 died inside.  Third ran outside and collapsed in the driveway.   I wonder if he was trying reach Ms. Rodriguez in the get away car?  Ooops, she left them high and dry, and dead in the water, so to speak.  She's pretty cold-blooded, eh,  Boomer? (rhetorical question).

Edited March 30, 2017 by 55Jay

[Ace of Pop]

What's this warning shot rubbish That could damage something useful you worked to buy .?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[55Jay]

6 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

If you don't know what 'hypothetical' means, look it up.

 

It relates to the scenario in the OP, mostly in relation to the killing of the 3rd intruder, who was shot dead outside the house, very likely with his hands up, pleading for mercy.  It also relates to the woman who was caught driving the get-away car.   If she had been shot dead (sitting in the car), gun-lovers would have fully justified that also.

No need to start lecturing when you're just blowing smoke to begin with.

 

It doesn't relate to the OP.  At all.  It relates to the fantasy you concocted about #3 doing the equally fictional "hands up don't shoot" pose ala Ferguson, Missouri.  You stretched it even further with that juicy "pleading for mercy" add-on. LOL.

 

It in no way relates to the woman in the get away car either.  Cause she wasn't even there.  She bailed out when she heard the shots inside the house.  I don't doubt that because it would seem that's what SHE told the police.

 

Blowing smoke.....  take another hit, Boomer.  You're doing great! 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2017 by 55Jay

[55Jay]

21 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

What's this warning shot rubbish That could damage something useful you worked to buy .?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Not a problem for him cause he's shootin' blanks! 

 

Edited March 30, 2017 by 55Jay

[klikster]

8 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I've thought some more about this case.  It troubles me.  I can see how the first intruder got shot with deadly force.  Justified.   Perhaps also the second was justified, who was also caught within the house.   However, the 3rd young man was shot outside.  Very likely he was running away, cornered, and/or pleading for his life with his hands raised.  In a military situation, a combatant who puts his hands up is supposed to be taken into custody, not shot dead.  Granted, this was not strictly a military scenario, but was similar, in that there were combatants.     If it proves true that the 3rd young man (and possibly also the 2nd) had his/their hands in the air pleading for mercy, .....AND WERE SHOT DEAD,  I think the shooter should be punished - perhaps with a modest fine (suggest $1000) and/or some months in jail.   The charge:  excessive force.

I've thought about this post .. it doesn't trouble me, just looks like a "trolling for post count" post.

 

Were you actually in the military? Combatants?  How about thugs. And your scenario jumping from "perhaps" to "very likely" to "proves".

 

Sounding a lot like Trump.

Edited March 30, 2017 by klikster
clarification

[metisdead]

Off topic trolling post has been removed as well as the replies. 

[Rigby40]

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.