35Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteI agree...
As I have said many times: once you reload it's no longer a crime of passion.
Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Vice President
On Thanksgiving two teens broke into the home of Byron Smith in Little Falls, Minnesota (not far from where I grew up, as a random side note). Mr. Smith killed both with, allegedly, excessive force. Mr. Smith, who's house was apparently burglarized multiple times, said the shooting was done in self-defense. What say you?
Personally, I think this guy is going to spend the rest of his days behind bars and rightly so. Lighting up the two teens is one thing and, if they died from that, I think Mr. Smith would be getting off. However, IMO, he crossed the line when he went for his second firearm despite the girl obviously being out of the fight. That alone would be enough to put him away. The execution shot is just icing on the cake for any halfway decent prosecutor.
Little Falls teen shooting deaths called 'cold-blooded
<snip>
According to the complaint, Smith told police that he heard someone breaking into his house at noon on Thanksgiving. He showed police the window he says Brady and his cousin, Kifer, used to enter his house, which he said had been broken into several times before. Lange, his friend, said he kept his valuables downstairs.
Smith told police he armed himself with a rifle and a handgun and waited downstairs until he saw the first person's feet, then legs, then hips.
He said he fired and the first victim, Brady, tumbled down the stairs. While Brady looked up at him, he shot him in the face, according to the complaint.
"I want him dead," he told investigators.
He put Brady's body on a tarp and dragged him into his basement workshop and sat back down in his chair.
Several minutes later, he heard more footsteps and saw Kifer coming down the stairs. He waited until he saw her hips, then fired. She also fell down the stairs, but then his rifle jammed and Kifer laughed.
That angered Smith. "If you're trying to shoot someone and they laugh at you, you go again," he told police.
He then pulled out the .22-caliber, nine-shot revolver that he was wearing, and fired "more shots than I needed to." He dragged Kifer into the workshop, placed her next to Brady and noticed she was still gasping for air.
"Smith stated at this point he placed the handgun under the woman's chin and shot her ... up into the cranium ... a good clean finishing shot."
He told police neither of the teens were armed but he feared they might have had a weapon.
He asked a neighbor the next morning if he knew any lawyers, and that neighbor apparently called police.
<snip>
"The spirit must be the firmer, the heart the bolder,
courage must be the greater as our might fails"
Moderator
I agree...
As I have said many times: once you reload it's no longer a crime of passion.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
He went too far. First shot could be self defense or protection, after that according to his story, not so much. I will give him credit for giving an honest account, but the guy is a dumbass.
This land was made for you and me
-Woody Guthrie
Legend of USPO!
Yup - he's going to prison. And deservedly so.Originally Posted by ThorHammer
“Well, congratulations, President Barack Obama, Conspiracy theorists who generally can survive in anaerobic environments have just had an algae bloom dropped on their fucking heads, thus removing the last arrow in your pro-governance quiver: skepticism about your opponents.” - Jon Stewart
President
I've had my car and home broken in to enough times that I think if I caught someone in the act, I'd loose my shit and rip them to shreds with my bare hands. Those fuckers would pay dearly for ALL the other burglaries against me. Is that fair? No, but tough shit. Shouldn't have been trying to steal my stuff, assholes.
Vice President
I found it surprising, though maybe I shouldn't considering he doesn't think he anything wrong, that he was so forth coming when it came to talking to the police. I bet his lawyer is thinking again and again "why the fuck did he run his mouth?!?!?!?". I've always been taught that, if you're going to shoot someone in self-defense, make sure they die. After that, regardless of whether you are totally in the wrong or totally in the right, its your word against that of a dead person.
"The spirit must be the firmer, the heart the bolder,
courage must be the greater as our might fails"
Administrator
Yeah when i lived in NYC i couldn't quite come to terms with the thought of the handgun ban being a good idea as i was just as scared that one day i would be on my own and it'd happen to me. Thankfully, it never did, not even once but i would get pretty pissed off and want to hurt them, too. Don't think i could do anything with my bare hands like you could though, i am only a small 5 ft 8 100 lb woman so i am figuring people like you are also taking a voice for victims who can't really defend themselves.
For 5 little cents per day, you can view the forums w/o advertising, search the forums endlessly, feel good about keeping this place up and running, among the other benefits that are offered to contributing members.
Administrator
Megyn Kelly just ran a segment on it with her docket style court panel where she asks legal experts on what she thinks will be the outcome to these sorts of cases and they seemed to agree with you. She gave her usual retort of "drop me a line on twitter and let me know what you think of it at home", to all her viewers and strangely a lot of them followed back with "he's a hero". A lot of the time most people (at least down here) figure you are deserving of everything you get when you break into someone's property and i have difficulty finding sympathy for the teens who got their heads blown off.
Does he deserve to go to prison? Well, he broke the law or at the very least stretched its limits and the intent behind its meaning. But they are much more deserving in their role as being dead, for breaking into his property, IMO.
For 5 little cents per day, you can view the forums w/o advertising, search the forums endlessly, feel good about keeping this place up and running, among the other benefits that are offered to contributing members.
Secretary of State
Finishing the first one off is not really out of order for me. If he knew there were two intruders, and suspected them of being armed, it would be quite acceptable to me to make sure the first one you downed, stayed down. The second was I grant you a little suspect, enough even to be considered illegal. Switching guns isn't that weird, especially since his first gun JAMMED (he didn't reload, he switched) and he suspected the suspect was armed. Still though I feel like this guy is goin in. If he had shut the fuck up about it, and immediately called the cops and not moved the bodies he would probably be ok. Even the final shot could be explained away if some of his other actions hadn't taken place.
Moderator
For those of you who believe he went too far, what would you have done in similar circumstances?
The modern Liberal is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. OMD
Administrator
Finishing the first one off is not really out of order for me. If he knew there were two intruders, and suspected them of being armed, it would be quite acceptable to me to make sure the first one you downed, stayed down. The second was I grant you a little suspect, enough even to be considered illegal. Switching guns isn't that weird, especially since his first gun JAMMED (he didn't reload, he switched) and he suspected the suspect was armed. Still though I feel like this guy is goin in. If he had shut the fuck up about it, and immediately called the cops and not moved the bodies he would probably be ok. Even the final shot could be explained away if some of his other actions hadn't taken place.
Right, if he wanted to open his mouth about the whole thing he better do it in a state like ours that let's him.
Still, in our case it better be dark so he has some excuse not to "see the black guy"...as much as i would defend anybody's right to defend themselves, one another, and even property, our laws are written abysmally.
For 5 little cents per day, you can view the forums w/o advertising, search the forums endlessly, feel good about keeping this place up and running, among the other benefits that are offered to contributing members.
Secretary of State
You're using the two wrongs fallacy. The teens acted wrong. They're dead, they paid for it. The homeowner acted wrong as well, by not calling the police, moving the bodies, and executing the 2nd person. He's going to be punished for it as well.
(̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ
Called the cops right after, not moved the bodies no execution shot on number 2. And damn sure not open my mouth about it.
Administrator
How am i using two fallacies? I am not justifying his bad behavior as legal or righteous, i am just saying that i am glad they died in the process. You on the other hand seem to be justifying that the behavior's wrong doing could be ignored, simply by not mentioning it:
Called the cops right after, not moved the bodies. And damn sure not open my mouth about it.
For 5 little cents per day, you can view the forums w/o advertising, search the forums endlessly, feel good about keeping this place up and running, among the other benefits that are offered to contributing members.
Moderator
Well... buried the bodies would have been a good first step. At night far away.
What should he have done?
Not taking the 'kill shot' would have helped a lot. Not dragged the bodies away from where he shot them.
Call the cops right then and there.
Secretary of State
Chloe you aren't using TWO FALLACIES you are using the two wrongs fallacy. < see that word? Its singular. Meaning only one. The two wrongs fallacy is when you say "well bush did it so X doing it is ok" etc You point to something morally wrong, and then point to another person doing something wrong as justification. Yours simplified : the teens were thieves so the homeowner executing both of them when they were unarmed and presenting no violence is acceptable.
OMD didn't ask me what was ethical or moral that I would've done. He asked "for those that think he went too far, what would you have done." I'm saying, YES I would've done it too, but I would've shut up about it so I wouldn't get CAUGHT.
The difference? I'm not attempting an ethical justification, merely a statement of hypothetical action. You seem to be trying to justify him (homeowner).
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks