Is He a Murder?

[Endless_Night]

I also understand what you're saying, but he was still alive. They weren't there to kill him. They were there to rob him.

Agreed. They weren't there to kill him. But how do you know they wouldn't have once he surprised them? More to the point, how did he know? Physical assault certainly threatens death.

I'm guessing he put up a fight and that added to the brutality he received in return. Do I think he should have put up a fight? That is his call, not mine.

This almost sounds like you're implying the beating was his fault. "He fought back, so got beaten," is a little too similar to, "She dressed slutty, so got raped," for my comfort. But surely that's not what you're saying!?

I think emotion got the better of him and he went for the gun instead of the phone. I know he probably felt vindicated after shooting her. If she had been beating on him, he wanted revenge. Was he justified? I guess he was, if I understand the California laws correctly. The courts have yet to decide if they will prosecute him for anything.

Unquestionably, emotions were running high. Was he justified? No easy answer to that one. As Him15 pointed out, ethics and morality and not the same thing as legality.

I can't get on board with the whole phone vs gun option. Grabbing the gun backed off his attackers. If he grabbed the phone it seems unlikely they'd have sat by casually why he dialed 911. A more likely scenario, IMO, is them grabbing something and beating him to death.

Just having a gun doesn't automatically put you in control of your situation. You have to weigh the circumstances of your actions. You have to be able to keep control of your gun. It might be best not to even have a gun.

I couldn't agree more.

There's no easy answer in confrontational situations. It's best to keep a clear head and be aware of what's going on around you. The more alert you are, the more you have a chance of doing the right thing and of surviving. Don't let your emotions take over. But, unfortunately, there is no action that will work in every case. That's why a clear and calm disposition works best.

Ideally, sure. But I'm not sure how reasonable it is to expect people to have a calm, clear head while under physically threatening confrontational situations.

As you can see, I didn't really provide any answers. I do still have my opinion about the use of a gun in some situations, even though the law says it's OK.

No answers necessary. Personal morality is hardly one size fits all.

 

[DVS]

Agreed. They weren't there to kill him. But how do you know they wouldn't have once he surprised them? More to the point, how did he know? Physical assault certainly threatens death.

You never know. For the most part, a burglar is chicken. That's why they prefer to rob you when you aren't there. These people followed that trend, because they didn't have guns. But, he did surprise them, so they felt they had to do something to keep him in control, while they continued what they had come for. In some cases, you will even scare the burglars off, if you come home unexpectedly. My guess is, because there were two of them, they felt confident they could control him and still get what they came for. But, just as easily, you can be wrong by assuming the burglar is not confrontational. You have to be cautious and "read" the body language of the people involved.

No, it's not an exact science, because all people are different and they will react differently in a given situation. A burglar will be reacting to a situation they didn't expect. If you confront them with violence, they will probably return with the same. Again, keeping a clear head and staying calm can work best.

This almost sounds like you're implying the beating was his fault. "He fought back, so got beaten," is a little too similar to, "She dressed slutty, so got raped," for my comfort. But surely that's not what you're saying!?

In a way, yes. Sure, if they felt they needed to control him so they could still get what they wanted, they are going to hit him as much as they feel is necessary to accomplish that. But, being physical isn't normally in a burglar's MO. Remember, they prefer to get your stuff when you aren't home. But, they will do what they feel is necessary to keep you down and if you keep fighting back, they will keep hitting you down.

I know it's not a normal reaction for someone to just sit there and allow someone to steal your stuff, but in the moment, it can sometimes be the best thing to do. Again, you have to survey the situation at the time to see how you should react. But when there is more than one person against you, it might be best to just let them think you are going to be passive, and you can wait for a chance to run or maybe a chance to get the upper hand.

Rapists aren't there for the sex. They are there for the control they get. If a victim tries to stop the attack, and she's smaller or weaker than her assailant, she's going to get beat up pretty badly, because he enjoys making her submit. That's where he gets his real satisfaction. If she complies and even acts like she's enjoying it, he might not enjoy it and not be able to continue with the actual rape. He wants her to be afraid. He wants her to feel like a victim. He feeds off of that. If she fights, he's going to retaliate and he's going to win.

It's not easy to do, but it's often said that rape victims should try to get personal with their attacker, give him her name and ask for his. Don't fight with him, even to the point of acting like you enjoy what's happening. Like all things of this nature, it doesn't always work but fighting back is usually going to get you hurt.

Unquestionably, emotions were running high. Was he justified? No easy answer to that one. As Him15 pointed out, ethics and morality and not the same thing as legality.

I understand and agree. This thread is just to point out what I see as problems with some of the laws we have on the books when it comes to giving citizens lethal power. Some people can handle that power and not abuse it. There are others who will take the legal power they have to the edge.

A gun can give an individual a feeling of invincible power. And in the moment of that situation when decisions are often clouded by emotion, people get killed. I'm not saying all laws like this are bad and it might not be possible to dictate limited power and make that work. But giving someone absolute power when their stress level is high just seems like we're lighting the fuse to something.

I can't get on board with the whole phone vs gun option. Grabbing the gun backed off his attackers. If he grabbed the phone it seems unlikely they'd have sat by casually why he dialed 911. A more likely scenario, IMO, is them grabbing something and beating him to death.

You grab the gun first. That gives you the power over them. Just like in this case, his gun chased them off. Then you call the police with a description of the two, and let them take over.

I read one article about the shooting of the woman. By the way, that same article said she was found not to be pregnant. Anyway, because she couldn't run as fast, he followed her and cornered her in an alley. That's when she begged him not to shoot her because she was pregnant. He shot her anyway. If this story is correct, that's taking his power too far. At that point he had her cornered at gunpoint. That's when he should have called police and let them arrest her. Instead, he shot her twice in the back.

I know different stories are saying different things. The media can twist things around and sometimes inflate a story to keep it going. We'll just have to wait to see if he's prosecuted for going too far.

Ideally, sure. But I'm not sure how reasonable it is to expect people to have a calm, clear head while under physically threatening confrontational situations.

Agreed. The basic citizen isn't going to do very well with that, I'm sure. But just keep that in the back of your mind if you ever get confronted with a violent person. I've been confronted by violent people. The key to resolving a violent situation is not to make it worse.

Violence feeds on violence. It's fuel for the fire. Being as calm as possible for as long as possible has been proven to work. But not always. Sometimes people are pumped up on drugs, or the situation is already to the extreme. Sometimes all of the tricks in the book just don't work. Life sucks sometimes.

No answers necessary. Personal morality is hardly one size fits all.

Actually, there might not be any answers. The world is becoming more violent. Some people are so desperate that they are driven to extremes. The trick is not to get caught up in it.

 

[bdsmshade]

Okay sorry don't know if should post this here but watching documentary and thinking the right to bare arms may be a bad idea. I mean is this taking the piss? Claims some guy in florida bit a guy's face off so the media are claiming zombie attacks (spreading panic) and peepers are going more nuts?

Come on no more guns for wackadoos

Has to be a gag

 

[bdsmshade]

Sorry does have some connection on the grounds that these 'people' are talking about shooting anyone who has been bitten. While I think your right to defend yourself is a great thing and wish we had the same rights. This may take it a bit far

 

[Primalex]

But, just as easily, you can be wrong by assuming the burglar is not confrontational. You have to be cautious and "read" the body language of the people involved.

And hope that their body language does not change, when they have tied you up, searched your home and came to the conclusion to question you where the "real money" is.

It's not easy to do, but it's often said that rape victims should try to get personal with their attacker, give him her name and ask for his. Don't fight with him, even to the point of acting like you enjoy what's happening. Like all things of this nature, it doesn't always work but fighting back is usually going to get you hurt.

I doubt there is any credible data what the best bet is. The problem is that the rapist has to decide what to do with you afterwards - and it's quite likely he comes to the conclusion that a dead person can't go to the police.

 

[DVS]

Okay sorry don't know if should post this here but watching documentary and thinking the right to bare arms may be a bad idea. I mean is this taking the piss? Claims some guy in florida bit a guy's face off so the media are claiming zombie attacks (spreading panic) and peepers are going more nuts?

Come on no more guns for wackadoos

Has to be a gag

This isn't recent, is it? Because I do remember some guy biting a homeless man's face enough that a lot of it was missing. Was it a year ago or more? I don't remember anybody talking about it being zombies unless someone was saying that with a bit of humor. Zombies and related gory theatrics seem to be popular with a percentage of the population. I think the biter was on a serious drug high or something. I don't remember for sure. And I don't remember any panic being spreading. Am I living a sheltered, unaware life?

 

[IrisAlthea]

Rapists aren't there for the sex. They are there for the control they get. If a victim tries to stop the attack, and she's smaller or weaker than her assailant, she's going to get beat up pretty badly, because he enjoys making her submit. That's where he gets his real satisfaction. If she complies and even acts like she's enjoying it, he might not enjoy it and not be able to continue with the actual rape. He wants her to be afraid. He wants her to feel like a victim. He feeds off of that. If she fights, he's going to retaliate and he's going to win.

It's not easy to do, but it's often said that rape victims should try to get personal with their attacker, give him her name and ask for his. Don't fight with him, even to the point of acting like you enjoy what's happening. Like all things of this nature, it doesn't always work but fighting back is usually going to get you hurt.

I think the advice is against ineffective violence actually.
The idea behind non agressive behaviour in this case is probably more about slowing things down and making the rapist less alert which increases the chanse to get to safety or use violence that actually counts.

It also depends a lot on the situation. Just happenening to be in the wrong place at the wrong time is completely different from being alone inside with the obsessed stalking ex.

The hope that the rapist wouldn't be able to go through with it if you don't fight back is nothing I can believe in. There can be just as much feeling of sexual power in the other persons obvious fear or going along without resistance and unless you know who you are dealing with its impossible to predict how they will react.

 

[DVS]

I think the advice is against ineffective violence actually.
The idea behind non agressive behaviour in this case is probably more about slowing things down and making the rapist less alert which increases the chanse to get to safety or use violence that actually counts.

It also depends a lot on the situation. Just happenening to be in the wrong place at the wrong time is completely different from being alone inside with the obsessed stalking ex.

The hope that the rapist wouldn't be able to go through with it if you don't fight back is nothing I can believe in. There can be just as much feeling of sexual power in the other persons obvious fear or going along without resistance and unless you know who you are dealing with its impossible to predict how they will react.

I didn't say the rapist wouldn't be able to go through with the rape if you didn't fight back. I said you would be more likely to get beat up less, if you didn't fight back. Rape isn't a sexual thing for a rapist, but more of a power thing. If you act like you are enjoying yourself, how ever you want to attempt that, you have a better chance of discouraging him than if you were to continue to fight him. But, because everybody and every situation is different, there are no guarantees.

More than likely, you are going to get raped, whether you fight or not. Of course, fight in the beginning. Sometimes he might not expect you to fight much and there are tactics you can use to fight him off. There is nothing wrong with that, because that is still considered a possible way to get the upper hand and then get away.

It's when you are no longer in control and you can't get away that you might think about this. This is what I learned from talking to police officers and social workers. Some of these people have been raped and feel strongly about this. And they have been involved in many rape cases. In the end, it will be the victim's decision on how they act. I just want to give you this option.

There's no need to hash this out. You either agree with this advice or you don't. I'm not going to try and force anybody to listen to me. I've never been a rapist, but I've talked to victims and like I said, I've talked to police officers who have worked a lot of rape cases.

They say fighting is still an option, depending on the situation. But the more the victim fights, the more likely she is going to be hurt more.

 

[bdsmshade]

This isn't recent, is it? Because I do remember some guy biting a homeless man's face enough that a lot of it was missing. Was it a year ago or more? I don't remember anybody talking about it being zombies unless someone was saying that with a bit of humor. Zombies and related gory theatrics seem to be popular with a percentage of the population. I think the biter was on a serious drug high or something. I don't remember for sure. And I don't remember any panic being spreading. Am I living a sheltered, unaware life?

Get the feeling it may have been a while ago and not convinced the follow up stories are mainstream media and considering when they started talking about voodoo their expert was a practitioner of santaria they ain't even trying to get facts.
Sometimes think the stuff prepars get into are insane.

Also pisses me off when discovery runs bs documentaries

 

[subwannabe]

That's not how the George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin thing went down though. George Zimmerman saw a suspicious person in the neighborhood, followed him against police advice, and according to the evidence Trayvon jumped George Zimmerman and began assaulting him, after which Zimmerman either pulled out a gun or used a gun already in his hand and shot Trayvon.

 

[IrisAlthea]

been reluctant to post on this. The severe PTSD of someone formerly close to me has shaped my opinions on matters of murder a lot, but trying to articulate those views has upset people in the past.

I find myself divorcing legality and morality from the question; did he kill some one? Yes? He's a murderer, and he needs assistance. Whether or not that also means he should be punished (which I do understand is primarily the premise question) seems secondary to me.

It's easier to come to peace with having done the wrong thing for the right reasons, than to have clearly done something terrible and be told you've done nothing wrong, or worse that you're a hero for doing it. If you can't even have a conversation about how terrible it is without someone telling you it's ok, you can't ever move past that and get around to making amends with the universe, whether that's community service, a flower at a graveside, or an apology to the survivors. Especially that last one; seems like the actions with the most potential to help have become completely anethma.

I think there is a lot of truth in this.
I guess it's partly because people mean well and partly because it's hard to handle other peoples pain so we don't want to hear about it.

 

[DVS]

Just keeping track of the story.


http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Intruder-Shot-by-Homeowner-Not-Pregnant-268655212.html




http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Long-Beach-Homeowner-Shoots-Kills-Intruder--268364152.html

Long Beach police said they were investigating the incident. It was not immediately clear whether any charges would be filed against Greer for the shooting.

"Investigators have to look at both sides of this coin," said legal analyst Royal Oakes. "On the one hand a frail man in his 80s is being attacked in his own home by intruders, he has a right to self-defense. On the other hand, he did shoot a person who was trying to get away, so he wasn't in imminent danger himself and the law says you can't shoot somebody under those circumstances."