[Psilocybin] Teen shot to death during home invasion

[Selfmeditaker]

Someone breaks into my house, whether they're on drugs and babbling or trying to steal my TV, armed or unarmed is going to get 10 rounds center mass.

There's no excuse for breaking and entering, I don't care if you're high or what, it's called personal responsibility. Take your drugs and get high, enjoy yourself.

I might be a little nicer if it's light outside and only grab a .22. I'm a good shot though, but who knows when it comes to it, I might decide to try to incapacitate you, and a few .22 rounds in your arms and legs won't kill you (probably), but a few in your chest will, if slowly. 15 will do so quickly. If it's dark outside, I'm grabbing my PM9 and emptying it in your chest.

Had this kid broke into my dad's house, it would have been much worse. I suspect he would have had a pistol in his mouth before he bit anyone.

PM9=nice gun. I have the PM 40 cal, an boy let me tell you you do not wanna be in front of the thing when I let 1 or 2 go! I wouldnt even need to empty it, im a good shot as well and 1 or 2 40 cals in your chest is stopping you in your tracks

although wounding um wouldnt be such a bad thing either, as long as I knew I wasnt about to have him pull something and cap my ass

 

[phatass]

Blame the shrooms!!!

 

[therapture]

I have got to say, while he has good arguing skills, BiG StroOnZ's arguments are totally f-ing stupid.

The homeowner used reasonable force. He did not shoot the intruder 10x or anything. He REPEATEDLY warned the intruder. The homeowner MAY NOT BE ABLE TO TELL that the kid was tripping, or thought the kid was on pcp or something. WE DO NOT KNOW HIS MENTAL STATE AT THAT POINT. Just because we on this forum MAY be able to tel if someone is tripping, doesn't mean the homeowner has ANY idea what a dude tripping is like!

The homeowner used reasonable force, was in the right in DEFENDING his FAMILY and HIMSELF against an ILLEGAL intruder of which he knew absolutely NOTHING about.

BiG StroOnZ, stop assuming so much, you are making an ass out of yourself. Your higher post count means nothing, so don't use that as a crutch. In fact, you are so illogical, assuming, and ignorant in your arguments, I am now putting you on ignore, I can't even stand to read your posts or replies, they just aren't worth it.

 

[Dragynfyr]

My dad printed this article out and left it sitting on my key board the other just to be a prick.

"see what can happen"?




funny part is I don't think he was questioning my ability to handle the psychedelic experience lol

 

[Blacksoulman]

taser + pistol for back up > *

 

[AmphetamineNinja]

retarded and despicable, there was no need for his death. the 'homeowner' should be jailed, fucking cowardly prick yea right to the gun, no need for your fucking head or fists.

 

[suppup]

retarded and despicable, there was no need for his death. the 'homeowner' should be jailed, fucking cowardly prick yea right to the gun, no need for your fucking head or fists.

Can someone translate? I haven't smoked meth today.

 

[Mister Superzombie]

I cannot believe the things I'm reading in this thread. Shooting and killing an unarmed 18 years old kid who was obviously confused (he called the owner Dad at one point) does not make any sense.

There are plenty of other ways to neutralize someone, ways which are non-lethal.

And I don't get how many of you say would react under supposed such circumstances: an intruder breaks into your house and you say you would go down on him and kill him, no questions asked? What the fuck?!

This 18 years old's life is over because some moron decided to shoot an unarmed person instead of either hitting him with any weapon in order to hurt him, neutralize him, make him flee OR calling the cops and hide while waiting for them to show up. It's a total and avoidable waste.

And to those who argue the 18 years old was a dangerous fighter who bit the owner, remember he did so AFTER he was shot. Before that he probably looked way more like a confused guy with no weapon than a serial killer.

 

[drug_mentor]

Key word in that last sentence is probably. We can only make assumptions on the finer points of what happened. I have drawn my conclusions based on the FACTS that we do know which are a highly intoxicated young man broke into this guys home in the middle of the night. The homeowner is a gun owner.

The homeowner then repeatedly warned the highly intoxicated youth to leave or he would be fired upon, he was ingored. He fired ONE shot into the kids ARM, generally a non lethal shot. The kid then fought with the homeowner until police and ambo's arrived and died later in hospital.

Why do you believe this kid could be incapacitated by other means when a fatal gunshot was not sufficient?

It is one thing as bluelighters to talk about recognising he was tripping and realising that he was probably harmless and its another as a non drug user who has been fed propaganda their whole life noticing he is out of it. The man probably assumed he was on PCP and had super human strength, was in such an emotionally unbalanced state that even if he didn't appear to be a threat one second could flip out any second. That is the sort of shit that is spewed forth by the Government and anti drug agencies.

I would also like to point out that a hard hit to the head with a solid object is probably more likely to kill someone than a gunshot to the arm.

 

[Mister Superzombie]

You are saying he was highly intoxicated as if it made him look more dangerous, while I think the opposite, but as you said these are assumptions so lets forget about that and look at it as it is: an 18 years old person breaks into a house, the homeowner warns him he is going to shoot him while the guy calls him DAD, then he shoots.

The one shot in the arm ended up in his chest, so that must be his arm was in front of his chest, which doesn't make much difference with aiming directly at his chest, unless he was an experienced sharpshooter (in which case he should have aimed for the legs anyway).

What we disagree on is past this story: when is it okay to shoot a trespasser who broke into your property? A lot of people here are saying "if someone breaks into my house, whatever his apparent age or regardless if he's armed or not, regardless if his intentions are to kill/rob or if he looks disoriented, I will shoot him." I find that to be a very stupid way to act. I think resorting to violence this fast doesn't make any sense and that such actions cause useless, avoidable deaths just as the one this thread is about.

I cannot agree with all the people in this thread saying acting this way is perfectly normal, that it is their right. You cannot kill this fast, without asking questions. It's nonsense.

You're talking about facts. The fact his an unarmed 18 years old was shot to death. Another fact is there are numerous other ways to deal with such a situation. Even if X armed robbers were to enter your house, I'd suggest people hide and call the cops, rather than risking killing or being killed to save their precious little material values. Fuck that, the life of a robber is still worth a lot more than a 42 inches plasma TV.

 

[swilow]

When I was young- my grandparesnt lived near a rather well known LSD-cult; something about shoes would tell more- anyway, these folks twice popped into the house, begging for help, while tripping ballz. My grandma- vicious maniac she was- made them a cup of tea, spoke to them, and called the cops.

Hmm...

 

[suppup]

You are saying he was highly intoxicated as if it made him look more dangerous, while I think the opposite, but as you said these are assumptions so lets forget about that and look at it as it is: an 18 years old person breaks into a house, the homeowner warns him he is going to shoot him while the guy calls him DAD, then he shoots.

When someone is breaking into your house, what they are calling you DOES NOT MATTER!!!! Dad, mom, homie, god, Jesus etc etc does not change the fact that this is a complete stranger in the middle of the night. Just because he's calling you dad does not mean he is harmless.

What we disagree on is past this story: when is it okay to shoot a trespasser who broke into your property? A lot of people here are saying "if someone breaks into my house, whatever his apparent age or regardless if he's armed or not, regardless if his intentions are to kill/rob or if he looks disoriented, I will shoot him." I find that to be a very stupid way to act. I think resorting to violence this fast doesn't make any sense and that such actions cause useless, avoidable deaths just as the one this thread is about.

I find this entire paragraph to be very fucking stupid. So this homeowner is supposed to risk HIS life for a random stranger thats breaking into his house for the SLIM chance this person may not be violent? Get real. The responsibility of avoiding this useless and avoidable death falls into the 18 year olds hands. Not the homeowner.

I cannot agree with all the people in this thread saying acting this way is perfectly normal, that it is their right. You cannot kill this fast, without asking questions. It's nonsense.

You're talking about facts. The fact his an unarmed 18 years old was shot to death. Another fact is there are numerous other ways to deal with such a situation. Even if X armed robbers were to enter your house, I'd suggest people hide and call the cops, rather than risking killing or being killed to save their precious little material values. Fuck that, the life of a robber is still worth a lot more than a 42 inches plasma TV.

Once again - you obviously don't value your own life or your family. This guy didn't run out and shoot him for walking in his yard. He shot him after repeatedly telling him to not come in his home through the fucking window. You better learn to kill fast or you will be killed. If you can't man up in a situation when your life is on the line then you better have your eulogy written up. And I see you don't have much experience with the police. You want to go hide in your closet on the phone while someone is breaking in and wait on them? They are gonna find you dead in the closet.

p.s. it wasn't his 42 inch plasma TV that told him someone was breaking in.... It was his screaming wife. I'd say that was what he was protecting... some would call that precious.

 

[suppup]

When I was young- my grandparesnt lived near a rather well known LSD-cult; something about shoes would tell more- anyway, these folks twice popped into the house, begging for help, while tripping ballz. My grandma- vicious maniac she was- made them a cup of tea, spoke to them, and called the cops.

Hmm...

Thats her option to put herself in danger. Not everyone lives so carelessly.

 

[drug_mentor]

Why are you so caught up on the dad thing? One would assume that he kid wouldn't attack his own dad but what you have to think of is how is he going to react to the person he thought was his dad when he realizes he isn't?

You seem to think that innocent people should take extra risks to their own life and that of their families to make 100% sure the person breaking in to their house is a threat. It is easy to sit on a public message board and say that but lets see how you react to some fucked up kid breaking in to your home.

I think that when an intruder enters your home they are pretty much at your mercy. I think that if a non violent solution can be reached then great, I am not advocating murder and tortue of all intruders. I do believe that an intruder has basically forfeited their right to safety and the home owners right to safety trumps the intruder. If that means a homeonwer has to kill an intruder to protect their life and their familys lives then too bad, the intruder shouldn't of broke in anyway.

 

[therapture]

I can guarantee you, if I find a man (and 18 years old is a man) breaking into my house, my wife and/or kids scared for their safety, I am going to be quick and brutal in my decision to safeguard MY FAMILY...if I tell the man to stop, and he keeps on coming in, the instant he gets in, he gets shot. I am not qualified (nor is anyone really) to determine the intruder's state of mind, intent, motive, or anything else, other than he is breaking into (illegally) MY HOUSE where my FAMILY has a right to be protected.

That's a promise. I am no vigilante, but when an intruder takes that kind of action....I have a RIGHT to defend MYSELF and my FAMILY. I would gladly die if it meant my family would survive. But I'll be damned if I am going to give an intruder ANY chance of hurting/killing them first....people that think the intruder has rights, are the ones that end up dead.

 

[Mister Superzombie]

When someone is breaking into your house, what they are calling you DOES NOT MATTER!!!! Dad, mom, homie, god, Jesus etc etc does not change the fact that this is a complete stranger in the middle of the night. Just because he's calling you dad does not mean he is harmless.

You must be kidding. There's a difference between: "Hi, I'm Charles Manson and I'm gonna cut that baby out of your stomach" and "Dad? Is that you?".

I find this entire paragraph to be very fucking stupid. So this homeowner is supposed to risk HIS life for a random stranger that's breaking into his house for the SLIM chance this person may not be violent? Get real. The responsibility of avoiding this useless and avoidable death falls into the 18 year olds hands. Not the homeowner.

Again, what the fuck? I'm not saying people have to risk their lives. Quite the opposite actually: they do not risk their lives as much by HIDING. If you think the intruder might be armed and you or someone of your family can't hide, and after you pointed your gun at him he doesn't cooperate, SHOOT. What I'm saying is, do not shoot, then ask questions. Don't shoot in the dark, don't shoot if you and your family can hide, but most of all DON'T SHOOT A FUCKING UNARMED 18 YEARS OLD.

Once again - you obviously don't value your own life or your family.

That is untrue. Quite the opposite: I value my life enough to not try and play the big hero, and hide instead of getting into a shootout, at the risk of looking like a pussy in the eyes of big heroes like many people in this thread seem to think they are. There are 2 options: either the person breaking into your house wants to kill/rape/hurt you, or he doesn't. If he doesn't, why would you kill him? And if he does, chances are he shoots better than you, so hide.

BTW I'm not saying you should magically know which one is which, just that you are better hiding, and that shooting someone should be used in last resort.

This guy didn't run out and shoot him for walking in his yard. He shot him after repeatedly telling him to not come in his home through the fucking window. You better learn to kill fast or you will be killed. If you can't man up in a situation when your life is on the line then you better have your eulogy written up. And I see you don't have much experience with the police. You want to go hide in your closet on the phone while someone is breaking in and wait on them? They are gonna find you dead in the closet.

If they find me dead in the closet, that means the person breaking in was armed and had as a goal to KILL me. It wasn't a guy alone and confused on mushrooms, nor a robber, not even a robber with the intention of shooting if he's found (I can't find him if I'm hiding). If the guy's goal is to kill me, he can do it whether I'm in my living room, in my closet or taking a dump. And as I already said, if such is the case, there is nothing wrong in defending yourself. But I still say, hide, then if you're found, defend yourself, rather than "do not hide, go on him and shoot him right there".

You give him a better chance to kill you if you confront him rather than locking yourself up in your room with your gun pointed at the door.

p.s. it wasn't his 42 inch plasma TV that told him someone was breaking in.... It was his screaming wife. I'd say that was what he was protecting... some would call that precious.

Answer this: in what way did he defended the life of his precious wife when he shot that 18 years old?

 

[Mister Superzombie]

Why are you so caught up on the dad thing? One would assume that he kid wouldn't attack his own dad but what you have to think of is how is he going to react to the person he thought was his dad when he realizes he isn't?

I'm saying you can weight the danger of the situation, and a a kid calling you "dad" is far less dangerous than someone with a balaclava or any form of mask on his face, not talking or saying things like "I'll kill you."

Common now, you can judge that a confused person is less of a threat than a guy dressed in black handling a crowbar.

You seem to think that innocent people should take extra risks to their own life and that of their families to make 100% sure the person breaking in to their house is a threat. It is easy to sit on a public message board and say that but lets see how you react to some fucked up kid breaking in to your home.

They do not take extra risks by hiding. And they do not take extra risks if they decide to confront one unarmed person with something else than a gun.

I think that when an intruder enters your home they are pretty much at your mercy. I think that if a non violent solution can be reached then great, I am not advocating murder and tortue of all intruders. I do believe that an intruder has basically forfeited their right to safety and the home owners right to safety trumps the intruder. If that means a homeonwer has to kill an intruder to protect their life and their familys lives then too bad, the intruder shouldn't of broke in anyway.

In the case discussed in this thread, as in many others, killing the intruder did nothing to protect the life of the homeowner's family, since their lives never were in danger. And if someone's goal is to kill you no matter what, you're still safer by hiding, then shooting.

 

[Mister Superzombie]

I can guarantee you, if I find a man (and 18 years old is a man) breaking into my house, my wife and/or kids scared for their safety, I am going to be quick and brutal in my decision to safeguard MY FAMILY...if I tell the man to stop, and he keeps on coming in, the instant he gets in, he gets shot. I am not qualified (nor is anyone really) to determine the intruder's state of mind, intent, motive, or anything else, other than he is breaking into (illegally) MY HOUSE where my FAMILY has a right to be protected.

That's a promise. I am no vigilante, but when an intruder takes that kind of action....I have a RIGHT to defend MYSELF and my FAMILY. I would gladly die if it meant my family would survive. But I'll be damned if I am going to give an intruder ANY chance of hurting/killing them first....people that think the intruder has rights, are the ones that end up dead.

Sure, protect your life by stepping in front of the guy with your gun, instead of hiding with your gun.

Be sure not to miss the confused 18 years old tough. You can't take any chance: he probably goes into each and every house unarmed and unmasked to rape everyone while calling them dad. 8)

EDIT: Oh yeah and you were talking about protecting your family. For that I say as I already said: if you or anyone of you family can't hide, point your gun on the guy, and shoot if he doesn't cooperate.

I still disagree with the way you would react, which is running on the guy and shooting him. If, of course, he doesn't shoot first.

 

[chompy]

I do not like it when my friends that are on drugs try to seek shelter at my house if they are tripping out or thinking they are being followed (again, tripping out). I have chased people off with my shotgun on many occasions for bringing trash into my home.

 

[chompy]

You must be kidding. There's a difference between: "Hi, I'm Charles Manson and I'm gonna cut that baby out of your stomach" and "Dad? Is that you?".



Again, what the fuck? I'm not saying people have to risk their lives. Quite the opposite actually: they do not risk their lives as much by HIDING. If you think the intruder might be armed and you or someone of your family can't hide, and after you pointed your gun at him he doesn't cooperate, SHOOT. What I'm saying is, do not shoot, then ask questions. Don't shoot in the dark, don't shoot if you and your family can hide, but most of all DON'T SHOOT A FUCKING UNARMED 18 YEARS OLD.



That is untrue. Quite the opposite: I value my life enough to not try and play the big hero, and hide instead of getting into a shootout, at the risk of looking like a pussy in the eyes of big heroes like many people in this thread seem to think they are. There are 2 options: either the person breaking into your house wants to kill you, or he doesn't. If he doesn't, why would you kill him? And if he does, chances are he shoots better than you, so hide.

BTW I'm not saying you should magically know which one is which, just that you are better hiding, and that shooting someone should be used in last resort.



If they find me dead in the closet, that means the person breaking in was armed and had as a goal to KILL me. It wasn't a guy alone and confused on mushrooms, nor a robber, not even a robber with the intention of shooting if he's found (I can't find him if I'm hiding). If the guy's goal is to kill me, he can do it whether I'm in my living room, in my closet or taking a dump. And as I already said, if such is the case, there is nothing wrong in defending yourself. But I still say, hide, then if you're found, defend yourself, rather than "do not hide, go on him and shoot him right there".

You give him a better chance to kill you if you confront him rather than locking yourself up in your room with your gun pointed at the door.



Answer this: in what way did he defended the life of his precious wife when he shot that 18 years old?

so you would rather turn your cheek to the intruder? who hides from the very clear and present enemy when you have assets and other lives to protect?