• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Homeowner shoots and kills home invader

JasperL said:
It's not inaccurate. What evidence establishes as fact the two were burglars or masked home invaders? There's the word of the homeowner about what happened, but not much else at least in the story we've seen. There's been no trial, no real investigation, they haven't apprehended the other suspect who might dispute that account. The police believe the homeowner, the evidence might strongly suggest that his story is true, but that doesn't establish something as fact.

I wouldn't comment, but the attack on the legitimacy of the press is actually dangerous and here it's baseless, wrong headed.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

I have heard from more than one Police Chief that they tell their officers if ever they are required to use their gun in the line of duty -- make sure they are the only one's giving a statement at the end of the day.

You get that?

Ever since then I've kept that outlook.

What's good for the goose...


and here's a bit of free advice for all you CCW holders out there. If an incident were to occur where you are forced to use your weapon to protect your life or the life of others, when the police arrive you say 3 things and 3 things ONLY.

1. I want that (person) arrested.
2. I was in fear for my life
3. I would like to wait for my lawyer to be present before making a statement.


Doing this, if you're an honest actor will ensure you will sleep in your own bed that night and will prevent politically motivated prosecutors from "making an example" out of you.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
What?? Where do you live again?
Click to expand...

'twas many moons ago. Some call it the sticks. Not much happened, not much crime to speak of, so it was all good. It was a poacher, and we got the license plate to be investigated later.
 
ChezC3 said:
Exactly.

I have heard from more than one Police Chief that they tell their officers if ever they are required to use their gun in the line of duty -- make sure they are the only one's giving a statement at the end of the day.

You get that?

Ever since then I've kept that outlook.

What's good for the goose...


and here's a bit of free advice for all you CCW holders out there. If an incident were to occur where you are forced to use your weapon to protect your life or the life of others, when the police arrive you say 3 things and 3 things ONLY.

1. I want that (person) arrested.
2. I was in fear for my life
3. I would like to wait for my lawyer to be present before making a statement.


Doing this, if you're an honest actor will ensure you will sleep in your own bed that night and will prevent politically motivated prosecutors from "making an example" out of you.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get it. Dead men tell no tales. :roll:

But seriously, in this case, I watched the news story and don't know a thing about the homeowner or the suspects, but the house doesn't APPEAR to be a natural target for an armed home invasion. So I'd think "alleged" is pretty wise here. What did they think they'd find worth the risk of getting shot and that justified masks when the guy was home, and not at 10am when they're all gone.... :confused:
 
JasperL said:
It's not inaccurate. What evidence establishes as fact the two were burglars or masked home invaders?
Click to expand...

But they used home invader in the video, which will presumably get many less views than the headline.
 
Wow, does the title of the article lie! There are almost no "news" outlets left in the USA, just corporate-fascist propaganda that basically lies about everything tactically for the agenda of the corporate super rich fascists.

It was not "a suspected burglar." It was two home invaders who attempted to murder the homeowner.

The anti 2Aers will count the dead attempted assassin as a wrongful gun death and are outraged that the homeowner did not comply with their ethical duty to allow himself to be defenselessly murdered.
 
aociswundumho said:
But they used home invader in the video, which will presumably get many less views than the headline.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter, the question still remains. The facts are at this point "alleged" or "suspected" and not established in any real or formal sense. So responsible journalists make that distinction. There's nothing dishonest about it - quite the contrary in fact.
 
poweRob said:
It is accurate. They have to say it as "allegedly" until found guilty in a court of law so as to not incur a liability for their organization for prejudging a criminal case. If they wrote it as guilty the way you want them to and the guy is somehow found not guilty, he can then turn around and sue the paper for saying he was guilty before the trial.
Click to expand...

No, it is a lie. Since someone was home, it is a LIE to call it a burglar attempt. Outright, deliberate lie. They could have stated "suspected armed robber and attempted murderer" to be accurate. Nothing in the article even hints at "burglary." Nothing.
 
JasperL said:
Yeah, I get it. Dead men tell no tales. :roll:

But seriously, in this case, I watched the news story and don't know a thing about the homeowner or the suspects, but the house doesn't APPEAR to be a natural target for an armed home invasion. So I'd think "alleged" is pretty wise here. What did they think they'd find worth the risk of getting shot and that justified masks when the guy was home, and not at 10am when they're all gone.... :confused:
Click to expand...

Alleged is actually, from my understanding a mandatory designation to prevent libel suits. If a person isn't convicted of anything they've "allegedly" done it.

Most view it like there is an "alleged" presumption of innocence until proven guilty...but, you know it still has to be said...

All that is required to use deadly force is the reasonable fear for your life, the life of others, or grave bodily harm. An intruder in the middle of the night almost will always fit that bill and unless you've shot them in the back or in a manner consistent with that suspect attempting to flee, you will generally be given the benefit of the doubt. Following my advice of CCW holder's actually is advice for anyone using a firearm to defend themselves on the street or in your home.
 
joko104 said:
Wow, does the title of the article lie! There are almost no "news" outlets left in the USA, just corporate-fascist propaganda that basically lies about everything tactically for the agenda of the corporate super rich fascists.

It was not "a suspected burglar." It was two home invaders who attempted to murder the homeowner.
Click to expand...

OK, what evidence can you cite that establishes that fact? The homeowner said so? The police seem to think he's telling the truth, but nothing in the story establishes that as fact.

The anti 2Aers will count the dead attempted assassin as a wrongful gun death and are outraged that the homeowner did not comply with their ethical duty to allow himself to be defenselessly murdered.
Click to expand...

Cool. When an anti-2Aer does that be sure to call them out. :peace
 
aociswundumho said:
It's interesting how they use the sugar-coated term "suspected burglar" in the headline, but in the video she says what they really were, which is masked home invaders.
Click to expand...

Yes, in America you are innocent until you are proven guilty. Since these men are dead we don't ever get to hear their side of the story. We don't actually know why they were breaking into this house. It's highly likely that they were burglers, but who knows?

The bigger question is why do you care, and why is this important. This is a more interesting story if you ask me.

Man fatally shoots son after mistaking him for intruder: Authorities - ABC News
 
ChezC3 said:
Alleged is actually, from my understanding a mandatory designation to prevent libel suits. If a person isn't convicted of anything they've "allegedly" done it.

Most view it like there is an "alleged" presumption of innocence until proven guilty...but, you know it still has to be said...

All that is required to use deadly force is the reasonable fear for your life, the life of others, or grave bodily harm. An intruder in the middle of the night almost will always fit that bill and unless you've shot them in the back or in a manner consistent with that suspect attempting to flee, you will generally be given the benefit of the doubt. Following my advice of CCW holder's actually is advice for anyone using a firearm to defend themselves on the street or in your home.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing the facts here or what appears likely.... Just what's been established, and in this case not much. :peace
 
JasperL said:
I wouldn't comment, but the attack on the legitimacy of the press is actually dangerous and here it's baseless, wrong headed.
Click to expand...

I'm not attacking their legitimacy. I'm saying it looks like they are downplaying a violent crime because of their use of two different terms to describe the perps: a sugar-coated one in the headline, and an accurate one in the video. The crime of burglary consists of breaking and entering and doesn't connote violence, yet the men shot the homeowner.

I'm surprised they didn't call them suspected trespassers.
 
JasperL said:
OK, what evidence can you cite that establishes that fact? The homeowner said so? The police seem to think he's telling the truth, but nothing in the story establishes that as fact.



Cool. When an anti-2Aer does that be sure to call them out. :peace
Click to expand...
The description of the event by the police is NOT burglary. NOTHING in what the police said or the resident said even implies "burglary." There was no "alleged burglary" as there is NO ONE claiming burglary - other than the author of the story who LIED, down grading "alleged attempted murder" and "alleged armed home invasion" to a mere burglary - which means no one is present.

They will count it as a gun death claiming that stat is basis to ban guns. They make no distinction between murder and preventing murder. All are equally evil in every message they post of gun death statistics.

Quote anything the police said that even implies "burglary." Burglary is when no one is present.
 
I feel sorry for you the homeowner now he has to live with the fact that he killed someone. I conceal carry and my home is armed . You can take my possessions but if you try to harm my family or my dog or me I will use lethal force without hesitation. I hope the homeowner didnt shoot him over stuff but rather to prevent injury.
 
joko104 said:
The description of the event by the police is NOT burglary. NOTHING in what the police said or the resident said even implies "burglary." There was no "alleged burglary" as there is NO ONE claiming burglary - other than the author of the story who LIED, down grading "alleged attempted murder" and "alleged armed home invasion" to a mere burglary - which means no one is present.

They will count it as a gun death claiming that stat is basis to ban guns. They make no distinction between murder and preventing murder. All are equally evil in every message they post of gun death statistics.

Quote anything the police said that even implies "burglary." Burglary is when no one is present.
Click to expand...

That's wrong. In fact the alleged crime is first degree burglary. Here's the relevant North Carolina statute:

Chapter 14 - Article 14

§ 14-51. First and second degree burglary.

There shall be two degrees in the crime of burglary as defined at the common law. If the crime be committed in a dwelling house, or in a room used as a sleeping apartment in any building, and any person is in the actual occupation of any part of said dwelling house or sleeping apartment at the time of the commission of such crime, it shall be burglary in the first degree. If such crime be committed in a dwelling house or sleeping apartment not actually occupied by anyone at the time of the commission of the crime, or if it be committed in any house within the curtilage of a dwelling house or in any building not a dwelling house, but in which is a room used as a sleeping apartment and not actually occupied as such at the time of the commission of the crime, it shall be burglary in the second degree. For the purposes of defining the crime of burglary, larceny shall be deemed a felony without regard to the value of the property in question. (1889, c. 434, s. 1; Rev., s. 3331; C.S., s. 4232; 1969, c. 543, s. 1.)
Click to expand...

Note the bolded. What separates first and second degree burglary is the presence of the person in the home.
 
joko104 said:
Wow, does the title of the article lie! There are almost no "news" outlets left in the USA, just corporate-fascist propaganda that basically lies about everything tactically for the agenda of the corporate super rich fascists.

It was not "a suspected burglar." It was two home invaders who attempted to murder the homeowner.

The anti 2Aers will count the dead attempted assassin as a wrongful gun death and are outraged that the homeowner did not comply with their ethical duty to allow himself to be defenselessly murdered.
Click to expand...

It's standard journalism practice to use the phrase "suspected" or "alleged" before someone is convicted in a court of law. It has been this way since before you were born. Why are you suddenly outraged by it?
 
SLC said:
I feel sorry for you the homeowner now he has to live with the fact that he killed someone. I conceal carry and my home is armed . You can take my possessions but if you try to harm my family or my dog or me I will use lethal force without hesitation. I hope the homeowner didnt shoot him over stuff but rather to prevent injury.
Click to expand...

I won't wait to find out if you're just there "for stuff". Breaking into my home is nefarious intent enough, I WILL shoot without hesitation at an intruder. Don't care if he was just after the flat screen, I'm not risking waiting to find out if he's got other plans.
 
JasperL said:
Note the bolded. What separates first and second degree burglary is the presence of the person in the home.
Click to expand...

What difference does it make? You think the person who wrote the story knows or even cares?

They called it burglary to downplay it, i.e. not make the criminals look so bad.
 
aociswundumho said:
What difference does it make? You think the person who wrote the story knows or even cares?

They called it burglary to downplay it, i.e. not make the criminals look so bad.
Click to expand...

So you're whining that the fake news accurately reported the story, and you don't like that the headline was accurate.

SAD! :boohoo:
 
Nothing like being judge, jury and executioner. No need for a long drawn out trial.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 
What's with all this whining about the headline? It has been done for decades.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom