Video: Friends, family don’t understand why teen home invaders were shot dead

posted at 4:51 pm on May 6, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via Bob Owens of Bearing Arms, I’m … pretty sure I understand it, although you can see why a heartbroken parent or sibling would have trouble sorting it out given the tender age of the boys involved. Plain and simple: What was the homeowner supposed to do differently? She’s in her late 60s and had been burgled twice before, including by one of the kids who ended up dead in this confrontation. She was so terrified of how things might escalate next time, given the sense of impunity they obviously felt in targeting her, that she asked her seventysomething brother to stay with her. The facts aren’t entirely clear but it sounds like he’s the one who fired the fatal shots. If he hadn’t, there might well have been a fight between two senior citizens and two young teens armed with God knows what. How do you like the odds on that one? Better yet, how would you like a law that says you can’t fire at someone who’s confronting you in your home unless you know for a fact that the intruder’s carrying a gun himself?

The only wrinkle here is what the sister of one of the teens said: “They were on their way out the door.” Not sure how she knows that, unless she’s making an assumption based on the fact that some of the bullets went through the door. I wonder what would happen if it turned out that the boys were shot in the back instead of the chest. In most home invasion cases, the politics of charging a homeowner with using excessive force in self-defense would be poisonous, especially when the homeowner’s as sympathetic as this one. But given the age of the teens, maybe prosecutors will take a closer look.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

This story is such an indictment of our decaying culture and society on so many levels that someone should write a book about this. How much anyone want to bet that these little dirtbags tormented kids in school with impunity because our woosified culture has a zero tolerance attitude towards violence in schools? I bet they made the lives of good kids in school miserable for years because the good kids knew that if they stood up to them they would receive the same punishment for defending themselves as these dirtbags would receive except that the good kids care about school and obeying rules and the dirtbags would have enjoyed a suspension/vacation. Maybe when these lowlifes first started acting up at an early age a good kid had stood up to them and gave them a good beating a lesson would have been learned instead of the most recent and permanent lesson they received.

peacenprosperity on May 7, 2014 at 8:17 AM

News flash: Two Sociopaths Die: World Safer As A Result!

mountainaires on May 7, 2014 at 8:27 AM

Here’s the deal. I was a burglary detective for years. I did it because I hated thieves (simply the laziest criminals out there) and I hated watching people who had their homes invaded by strangers lose their sense of sanctuary. You can replace the stolen goods. You can’t replace the lost sense of security. It’s YOUR HOME for God’s sake. If you aren’t safe there, where are you safe?

I had one couple, a man and wife, she being seven months pregnant get broken into. When I got there the wife was on the phone. I asked the man what she was doing and he said, “Calling a realtor. We’re moving.” I told him she would calm down. He said, “No, you don’t understand. She refuses to have a baby in a house that isn’t safe.”

So when some scumbag- no matter what age- breaks into a home and gets whacked, tough nuts.

Oh and by the way, Allahpundit again reminds us of how twisted our minds have become because of the constant pressure by the Left about what is right and what is wrong. His comment about if the kids were shot in the back there might be an issue tells us volumes. In a gunfight everything is moving. You, them, your focus, your mindset, their intentions. Everything. At some point if the guy in YOUR house turns his back what does that matter? If they are running for the door IN YOUR HOUSE how do we know they are running to pick up a weapon and turn back around? If they twist, is it in the back?

Keep it simple stupid. (KISS) If the bad guy is in the house, uninvited, committing a crime, then whatever happens to him is on him.

archer52 on May 7, 2014 at 8:58 AM

I have no sympathy for anyone shot and killed (in the chest or in the back) while breaking into someone’s property.

Making poor choices in life has consequences. Had the kids gone to a movie instead, they’d still be alive.

BMF on May 7, 2014 at 9:08 AM

AllahPundit wrote “The only wrinkle here is what the sister of one of the teens said: “They were on their way out the door.” Not sure how she knows that, unless she’s making an assumption based on the fact that some of the bullets went through the door.” I’m surprised they let people who call our hosts filthy liars continue to post here.

jim56 on May 6, 2014 at 11:52 PM

There is nothing in the facts of the case to suggest that.

Allahpundit appears to have been attempting to provide a possibile explanation for what the girl said.

It is not part of the facts of the case.

The facts part says the boys made it accross the first floor of the house to the living room and where shot there. The video appears to show bullet holes in the living room wall. Perhaps Allahpundit should not have speculated on the girl’s behalf. It did not add to the clarity of the situation.

talkingpoints on May 7, 2014 at 9:14 AM

archer52 on May 7, 2014 at 8:58 AM

Thanks for your post! Absolutely correct! It should not matter whether they were shot in the back or not.. and you are so right. Everything is moving and events can happen in the blink of an eye. When someone turns around who is to say they aren’t even faking you out.. or in a flash change their mind and turn again with a gun firing back at you, or turn and run and fire a weapon under their arm. You have no way of knowing but there is one thing you do know.. there are at least two people who have just illegally invaded your home in the middle of the night who may or may not take everything you own of value and hurt you or kill you in the process.

All these other considerations… were they armed.. if so was it a knife or a gun.. were they turning around or running away.. are nothing but “rules of engagement” for the innocent victims. The perp has no rules.

JellyToast on May 7, 2014 at 9:15 AM

P.S.

Autoplay is a tool of satan.

CurtZHP on May 6, 2014 at 5:16 PM

I agree completely.

Kevin K. on May 7, 2014 at 9:17 AM

I wonder what would happen if it turned out that the boys were shot in the back instead of the chest.

That wouldn’t make a difference to me and it shouldn’t make a difference to anyone else either.

If you break into my home, you face possible death no matter what direction you are facing… period.

Nineball on May 7, 2014 at 9:29 AM

Racists.

KMC1 on May 7, 2014 at 9:43 AM

illegally invaded your home in the middle of the night

JellyToast on May 7, 2014 at 9:15 AM

Gee, what other situation do we keep talking about that concept? One on a larger scale than the 1-2k square footage of a house? But we’re not allowed to do anything about those invasions. (Yeah, ok, that was sorta OT.)

On topic: concur wholeheartedly with BMF – they should have gone to a movie. Even at today’s absurd prices it would have cost less.

GWB on May 7, 2014 at 9:48 AM

Now you finally admit that at least one of the people were pointing guns at officers and that Bundy at least implicitly was egging him on. (There were more than one according to the article).

There are photos of guns being aimed, so no “admission” is needed.

What point would the 2nd Amendment have were we allowed to keep and bear arms but not aim them at invaders?

They also were probably improperly on a highway.

“Implicitly…” “probably…” you’ve really done some great research before forming your opinion.

I guess in your mind it would have been fine for these two kids to have trespassed by driving on the homeowner’s yard here and one of them to have aimed guns at the homeowner.

A public highway and a private yard are two very different things. Look it up.

But not fine if they went into the house without any guns. Hmmm. jim56 on May 6, 2014 at 8:34 PM

Home invaders should wear t-shirts with “UNARMED AND WILL LEAVE IF ASKED, DON’T SHOOT” printed on them. Maybe have them notarized.

Akzed on May 7, 2014 at 9:49 AM

Home invaders should wear t-shirts with “UNARMED AND WILL LEAVE IF ASKED, DON’T SHOOT” printed on them. Maybe have them notarized.

Akzed on May 7, 2014 at 9:49 AM

Needs to be printed front and back, mind you.

GWB on May 7, 2014 at 10:14 AM

I wonder what would happen if it turned out that the boys were shot in the back instead of the chest.

I don’t care, and if these boys had broken into my home, they would have been shot until there was no twitching.

Wallythedog on May 7, 2014 at 10:47 AM

“We don’t dial 9-1-1.”
Chuck Norris

Tenwheeler on May 7, 2014 at 10:53 AM

One point not often discussed is the emotional toll this situation takes on the home owner who is forced to use deadly force. I know many gun owners, with me being one, and not one has a desire to be forced to defend themselves with deadly force.

Once the trigger is pulled the shooters life will change. It starts with the body in the house, the 911 call, LEOs showing up, the trip “down town” and the BAC blood test, the statements given, the many folks showing up at the scene, the clean up, the investigation, the local news coverage, your neighbours talking about the incident, you kid’s friends talking to them about the shooting at school and so on. The shooter just wants to get back to a normal life but for many years folks will bring the subject up. Some will see you as a hero, some a villain, and some as a curiosity. When a new neighbour moves in; your neighbours will point out to them that you once were forced to use deadly force. Heck when selling the realtor will inform the new buyers of the incident in some states.

Point being; the shooting will change your life. Sure some could pull the trigger and then enjoy a beer and ask the wife to bring a sammich. For many, and especially the old (like me), this is a terrible event. Of course, they would do it again if they had to.

To be clear…….. I 100% believe in the right of a person using deadly force when they believe their life is in danger. I am too old to fight off a 21 year old attacker, even if they are unarmed. An attacker with no arms? Well, maybe I could deal with that situation.

Finally to make my point clear…I conceal carry so please don’t take my point wrong. Just typing out some random thoughts.

HonestLib on May 7, 2014 at 10:54 AM

Today’s children are not being parented, not taught anyone about right and wrong at home, and the public school system enforces this stupidity. They were more than old enough to know what they should not be doing. If you do the crime, many times you die! Just thought since the lady was older (not elderly, thank you! as I am older and ready), she would be an easy mark. What if they had attacked her and killed her? Would the family and anyone else say the teens were doing the right thing and all is okay? Frankly, parents of these rotten kids deserve to be punished as well! Thanks to you and your brother, you are alive and probably will not be bothered again because now the area knows you are really prepared!

Roselle on May 7, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Clearly a sad news story of young victims. Who does this old woman think she is to deny them of what our master tells us they are entitled to. She didn’t build that house.
Criminal is the victim. Victim is a criminal. Where’s the justice? Where’s the figg’n reality? We’ve become a nation ravaged by a culturally communicated viral form of dumb@ss.

onomo on May 7, 2014 at 11:10 AM

Friends, family don’t understand why teen home invaders were shot dead

This kind of thinking, and the actions of the thugs, are all a consequence of the entitlement mentality that is so promoted by the left. The thugs wanted what others had, and the family and friends(and other morons) can’t figure out why they weren’t just allowed to take it. Why don’t they “share the wealth”, right?!

Sterling Holobyte on May 7, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Frankly, parents of these rotten kids deserve to be punished as well!

Roselle on May 7, 2014 at 11:01 AM

.
IF . . . . . the parents display NO shame or contrition for what their son’s did, then they should, at the very least, be publicly humiliated out of their neighborhood.

The following is an example of ‘false-contrition’:
.

“What my son did was completely wrong, but the homeowner and/or her brother over-reacted.”

(the President would say “acted stupidly”)

listens2glenn on May 7, 2014 at 11:16 AM

“What my son did was completely wrong, but the homeowner and/or her brother over-reacted.”

The Left expects everyone to play their assigned role.

If you’ve been selected as the victim, you’re not allowed to flip the script and defend yourself. Be a patsy like you’re supposed to

CoolMick on May 7, 2014 at 11:19 AM

It seems like many homeowners have gotten more hardened in their attitudes on break ins. When I was a kid, there were plenty of break ins but never heard of a teenager being shot for burglary. Most people would just get a good dog, better locks and put out the word that they might shoot a burglar. Ultimately you should have the right to use force to stop a burglar, but I am not going to do so unless I absolutely have to. The jewelry or whatever just isn’t important enough to me, to kill a wayward kid.

cimbri on May 7, 2014 at 11:29 AM

The jewelry or whatever just isn’t important enough to me, to kill a wayward kid.

cimbri on May 7, 2014 at 11:29 AM

You assume the homeowner knew that jewelry or whatever was all the perps were after.

And why can’t you say the same to the perps? Is the possibility of nabbing some jewelry worth losing your life? Why did they pick the same house twice? Isn’t it at least possible that the homeowner legitimately felt physically threatened?

The lesson that ought to be learned here is: don’t invade people’s homes and try to steal from them. Instead it seems to be “don’t shoot teenagers.” I guess you’re supposed to ID them first to see how old they are.

Missy on May 7, 2014 at 11:52 AM

The teenagers’ youth is no excuse for their behavior. Even children can be feral and dangerous. They can also have rap sheets as long as your leg, and their families will still bewail what “good boys” they were.

RebeccaH on May 7, 2014 at 11:53 AM

cimbri on May 7, 2014 at 11:29 AM

where do you live?
asking for a friend.

idiot.

dmacleo on May 7, 2014 at 11:55 AM

Use of lighting/darkness can be quite a useful tool in dealing with human threats. One should, of course, have other tools to follow up with.

S. D. on May 6, 2014 at 10:56 PM

That was kind of the point I was trying to make.

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 11:59 AM

“Hold it, boys. Take a seat, I’m calling the police”. That’s probably what I would have done if I had been the brother. People are too antsy and quick to pull the trigger.

cimbri on May 7, 2014 at 2:23 AM

And with the kind of criminals we have conducting home invasions these days, YOU (and your family, if there) would likely be the dead bodies the cops would be picking up – or digging out of the ashes of the fire the criminals set to cover up what they did.

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 12:03 PM

The jewelry or whatever just isn’t important enough to me, to kill a wayward kid.

cimbri on May 7, 2014 at 11:29 AM

And you would know for sure they’re not just there for a “thrill kill” or to rape any girls/women inside first, then kill everyone there?
Pay attention to the news.

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 12:05 PM

Say, Cimbri, can you hook me up with that mind reading course you took? How do you KNOW they only want your jewelry or TV? What if they are Alex, George, Pete & Dim, Dim being very Dim & they thought to pop by for a bit of the In-Out-In-Out or spot of the Old Ultra-Violence?

Or do you have a sign out front, “No Violent Home Intruders, Please?”

Basically, you’re leaving in a safe little cocoon, where you KNOW what the bad guyz, intend, even though you don’t. I don’t think I’d actually want to have to rely on your for protection” as you seem rather prone to unfounded ASSUMPTIONS.

JFKY on May 7, 2014 at 12:11 PM

“Hold it, boys. Take a seat, I’m calling the police”. That’s probably what I would have done if I had been the brother. People are too antsy and quick to pull the trigger.

cimbri on May 7, 2014 at 2:23 AM

Then you are a Darwin Award candidate.
Not to mention, a flippin’ azzh0le.

katy the mean old lady on May 7, 2014 at 12:15 PM

“Hold it, boys. Take a seat, I’m calling the police”. That’s probably what I would have done if I had been the brother. People are too antsy and quick to pull the trigger.

cimbri on May 7, 2014 at 2:23 AM

And, well, we all KNOW that a couple criminals who have broken into a house before – possibly dozens of other houses, take the time to case the house for another visit, bust out a window to break in in the middle of the night – will just quietly sit down and wait for the police to show up to take them to jail – because an old man or woman told them to, perhaps in a stern voice…..

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 12:19 PM

“Hold it, boys. Take a seat, I’m calling the police”. That’s probably what I would have done if I had been the brother. People are too antsy and quick to pull the trigger.

cimbri on May 7, 2014 at 2:23 AM

“Life’s hard. It’s even harder when you’re stupid.”
― John Wayne

bimmcorp on May 7, 2014 at 12:28 PM

Why if Yu use the carrot the stick Dentarhurdent? You use the stern voce, BUT also offer them cookies, too, if they sit down?

Possibly, rather than the police, in fact, Cimbri & his/her family could have an impromptu group therapy meeting, wherein everyone shares their feelings, about being burglarized & why the two ‘utes needed to burglarize. It could end with a big group hug & Cimbri & family tied up & the house emptied of any valuables. And the cookies eaten, too….

JFKY on May 7, 2014 at 12:32 PM

Why if Yu use the carrot the stick Dentarhurdent? You use the stern voce, BUT also offer them cookies, too, if they sit down?

Possibly, rather than the police, in fact, Cimbri & his/her family could have an impromptu group therapy meeting, wherein everyone shares their feelings, about being burglarized & why the two ‘utes needed to burglarize. It could end with a big group hug & Cimbri & family tied up & the house emptied of any valuables. And the cookies eaten, too….

JFKY on May 7, 2014 at 12:32 PM

Oh, but of course – cookies would have worked. The family did say they were just looking for food afterall….

The res of your post reminds me of a joke about the difference between a lib and a conservative when confronted by a robber/mugger on the street – -you’ve probably heard it – short summary is lib does group therapy and gets killed, conservative shoots the mugger – Texas conservative shoots, reloads and keeps shooting….

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 12:38 PM

You assume the homeowner knew that jewelry or whatever was all the perps were after.

And why can’t you say the same to the perps? Is the possibility of nabbing some jewelry worth losing your life? Why did they pick the same house twice? Isn’t it at least possible that the homeowner legitimately felt physically threatened?

The lesson that ought to be learned here is: don’t invade people’s homes and try to steal from them. Instead it seems to be “don’t shoot teenagers.” I guess you’re supposed to ID them first to see how old they are.

Missy on May 7, 2014 at 11:52 AM

Missy….Missy…..Missy

If the home owners would have moved out after the first time this would not have happened. By staying it was an open invite for the budding retail distributors to visit the second time. Home owners are 100% at fault this time. Think of the first time as receiving a certified letter from the lads.

HonestLib on May 7, 2014 at 12:39 PM

I found this sarc tag laying on the floor. Does it belong to anyone?

CurtZHP on May 7, 2014 at 12:39 PM

CutZHP, I pray it’s Cimbri’s…bu. have my doubts.

JFKY on May 7, 2014 at 12:42 PM

HonestLib on May 7, 2014 at 12:39 PM

Great points. It’s also the homeowner’s fault for not having higher quality locks on the doors. I mean, they were warned and everything.

Missy on May 7, 2014 at 12:44 PM

This is just one of the many reasons that I will consider my life to be in imminent danger from any home invader. My oldest son actually knew the Harveys. I doubt that they owned a gun.

Oldnuke on May 7, 2014 at 12:47 PM

Great points. It’s also the homeowner’s fault for not having higher quality locks on the doors. I mean, they were warned and everything.

Missy on May 7, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Well, except the recently deceased perps broke a window and climbed in tha way. Door locks were irrelevant.
Clearly they should have spent the money for security bars on all windows as well….

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 12:47 PM

This is just one of the many reasons that I will consider my life to be in imminent danger from any home invader. My oldest son actually knew the Harveys. I doubt that they owned a gun.

Oldnuke on May 7, 2014 at 12:47 PM

And I’m guessing cimbri’s advice wouldn’t have or didn’t save them – imagine that.

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 12:52 PM

Personally I blah the ENTIRE Neighborhood..why couldn’t they have taken it in turns to put valuables on their front lawns, so the ‘utes wouldn’t have o risk injury breaking into homes?

Also, was hold lady’s house ADA compliant? What if a burglar in a wheel chair had tried to B&E, could s/he have done so? In short, I believe she needs to be sued to install handicapped accessible doors & windows. Also, I don’t think her house was OSHA compliant, uh hello, breaking a window & climbing in? Broken glass, risk of dangerous cuts & how about falling? Again, this womon was running a regulatory nightmare, a veritable workplace death trap! What does no one seem to care?

JFKY on May 7, 2014 at 12:55 PM

HonestLib on May 7, 2014 at 10:54 AM

that is probably one of the most sober and rational evaluations of home defense that i have read in a long time. you are completely correct in that, and i appreciate the integrity that you show in so many of your posts.

Freed0m28 on May 7, 2014 at 1:15 PM

Pointing a gun at someone merely as a means to coerce their actions is a felony called brandishing.

Stop watching the horsecrap on TV “cop and robber” shows. Get books on the subject or take a course before YOU even consider using a gun for self defense.

PolAgnostic on May 7, 2014 at 3:00 AM

Hey blowhard, that is a state law, and varies by state. Stop acting like you know everything.

earlgrey on May 7, 2014 at 1:34 PM

Hey blowhard, that is a state law, and varies by state. Stop acting like you know everything.

earlgrey on May 7, 2014 at 1:34 PM

Actually, I think PolAgnostic’s entire post, taken altogether, was a pretty good response to the idiocy cimbri was spouting.

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 1:43 PM

And I’m guessing cimbri’s advice wouldn’t have or didn’t save them – imagine that.

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 12:52 PM

No, wouldn’t have and didn’t. cimbri’s advice will get you a chalk outline and a headline in the local paper. Did you notice that the trial in Virginia of Gray took 4 days and jury deliberations took 30 minutes….and he’s still sitting on Death row awaiting appeals. Disgusting. Much better outcome if Dad had owned a gun and just blown the invaders away.

Oldnuke on May 7, 2014 at 1:51 PM

Finally to make my point clear…I conceal carry so please don’t take my point wrong. Just typing out some random thoughts.

HonestLib on May 7, 2014 at 10:54 AM

.
I completely agree with your comments regarding the effect on the homeowners. I have made similar comments on previous home defense threads here on Hot Air.

You remain the ONLY intelligent, honest liberal on Hot Sir. I do not agree with everything you say but I always find t worth my time to read your posts.

PolAgnostic on May 7, 2014 at 1:55 PM

Everyone else has said already what needs to be said.

Goodbye little thugs and gang banger wannabes.

Now have a nice chat with Travon.

FlaVet on May 7, 2014 at 2:08 PM

“Hold it, boys. Take a seat, I’m calling the police”. That’s probably what I would have done if I had been the brother. People are too antsy and quick to pull the trigger.

1. The way the police carry on these days, the home owner holding the gun on the two young thugs is likely to end up being shot by the police.

2.Hold it boys, take a seat. That means you won’t be around to read the next days headline “Police investigating grisly double murder in home invasion”

3. Now all these little thugs friends, everyone they went to school with, will now think twice before invading someone’s home.

Wallythedog on May 7, 2014 at 2:19 PM

Hey blowhard, that is a state law, and varies by state. Stop acting like you know everything.

earlgrey on May 7, 2014 at 1:34 PM

.
Tell you what, Earl of Zero Grey Matter …

If you believe you can with impunity point a gun at someone without consequence in ANY state, you go ahead and do so a statistically significant number of times.

We will wait right here for you to NOT come back with a report of what you found.

For everyone ELSE, regardless of whether there is a specific “brandishing” law in your state, these are just a few of the consequences that together equal 100% likelihood you would regret doing it:

1) The police can charge you under a variety of “public endangerment” laws, “creating a panic” laws and “assault” laws. In fact they don’t usually pick just one, they will charge you with EVERYTHING they think may apply.

2) If a police officer comes upon you pointing a gun at an unarmed person, you better PRAY he decides to tell you to drop the weapon as opposed to shooting you FIRST because he thought you posed an immediate danger – but given what’s been happening lately with police shooting UNARMED people in high stress situations – your odds are not very good.

3)If an armed civilian comes upon you pointing a gun at an unarmed person … well, your MIGHT be lucky – but your odds are WAY better with the police officer.

4)You can be sued for “mental anguish” in a civil court – remember, the “I’ll hold them at bay” decision you made EXCLUDES you from most protections under the “Castle Doctrine” laws. At that point, you are in a “He said, They said” scenario and police officers get REAL twitchy when they see someone with a gun & are automatically inclined to view the person with the gun as the aggressor.

5) You could very well be charged with a crime. Case in hand, the police arrive and find you with two teenage boys. The officer takes them off separately for questioning and they proceed to tell a prearranged story that you “lured them in and offered them money to have sex with you”, when they refused – you went psycho, pulled the gun and said you were going to have the police arrest them for breaking and entering. This one can get REALLY expensive and possibly quite a disruption in your life.

Life and movies are mutually exclusive of one another in significant ways; kind of like these two idiots who thought they had everything figured out.

PolAgnostic on May 7, 2014 at 2:22 PM

A 9mm’s response time is 1200 feet per second as opposed to the Sacramento PD’s being 20 minutes. I’ll go with the 9.

Why is the media showing up to date photos of the perps flashing gang signs instead of old photos of them at age 12 in football uniforms, ala Trayvon Martin? Can’t be because they’re white, could it?

Yeah, I know. I’m a racist.

NoPain on May 7, 2014 at 2:27 PM

No sympathy. You break into somebodies home, and you’re gambling with your life. That they’re teens is irrelevant, how are the home owners supposed to know if you intend them harm or not?

No, they broke the law, took a chance, and lost. The fact that they’re repeat offenders only cements the situation here.

WolvenOne on May 7, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Now have a nice chat with Travon.

FlaVet on May 7, 2014 at 2:08 PM

and help yourself to some skittles and tea….

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 2:39 PM

Life and movies are mutually exclusive of one another in significant ways; kind of like these two idiots who thought they had everything figured out.

PolAgnostic on May 7, 2014 at 2:22 PM

Yup.
I don’t think earlgrey quite got what you’re saying – which, as I said above, I thought was a very good response to cimbri – and Oldnuke’s post and link story adds some real world consequences type emphasis to it.

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 2:43 PM

I just love a happy ending!

Cottonpony on May 7, 2014 at 2:46 PM

Good points well stated.

davidk on May 7, 2014 at 2:47 PM

HonestLib on May 7, 2014 at 10:54 AM

good points well stated.

davidk on May 7, 2014 at 2:48 PM

You break into my house you have given implied consent to be fatalized.

davidk on May 7, 2014 at 2:51 PM

A 9mm’s response time is 1200 feet per second as opposed to the Sacramento PD’s being 20 minutes. I’ll go with the 9.
NoPain on May 7, 2014 at 2:27 PM

Yup – although the muzzle velocity for my .40 JHP Golden Sabers is only a little over 1000 fps – but it’s in the same ballpark…..

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 2:55 PM

You break into my house you have given implied consent to be fatalized.

davidk on May 7, 2014 at 2:51 PM

Unlike cimbri – my orders will be in the form of multiple nonverbal directives to assume room temperature.

dentarthurdent on May 7, 2014 at 2:58 PM

It’s getting tougher for kids to realize you don’t push a button and get another chance at life.

mixplix on May 7, 2014 at 3:29 PM

BTW, F the auto-start — PLEASE!!!!

…I also object to these people holding a noisy vigil for the thugs in front of the home they were invading. Leave this poor old lady and her brother alone….

neyney on May 6, 2014 at 5:09 PM

EXACTLY! Isn’t that “vigil” taunting the victims?? Maybe hate speech??

Where the heck are the hate speech leftist protestors when you need them.

If I were the residents, I would place large lawn sprinklers along my sidewalk and run them 24/7. With indelible red dyed water.

fred5678 on May 7, 2014 at 4:01 PM

Once the trigger is pulled the shooters life will change. It starts with the body in the house, the 911 call, LEOs showing up, the trip “down town” and the BAC blood test, …

HonestLib on May 7, 2014 at 10:54 AM

Hmmm… If I can’t afford an armed “babysitter”, does that mean I have to stay sober to remain armed, or do I keep drinking in my own home and make sure not to resist home invasions during Happy Hour?

fred5678 on May 7, 2014 at 4:11 PM

They can also have rap sheets as long as your leg, and their families will still bewail what “good boys” they were.

RebeccaH on May 7, 2014 at 11:53 AM

typical response of thug parents “my baby din’t do nuffin!”

If you break into my home while I am home I have no idea what your intent is
nor do I care … I will shoot you …. I will continue to shoot you until I determine you are no longer a threat. I will use either my Glock 19 9mm or my Glock 21
in .45 ACP, or if it is at zero dark thirty and I do not want to mess around
I will use the mossberg 500 12 ga.
do not like it … do not break into my house.

conservative tarheel on May 7, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Society has changed so much. When I was in intermediate school some guys were goofing around in shop class. I was working on a project when the teacher kicked me in the butt. I protested that whatever happened wasnt me but ended up in the office anyway. When I told my Dad he said that I just got payment for something I did but never got caught for so suck it up. He was right. This time I was innocent but sooo many times before I was not. Today the parents would sue the school and teacher. For me it was a learning experience that kids today rarely get.

faol on May 7, 2014 at 4:40 PM

Of course, if the invaders had killed someone, they would get a trial by jury and all the rights afforded them by Due Process.

oldennis on May 7, 2014 at 7:23 PM

I’m tired of this whining on behalf of criminals. If you don’t want to get shot, don’t break into people’s houses. The right to self defense is older than all of us, older than this country.

oldennis on May 7, 2014 at 7:27 PM

“Friends, family don’t understand why teen home invaders were shot dead”
Only deranged idiots who should be in a mental institution would hold such an asinine view, a typically vile lawless, fascist, selfish, greedy and grossly hypocritical “occupy Wall Street” mentality, caring nothing for the very real suffering of the real victims, the homeowners.

russedav on May 7, 2014 at 8:02 PM

Under the laws of my state, if someone is in your house, you can shoot them. Period. Makes things less complicated.

quikstrike98 on May 8, 2014 at 1:31 AM

*uninvited that is of course. These dirtbags weren’t invited. Lock and load.

quikstrike98 on May 8, 2014 at 1:33 AM

The one girl claims they were looking for something to eat? Mm hm. More like crack money. And this is apparently society’s problem, not the family’s. Go ahead and light your candles for a couple of cockroaches that got stomped.

evergreen on May 8, 2014 at 10:00 AM

The only question left is can we indict the parents for harboring these little domestic terrorists?

Afterseven on May 8, 2014 at 10:26 AM

Only in CA does the criminals get more play than the victims. And you wonder why it’s going under!!!

gwhh on May 8, 2014 at 2:02 PM

Once someone threatens violence upon another to further their criminal, selfish desires – at that point they “deserve” to die. Indeed, they’ve demanded it.

As for the hypothetical of being shot in the back, anyone who thinks that is determinative has not seen Massad Ayoob’s demo of how fast a human can spin after someone has made the decision to shoot. Reaction times are slower than people often realize. There have been many “good” shoots where the perp was shot in the back ultimately.

SPQR on May 8, 2014 at 4:36 PM

The media spreads the criminal-sympathizers’ propaganda and the victims are maintaining silence to not stir things up. Consequently, much that is known in the neighborhood and by police has gone unsaid.

There was a rash of burglaries in the vicinity. I suspect a search of the residences of the burglars’ families would reveal a lot of stolen goods.

The two burglars had been threatening the homeowner repeatedly in the prior week during daytime, shouting in her yard and banging on windows. One neighbor captured this on video. They obviously felt emboldened to enter her house to carry out whatever they had planned that night. They were not “on their way out the door”, but were more than halfway through the house from their entry point and heading toward the stairs to the upper floor.

If one is in a dark house with intruders, one cannot tell whether or not the criminals are armed or not, or even which direction they are facing. So any speculation about “shot in the back” just aids the criminals. Such shootings would still be self-defense.

The burglars’ family members seem to have the expectation that the victims should have said, “Pardon me, could you turn on the light and show us that you are unarmed? Would you like a cup of tea before you leave. And please, take my cash too.”

Picaro on May 9, 2014 at 1:00 PM

The family members of the boys don’t understand that criminal behavior is sometimes hazardous to your health. You roll the dice when you engage in something unlawful like burglary. They thought they could repeatedly hit the jackpot with impunity. That’s what they get for thinking. Two less thugs to prey on society for decades to come…….sounds good to me.

geezerintraining on May 9, 2014 at 2:57 PM

Athos on August 5, 2014 at 2:01 PM

 
Here’s a more simple conclusion: You’re a low-information, lazy idiot who’s not worth talking to, because you won’t (or can’t) keep informed.
 
jim56 on August 5, 2014 at 2:18 PM

 
Ha. That reminds me of that time you immediately thought burglars were chased down and shot vigilante-style outside because there were bullet holes in the victim’s door.
 
Or the time you didn’t know what was on FFLs and thought federal firearms license holders weren’t required to provide any information to the government regarding their gun sales.
 
Or that time you thought soldiers serving honorably were probably being paid off by Faux News to be big meanies because they thought Bergdahl was a poopie-head.
 
But yeah, you pretty much nailed the problem. Thanks in advance.

rogerb on August 5, 2014 at 3:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5