Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Frazzled wrote:

Asterios wrote:
good use of a gun.

http://fox40.com/2016/06/27/oregon-mother-shoots-kills-intruder-found-hiding-in-kids-bedroom/

Sounds like an extremely good shoot legally. Now if after she and the kids ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti that might be a little OT, because liver is just gross.

ugh chianti with Liver?

 agnosto wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/12/us/father-shoots-son/
http://www.thv11.com/news/local/young-boy-mistaken-as-an-intruder-shot-by-family-member/249150679
http://www.your4state.com/news/news/father-shoots-teen-daughter-mistaken-for-intruder
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/12/woman_visiting_fla_for_holiday.html

by the way forgot to respond to your links:

1: son left for school and came right back and entered thru the basement? sounds like son got stupid in a no stupid zone.

2: child walked from one home to the other and never bothered to say he was coming over and entered without knocking? it was not his home.

3: the daughter had snuck out then snuck in, furthermore the father was an off duty cop, so you want to use that link?

4: the daughter came into the mother's house without knocking and/or announcing herself, not a good thing to do. (daughter was not living there either.)

Asterios wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

Asterios wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:
This reminds me of what happened a couple weeks ago. Me and the wife where watching a movie around 2:30 am, two guys walked into my house walked through the mud room and into the hall.

The just looked at us for a couple seconds and I said hello can I help you, they just said this isnt 349 is it. I just said no thats next door like a 10 min walk. I said I can drive ya if ya need it, they said no thank and said srry and left. Couple days later I seen them at my neighbors house turns out it was his brother and his.... Boyfriend? Partner? I am not upto date on the current lingo.

Here how it plays out in other places men walk in people yell shoot people die. We all win.

But this story is also why I make sure my health care coverage is good and I have a hand gun when I visit the states. To protect myself from the medical care system and people protecting themselves with guns.

so the guy has never been to his brothers house? and when my brother or folks come to visit they always knock and/or announce(if I told them come in when they get here) themselves.

You've never lived in the country have you? He said next door was a 10 minute walk. Heck, many people in my state who live in the country don't lock their doors and would react the same way and most of them have guns all over the house.

On topic.
There are always options when presented with perceived imminent danger. I can easily see this going either way when presented with coming home, with two kids, and a suspected intruder. The problem with a gun involved is what would she have done absent a gun? A reasonable and prudent person would have left the premises and called the police; the police would have arrived and checked the home. She possessed a gun, presumably on her person (I would hate to think that she retrieved the weapon from another room when she could have just left and called the police), and reacted violently. Not being in her situation, I can respect her decision with the information presented. But I also can't help but think how else it could have been resolved; especially in light of how it possibly could have gone should the person not have been an actual intruder:

1: you don't live in places like California even out in the boonies people do not leave their doors unlocked, too many criminals and such. also a 10 minute walk is not far. its like a farm stead away and I repeat I'd be more worried about someone confusing a house with his brothers house, especially in the country, where it is a 10 minute walk to the next house, sorry but story sounds fishy.

2: someone is in my kids room when I get home, the cops won't get there fast enough to save the intruder, nor will I be willing to allow the intruder the opportunity to pull out his weapon either. someone breaks into your house always expect them to be armed especially here in California with the strictest gun laws.

A taxi dropped them off they never had a car, and you have to look at the situation to see if it is a problem or not. I find thats the difference I met in traveling, every country I have been to is open and friendly and they approach you like your a person. When I went to the states every person approached like I was doing something wrong until proven otherwise. Kinda like everyone is a criminal until otherwise stated.

Also in Canada I never heard of anyone locking doors unless they are not home or it os really late. Pr if it os a older lady.

OgreChubbs wrote:
When I went to the states every person approached like I was doing something wrong until proven otherwise. Kinda like everyone is a criminal until otherwise stated.

Kinda funny, I had the exact opposite experience when I lived in the US. Maybe they just like Australians more than Canadians

I've never lived in a place where you don't lock the doors when you aren't actually home. When I am home I don't usually lock my doors, sometimes if I'm at my parent's by myself simply because it's a big house and if I'm in my room on the far side of it, it could easily look like no one's home. I most definitely expect people to knock though, if someone just walked in to my house without knocking I'd be reaching for a weapon (though given this is Australia, the weapon would probably be a cricket bat rather than a gun).

Guys, unless you shoot first without asking questions anyone in your home that you're not expecting, up to and including your own children, you're a gutless liberal who deserves to be a victim.

Duh.

Ogre, I respect your thoughts and experience in your travels. Yes Americans can be standoffish, even among ourselves. But America is not those countries, it is not your country. Although in rural Texas where I spent all my summers when growing up a person walking into a house would not necessarily have been shot as in the scenario you have given, a person hiding in a kids room would have. They are not the same situation, not even close.

whether you lock your doors or not has no bearing on the OP.
I agree there were many options open to this woman, but it has been stated time and time again, none of them mitigated the possibility of harm to her children, or herself. I hope you never find yourself in that situation. Taking a human life is no insignicant event. It is singularly the most defining moment a person can have, and traumatic for the shooter. But not as traumatic as being beaten up and watching her kids kidnapped, killed, or quite frankly worse.

Secondly I believe, as I would hope many can agree with, that individual responsibility is actually a thing. This person made a conscious choice to hide in the bedroom, which I assume was easily identifiable as a childs room, and wait. He bears responsibility for the consequences of his actions as well, and no where have I heard anyone talking about that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 feeder wrote:
Guys, unless you shoot first without asking questions anyone in your home that you're not expecting, up to and including your own children, you're a gutless liberal who deserves to be a victim.

Duh.

You sir, should go back to your bridge.

 redleger wrote:
He bears responsibility for the consequences of his actions as well, and no where have I heard anyone talking about that.

Probably because it's so obvious that it doesn't bear mentioning. Obviously he's responsible for his actions, though I always err on the side of it being a bad thing when someone is killed.

I agree that its obvious, and human death can be a horrible thing, but in this case, I would have to say probably not. If it turns out he was a confused mental patient, who was probably harmless, well now its a tragedy, but not one the woman should pay for.

I hope the lady has USCCA or similar insurance in case the perp's family attempts a civil suit against her.

 redleger wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 feeder wrote:
Guys, unless you shoot first without asking questions anyone in your home that you're not expecting, up to and including your own children, you're a gutless liberal who deserves to be a victim.

Duh.

You sir, should go back to your bridge.

We've got the OP projecting that there's no such thing as a bad shoot. I'm not the troll here.

 feeder wrote:

 redleger wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 feeder wrote:
Guys, unless you shoot first without asking questions anyone in your home that you're not expecting, up to and including your own children, you're a gutless liberal who deserves to be a victim.

Duh.

You sir, should go back to your bridge.

We've got the OP projecting that there's no such thing as a bad shoot. I'm not the troll here.

I'm not sure that is at all any indication of the OP saying that. The article linked, and his statement is that this shoot is justified, as the information is reported. There are no good or bad shoots, only justified or not justified. Only those that have pulled the trigger would understand that though. Your quote was inflammatory and troll worthy.

And then there's this one

http://americannewsx.com/hot-off-the-press/christian-mom-guns-daughters-street-video/

 lord_blackfang wrote:
And then there's this one

http://americannewsx.com/hot-off-the-press/christian-mom-guns-daughters-street-video/

absolutely a tragedy, and she was obviously mentally unwell. This has nothing at all to do with the topic on hand. There are so many stories of mothers killing their own children for this reason or that. In Texas the last big one I remember she drowned them. Not sure how this has any bearing on self defense or justified shooting or not? No one is gonna defend this scumbag-ette.

 feeder wrote:
Guys, unless you shoot first without asking questions anyone in your home that you're not expecting, up to and including your own children, you're a gutless liberal who deserves to be a victim.

Duh.

Wegot your number. Shooting them is eminently better than the Canadian method of firing an angry moose at them.

 redleger wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 redleger wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 feeder wrote:
Guys, unless you shoot first without asking questions anyone in your home that you're not expecting, up to and including your own children, you're a gutless liberal who deserves to be a victim.

Duh.

You sir, should go back to your bridge.

We've got the OP projecting that there's no such thing as a bad shoot. I'm not the troll here.

I'm not sure that is at all any indication of the OP saying that. The article linked, and his statement is that this shoot is justified, as the information is reported. There are no good or bad shoots, only justified or not justified. Only those that have pulled the trigger would understand that though. Your quote was inflammatory and troll worthy.

Four examples of parents shooting their kids by accident, hand waved away as "stupid in a no stupid zone".

I used 'bad shoot' because it's easier to type than 'not justified' I thought that was the vernacular.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

now you are just trolling.

Four examples of not knowing who they were shooting at before they pulled the trigger. This woman knew this guy was not supposed to be there, and she walked in on him, not the other way around. Not a good argument for this woman putting her self at risk.

 feeder wrote:

 redleger wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 redleger wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 feeder wrote:
Guys, unless you shoot first without asking questions anyone in your home that you're not expecting, up to and including your own children, you're a gutless liberal who deserves to be a victim.

Duh.

You sir, should go back to your bridge.

We've got the OP projecting that there's no such thing as a bad shoot. I'm not the troll here.

I'm not sure that is at all any indication of the OP saying that. The article linked, and his statement is that this shoot is justified, as the information is reported. There are no good or bad shoots, only justified or not justified. Only those that have pulled the trigger would understand that though. Your quote was inflammatory and troll worthy.

Four examples of parents shooting their kids by accident, hand waved away as "stupid in a no stupid zone".

I used 'bad shoot' because it's easier to type than 'not justified' I thought that was the vernacular.

well lets see a kid goes to school then comes right back coming thru the basement, not smart, a daughter shot by her cop father snuck out late at night, then tried sneaking back in thru the garage, you call that smart?

Justifying stupid is why the human species is bound to fail, hopefully not like wayward pines, that would suck.

 redleger wrote:
Four examples of not knowing who they were shooting at before they pulled the trigger. This woman knew this guy was not supposed to be there, and she walked in on him, not the other way around. Not a good argument for this woman putting her self at risk.

Agreed. It's not the mother's job to figure out why a stranger broke into her house at night and is in her kids' room, it's the responsibility of the intruder not to break into other peoples' houses. If you don't want to get shot, don't do a B & E.

 redleger wrote:
Four examples of not knowing who they were shooting at before they pulled the trigger. This woman knew this guy was not supposed to be there, and she walked in on him, not the other way around. Not a good argument for this woman putting her self at risk.

I'm not commenting on the woman in the story, just pointing out the absurdity of the OP's argument. Fish in a barrel, I know, but its still Monday morning here.

RULE #1 IS 'BE POLITE'.

ACCUSATIONS OF TROLLING ARE CONSIDERED (POTENTIALLY) AGAINST RULE #1 - IF YOU SEE A POST THAT YOU BELIEVE IS AGAINST THE RULES OF THE SITE - REPORT IT.

RULE #2 IS 'STAY ON TOPIC'.

 Frazzled wrote:

Asterios wrote:
good use of a gun.

http://fox40.com/2016/06/27/oregon-mother-shoots-kills-intruder-found-hiding-in-kids-bedroom/

Sounds like an extremely good shoot legally. Now if after she and the kids ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti that might be a little OT, because liver is just gross.
I'll be frank. If, when the kids were small, we had come in and there was someone in their room I would have emptied the mag the moment I saw movement. Odds are it would hav ebeen our stalker. Now if I come in and there's a man in the room then the daughter has some serious explaining to do (after I've pitched him out the window).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Article is sketchy on details, but he might have been robbing the place, heard them come back, dived into a cupboard to hide...

Still, I understand why the woman opened fire, though...

In many states thats more than enough. Intruder in house is specifically written into the law in multiple jurisdictions. Mother with kids, even a California DA wouldn't prosecute that.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't defend their homes against intruders. I'm saying that if I came home, was armed, and discovered somebody in my house stealing my TV, I wouldn't necessary open fire for the sake of some £200 TV.

Every situation is different. Every person is different...

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Asterios wrote:
good use of a gun.

http://fox40.com/2016/06/27/oregon-mother-shoots-kills-intruder-found-hiding-in-kids-bedroom/

Sounds like an extremely good shoot legally. Now if after she and the kids ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti that might be a little OT, because liver is just gross.
I'll be frank. If, when the kids were small, we had come in and there was someone in their room I would have emptied the mag the moment I saw movement. Odds are it would hav ebeen our stalker. Now if I come in and there's a man in the room then the daughter has some serious explaining to do (after I've pitched him out the window).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Article is sketchy on details, but he might have been robbing the place, heard them come back, dived into a cupboard to hide...

Still, I understand why the woman opened fire, though...

In many states thats more than enough. Intruder in house is specifically written into the law in multiple jurisdictions. Mother with kids, even a California DA wouldn't prosecute that.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't defend their homes against intruders. I'm saying that if I came home, was armed, and discovered somebody in my house stealing my TV, I wouldn't necessary open fire for the sake of some £200 TV.

Every situation is different. Every person is different...

and what if your kids were with you and you were unaware if the intruder was armed or not?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Asterios wrote:
good use of a gun.

http://fox40.com/2016/06/27/oregon-mother-shoots-kills-intruder-found-hiding-in-kids-bedroom/

Sounds like an extremely good shoot legally. Now if after she and the kids ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti that might be a little OT, because liver is just gross.
I'll be frank. If, when the kids were small, we had come in and there was someone in their room I would have emptied the mag the moment I saw movement. Odds are it would hav ebeen our stalker. Now if I come in and there's a man in the room then the daughter has some serious explaining to do (after I've pitched him out the window).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Article is sketchy on details, but he might have been robbing the place, heard them come back, dived into a cupboard to hide...

Still, I understand why the woman opened fire, though...

In many states thats more than enough. Intruder in house is specifically written into the law in multiple jurisdictions. Mother with kids, even a California DA wouldn't prosecute that.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't defend their homes against intruders. I'm saying that if I came home, was armed, and discovered somebody in my house stealing my TV, I wouldn't necessary open fire for the sake of some £200 TV.

Every situation is different. Every person is different...

I wouldn't shoot somebody just because he/she was trying to steal my tv either. The legal justification (in my state) is being a reasonable threat of bodily harm. In the OP instance, the mother felt threatened enough by the stranger who had broken into her home and gone into her kids room to shoot him. Now, with the help of the local PD the DA will decide if her belief that the man was a threat was reasonable or not. Whether or not the intruder really was a lethal threat is irrelevant to determining if the shooting was justifified, only the reasonableness of the belief that he posed a lethal threat is relevant.

Not every problem can be solved with a gun...

Some solutions are better off without guns. Some solutions need a gun...

It's complicated...

Asterios wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/12/us/father-shoots-son/
http://www.thv11.com/news/local/young-boy-mistaken-as-an-intruder-shot-by-family-member/249150679
http://www.your4state.com/news/news/father-shoots-teen-daughter-mistaken-for-intruder
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/12/woman_visiting_fla_for_holiday.html

by the way forgot to respond to your links:

1: son left for school and came right back and entered thru the basement? sounds like son got stupid in a no stupid zone.

2: child walked from one home to the other and never bothered to say he was coming over and entered without knocking? it was not his home.

3: the daughter had snuck out then snuck in, furthermore the father was an off duty cop, so you want to use that link?

4: the daughter came into the mother's house without knocking and/or announcing herself, not a good thing to do. (daughter was not living there either.)

Not sure the amount of handwavium you're using with these shows a great respect for life; with #3 I'd almost argue that cop shooting his own kid shows how hair-triggered our society has become and #4, I have and know of many, many people who walk into a relative's house without knocking, especially one whose home I "had been visiting" as in, not just arrived but been there for a while; you have some messed up family situation if you're required to knock every time you want to go to the store (or whatever) and come back while staying with your parents. I point out some situations where firing before knowing who you were firing at turned out badly.

I'm not second-guessing the lady in this story, just making a statement. Luckily, I've never been in the situation she's been in; likely, I'd have shot the guy too. I do feel badly for her because the emotional baggage will stick with her always.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Not every problem can be solved with a gun...

Some solutions are better off without guns. Some solutions need a gun...

It's complicated...

You're right. Sometimes they require a fire mission.

"There is no problem in the world that cannot be solved with high explosives."
-Some German dude in a movie.

 agnosto wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/12/us/father-shoots-son/
http://www.thv11.com/news/local/young-boy-mistaken-as-an-intruder-shot-by-family-member/249150679
http://www.your4state.com/news/news/father-shoots-teen-daughter-mistaken-for-intruder
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/12/woman_visiting_fla_for_holiday.html

by the way forgot to respond to your links:

1: son left for school and came right back and entered thru the basement? sounds like son got stupid in a no stupid zone.

2: child walked from one home to the other and never bothered to say he was coming over and entered without knocking? it was not his home.

3: the daughter had snuck out then snuck in, furthermore the father was an off duty cop, so you want to use that link?

4: the daughter came into the mother's house without knocking and/or announcing herself, not a good thing to do. (daughter was not living there either.)

Not sure the amount of handwavium you're using with these shows a great respect for life; with #3 I'd almost argue that cop shooting his own kid shows how hair-triggered our society has become and #4, I have and know of many, many people who walk into a relative's house without knocking, especially one whose home I "had been visiting" as in, not just arrived but been there for a while; you have some messed up family situation if you're required to knock every time you want to go to the store (or whatever) and come back while staying with your parents. I point out some situations where firing before knowing who you were firing at turned out badly.

I'm not second-guessing the lady in this story, just making a statement. Luckily, I've never been in the situation she's been in; likely, I'd have shot the guy too. I do feel badly for her because the emotional baggage will stick with her always.

in #4 the woman was not staying there, the story explicitly pointed that out.

Asterios wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/12/us/father-shoots-son/
http://www.thv11.com/news/local/young-boy-mistaken-as-an-intruder-shot-by-family-member/249150679
http://www.your4state.com/news/news/father-shoots-teen-daughter-mistaken-for-intruder
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/12/woman_visiting_fla_for_holiday.html

by the way forgot to respond to your links:

1: son left for school and came right back and entered thru the basement? sounds like son got stupid in a no stupid zone.

2: child walked from one home to the other and never bothered to say he was coming over and entered without knocking? it was not his home.

3: the daughter had snuck out then snuck in, furthermore the father was an off duty cop, so you want to use that link?

4: the daughter came into the mother's house without knocking and/or announcing herself, not a good thing to do. (daughter was not living there either.)

Not sure the amount of handwavium you're using with these shows a great respect for life; with #3 I'd almost argue that cop shooting his own kid shows how hair-triggered our society has become and #4, I have and know of many, many people who walk into a relative's house without knocking, especially one whose home I "had been visiting" as in, not just arrived but been there for a while; you have some messed up family situation if you're required to knock every time you want to go to the store (or whatever) and come back while staying with your parents. I point out some situations where firing before knowing who you were firing at turned out badly.

I'm not second-guessing the lady in this story, just making a statement. Luckily, I've never been in the situation she's been in; likely, I'd have shot the guy too. I do feel badly for her because the emotional baggage will stick with her always.

in #4 the woman was not staying there, the story explicitly pointed that out.

I don't see where it says that. I do see where it says this:

A woman fatally shot by her mother in central Florida after being mistaken for an intruder had been visiting for the holidays, police said Wednesday.

The mother was asleep when she heard someone enter her home late Tuesday, St. Cloud police Sgt. Denise Roberts said Wednesday. The mother told police she heard footsteps approaching quickly so she fired a single shot.

She then discovered the person was her 27-year-old daughter, according to a news release from police. The daughter had been visiting from North Carolina and didn't live in the home, Roberts said.

"Had been visiting" is used twice in the story. Past perfect tense is used to show something that was ongoing in the past. It's certainly possible that the writer used incorrect grammar...

Edit:
Remembered that usage in this context is a stative verb. Something to denote an event that started in the past and continued to another point in the past.

 agnosto wrote:

She then discovered the person was her 27-year-old daughter, according to a news release from police. The daughter had been visiting from North Carolina and didn't live in the home, Roberts said.

"Had been visiting" is used twice in the story. Past perfect tense is used to show something that was ongoing in the past. It's certainly possible that the writer used incorrect grammar...

Edit:
Remembered that usage in this context is a stative verb. Something to denote an event that started in the past and continued to another point in the past.

put the part in bold and underlined that you missed., notice it didn't state she was staying there, just visiting