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.

 ZultanQ wrote:
I think people are conveniently ignoring the fact that the people shot in these situations are thieving criminals.

You do realize the person shot in this situation was neither a criminal nor thieving?

String the fether up.

They may be criminals but that does not mean I take upon myself to administer "Frontier Justice"

Only time I've seen or heard of baiting was in Afghanistan and Iraq. Its way damn questionable because the individual picking up the "war material" might not be an actual insurgent but someone looking to make a quick cash in on "turn in".

Also IMHO someone looking to kill someone on a flimsy "excuse" with this type of "baiting" is someone that needs to be freaking removed from society for a good llooonnngggg while. As property owners, being my perception on a lot of you on here, we kick ourselves in the butt for our own stupidity for leaving our property unsecure. We do not take it upon ourselves to resolve a unlawful act by straight out killing someone.

 Ahtman wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:
I think people are conveniently ignoring the fact that the people shot in these situations are thieving criminals.

You do realize the person shot in this situation was neither a criminal nor thieving?

1) this article states that "it's not clear what he was doing in the garage", which is pretty suspicious. Any non-idiot would go to the front door, knock, and inform these people that they are leaving their property unprotected.
2) there are numerous articles on other websites I have read on this that claim the Turkish kid had a history of stealing and people in the community knew he was doing this, like this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2615526/Montana-man-shoots-kills-17-year-old-German-exchange-student-wife-set-trap-burglars-garage.html

 ZultanQ wrote:
I think people are conveniently ignoring the fact that the people shot in these situations are thieving criminals.

Are the people who allegedly bait thieves onto their property just to kill them douchebags? Yes. Are they completely within their rights to be this kind of douchebag? Also yes. Of course castle law doesn't mean you're allowed to shoot to kill someone after you have already incapacitated them, so in that case the person is a murderer and should go to prison.

But shooting somebody who comes into your garage with the intent to steal is completely justified. Why? Because the only kinds of people who fall for this "bait" are doing so with the intent to commit a crime. This type of thing wouldn't work on me because I'm not thieving scum, so I don't see the problem here. I don't understand how criminals are suddenly some kind of victims.

This post is so hard and real and telling it like it is. I'm actually a little aroused by this post.

Isn't this by definition, entrapment?

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:
I think people are conveniently ignoring the fact that the people shot in these situations are thieving criminals.

You do realize the person shot in this situation was neither a criminal nor thieving?

1) this article states that "it's not clear what he was doing in the garage", which is pretty suspicious. Any non-idiot would go to the front door, knock, and inform these people that they are leaving their property unprotected.
2) there are numerous articles on other websites I have read on this that claim the Turkish kid had a history of stealing and people in the community knew he was doing this, like this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2615526/Montana-man-shoots-kills-17-year-old-German-exchange-student-wife-set-trap-burglars-garage.html

Just a note but don't ever post a link to the Daily Mail and claim it is a reliable source. They're racist douchebags who wouldn't know good journalism if it hit them in the face with a Pulitzer.

Also you failed at reading comprehension because nowhere in that article is it stated that the German boy who was shot had a history of theft.

So whatever websites have been telling you that a Turk had a history of stealing is either talking about a different case or can't even get the most basic facts right.

 whembly wrote:
Isn't this by definition, entrapment?

No. They aren't police or other law enforcement.

They're just donkey-caves.

 kronk wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Isn't this by definition, entrapment?

No. They aren't police or other law enforcement.

They're just donkey-caves.

Ah... okay.

Deliberate Homicide then...

Throw the book at 'em!

The Daily Mail claiming that a Turk is a criminal is such a surprise...

Ha! Someone claiming the Daily Mail is worth a damn...

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:
I think people are conveniently ignoring the fact that the people shot in these situations are thieving criminals.

You do realize the person shot in this situation was neither a criminal nor thieving?

1) this article states that "it's not clear what he was doing in the garage", which is pretty suspicious. Any non-idiot would go to the front door, knock, and inform these people that they are leaving their property unprotected.
2) there are numerous articles on other websites I have read on this that claim the Turkish kid had a history of stealing and people in the community knew he was doing this, like this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2615526/Montana-man-shoots-kills-17-year-old-German-exchange-student-wife-set-trap-burglars-garage.html

Just a note but don't ever post a link to the Daily Mail and claim it is a reliable source. They're racist douchebags who wouldn't know good journalism if it hit them in the face with a Pulitzer.

Also you failed at reading comprehension because nowhere in that article is it stated that the German boy who was shot had a history of theft.

So whatever websites have been telling you that a Turk had a history of stealing is either talking about a different case or can't even get the most basic facts right.

Give that the "victim" is Diren Dede, the son of Turkish immigrants to Germany, I'm pretty sure he's a Turkish German. And I am quite aware of the reputation of dailymail, and the fact that they are "racist" because they don't pander liberal white guilt. That's part of the crux of the matter, if this exchange student was a white German you would never have heard of this story. This story is covered by multiple other sources that say Dede definitely had a history of thieving even in Germany.

Here's a picture of him in the middle of their garage in the middle of the night. What was he doing in there? I'm sure he had a perfectly reasonable reason to be in somebody else's garage in the middle of the night, hmmm.

http://www.abcfoxmontana.com/story/25392184/exclusive-photo-diren-dede-moments-before-shooting

Whether he was in there actually trying to steal is no longer the issue I feel, it's that the homeowner both attempted to lure someone in to his home, and then fired on him with no attempt to subdue without lethal force or deescalate the situation, because I honestly think he was just out for blood at this point.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
Whether he was in there actually trying to steal is no longer the issue I feel, it's that the homeowner both attempted to lure someone in to his home, and then fired on him with no attempt to subdue without lethal force or deescalate the situation, because I honestly think he was just out for blood at this point.

Sure, I agree. Shooting someone after you have already incapacitated them is a crime and such an act should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Luring someone into your home, while smacking of some sort of redneck vigilante justice, is not nor should it be against the law because it only hurts those who have intent to hurt others. Not that I want criminals to be shot, but it's their own faults for attempting to commit a crime. If they don't want to get shot then perhaps they should consider not committing crimes.

My feeling on this was that the dude was there to do something illicit. If you see someone's garage open, you ring the bell and tell them - you don't wander in with your buddy to check it out.

That said, you don't build a trap and murder people.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
Whether he was in there actually trying to steal is no longer the issue I feel, it's that the homeowner both attempted to lure someone in to his home, and then fired on him with no attempt to subdue without lethal force or deescalate the situation, because I honestly think he was just out for blood at this point.

To me the issue is not that the homeowner did nothing to subdue or attempt to deescalate, as those are not things that a homeowner should be required to do. However, yes, the "fact" that he apparently laid a trap and bait out for some would be idiot completely screws this whole situation for the homeowner.


From the sounds of it, to me, the owners put out their cameras in the evening, right before all this happened. I think it'd be a little bit different of a story if they had set up the cameras, and a couple weeks later this happened, as you could reasonably argue that they did forget to close the garage.

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
Whether he was in there actually trying to steal is no longer the issue I feel, it's that the homeowner both attempted to lure someone in to his home, and then fired on him with no attempt to subdue without lethal force or deescalate the situation, because I honestly think he was just out for blood at this point.

Sure, I agree. Shooting someone after you have already incapacitated them is a crime and such an act should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Luring someone into your home, while smacking of some sort of redneck vigilante justice, is not nor should it be against the law because it only hurts those who have intent to hurt others. Not that I want criminals to be shot, but it's their own faults for attempting to commit a crime. If they don't want to get shot then perhaps they should consider not committing crimes.

So you should just be allowed to lure people into your house and murder them?
If I left food in my garage and waited for hobos to come and try to eat it could I kill them because of that? I mean that's theft right?

At worst the kid was going to steal a handbag and they killed him for it, without warning. At best they murdered a kid who was going to remind them they left their garage door open.
Either way it should be illegal if it already isn't.

 purplefood wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
Whether he was in there actually trying to steal is no longer the issue I feel, it's that the homeowner both attempted to lure someone in to his home, and then fired on him with no attempt to subdue without lethal force or deescalate the situation, because I honestly think he was just out for blood at this point.

Sure, I agree. Shooting someone after you have already incapacitated them is a crime and such an act should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Luring someone into your home, while smacking of some sort of redneck vigilante justice, is not nor should it be against the law because it only hurts those who have intent to hurt others. Not that I want criminals to be shot, but it's their own faults for attempting to commit a crime. If they don't want to get shot then perhaps they should consider not committing crimes.

So you should just be allowed to lure people into your house and murder them?
If I left food in my garage and waited for hobos to come and try to eat it could I kill them because of that? I mean that's theft right?

At worst the kid was going to steal a handbag and they killed him for it, without warning. At best they murdered a kid who was going to remind them they left their garage door open.
Either way it should be illegal if it already isn't.

Yes, I should be able to leave whatever I want on my property without fear that someone will come to my house and take it. I paid for this property, and nobody has the right to come to my property and commit a crime against me.

If you want to say "well that's your fault, you should have common sense and prevent situations like this from arising", I would counter this by saying that it's their fault, they should have the common sense to know that if they come to my place looking for trouble, there will be consequences.

This seems to boil down to the idea that being shot to death is too harsh a penalty for petty theft. I agree that it is, but I also believe that the rights of law abiding citizens trump the rights of criminals. Call me crazy but I tend to side with people who aren't running around breaking into garages, even if they are too harsh on criminals. Don't commit crimes, and you won't give these people any reason to shoot you.

I can't argue with you.
I cannot fathom the mindset of someone so paranoid that he assumes anyone near his house is trying to steal his stuff and is instantly deserving of death for it.

 ZultanQ wrote:


Yes, I should be able to leave whatever I want on my property without fear that someone will come to my house and take it.

That's...

Not even close to what happened.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:


Yes, I should be able to leave whatever I want on my property without fear that someone will come to my house and take it.

That's...

Not even close to what happened.

Except that it is. What's the difference between me forgetting my wallet on my car and some dude stealing it, and intentionally putting it there so that he would steal it? He still tried to steal it, and for that he is a criminal. I challenge you to provide an explanation for why that kid had any reason to be in someone else's garage in the middle of the night. I also challenge you to support your claims in further posts instead of just saying NUH UH UR WRONG.

It's more like you left your car door open with you inside it and when someone looks inside you shot them.
He may have been going inside to tell them they left the garage door open.
That's equally as likely as the stealing idea given that he is dead and we'll never know now.

 purplefood wrote:
It's more like you left your car door open with you inside it and when someone looks inside you shot them.
He may have been going inside to tell them they left the garage door open.
That's equally as likely as the stealing idea given that he is dead and we'll never know now.

I agree that we would need more information, and again I agree that the shooter should go to prison for double tapping that kid, I'm just saying that I highly doubt he was just there to say hi. He should have went to the front door if he had good intentions. Also what was he even doing in a residential neighborhood that far away from his own house? I doubt that he was on his way to buy some socks at Wal Mart and on the way there he got lost and ended up in somebody else's garage that happened to have valuables displayed in it in the middle of the night.

Well. If I meet any foreign exchange students I let them know do not wonder into garages in the middle of the night

 ZultanQ wrote:
I challenge you to provide an explanation for why that kid had any reason to be in someone else's garage in the middle of the night. I also challenge you to support your claims in further posts instead of just saying NUH UH UR WRONG.

Perhaps he thought that an older, or elderly person lived there, got as far as the garage whilst having a life threatening emergency? In such a situation, if I were coming up on an open garage, I'd be sure as heck calling out, and IDing myself, to let anyone know that I'm there, I mean no harm and am just there to provide help, if any is needed.

 ZultanQ wrote:



This seems to boil down to the idea that being shot to death is too harsh a penalty for petty theft. I agree that it is, but I also believe that the rights of law abiding citizens trump the rights of criminals. Call me crazy but I tend to side with people who aren't running around breaking into garages, even if they are too harsh on criminals. Don't commit crimes, and you won't give these people any reason to shoot you.

I tend to side with people who aren't murdering others for trespass. He did not break into the garage, he walked in. Trespass is not a reason to shoot someone. The crime that has been committed here is murder, not manslaughter, murder.
The forethought put into murdering this guy is scary, I know blaming the victim is a thing but feth this is just 200 steps too far into crazy for me.

Ensis that's a bit going to far. Open garage at night is not my issue. Open garage at night and I see a body on the ground or something then aye I see your view. Its middle of the night keep that in mind.

 ZultanQ wrote:


Give that the "victim" is Diren Dede, the son of Turkish immigrants to Germany, I'm pretty sure he's a Turkish German. And I am quite aware of the reputation of dailymail, and the fact that they are "racist" because they don't pander liberal white guilt. That's part of the crux of the matter, if this exchange student was a white German you would never have heard of this story. This story is covered by multiple other sources that say Dede definitely had a history of thieving even in Germany.

Here's a picture of him in the middle of their garage in the middle of the night. What was he doing in there? I'm sure he had a perfectly reasonable reason to be in somebody else's garage in the middle of the night, hmmm.

http://www.abcfoxmontana.com/story/25392184/exclusive-photo-diren-dede-moments-before-shooting

So where are these sources? Where is the evidence of Dede's previous convictions for theft? Because no reputable source has said anything about prior convictions for theft or any crime at all. In fact, would he have even got into the USA on an exchange programme with a criminal record?

Also, is that Dede's phone he's holding and using as a torch in that picture? Or an actual torch?

Considering that the man who shot him said he couldn't see him, when there is some light source there and the garage is bright enough for a babycam to be able to see (those things do not have very good night vision), I find that very suspicious.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:
I challenge you to provide an explanation for why that kid had any reason to be in someone else's garage in the middle of the night. I also challenge you to support your claims in further posts instead of just saying NUH UH UR WRONG.

Perhaps he thought that an older, or elderly person lived there, got as far as the garage whilst having a life threatening emergency? In such a situation, if I were coming up on an open garage, I'd be sure as heck calling out, and IDing myself, to let anyone know that I'm there, I mean no harm and am just there to provide help, if any is needed.

Perhaps he was a space alien coming to bring enlightenment to these people because they were the chosen ones. This is all speculation.

All we have are the facts, and the facts don't look good for Dede's case. The only crime the shooter is guilty of is killing an intruder they had already incapacitated, and Dede looks very much like a thief given what we know right now. Remember that the shooter claimed he had already intruded on their property before and committed theft, and the circumstances are pretty suspicious given Dede has no good reason to be in the garage. I don't buy the good Samaritan theory because anybody with common sense would go to the front door, especially in the middle of the night, and there has been no mention of Dede being too mentally impaired to not realize this.

IMO, both parties are idiots, and the authors of their own misfortunes.

 ZultanQ wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:
I challenge you to provide an explanation for why that kid had any reason to be in someone else's garage in the middle of the night. I also challenge you to support your claims in further posts instead of just saying NUH UH UR WRONG.

Perhaps he thought that an older, or elderly person lived there, got as far as the garage whilst having a life threatening emergency? In such a situation, if I were coming up on an open garage, I'd be sure as heck calling out, and IDing myself, to let anyone know that I'm there, I mean no harm and am just there to provide help, if any is needed.

Perhaps he was a space alien coming to bring enlightenment to these people because they were the chosen ones. This is all speculation.

All we have are the facts, and the facts don't look good for Dede's case. The only crime the shooter is guilty of is killing an intruder they had already incapacitated, and Dede looks very much like a thief given what we know right now. Remember that the shooter claimed he had already intruded on their property before and committed theft, and the circumstances are pretty suspicious given Dede has no good reason to be in the garage. I don't buy the good Samaritan theory because anybody with common sense would go to the front door, especially in the middle of the night, and there has been no mention of Dede being too mentally impaired to not realize this.

IMO, both parties are idiots, and the authors of their own misfortunes.

The shooter claimed that somebody had broken in before, not that it was Dede.

Please keep to the facts, rather than stating absolute bs and claiming it is true.