German exchange student killed

[High Fidelity]

Maybe he's trying to tell himself that he should have no regrets, I'm not a psychologist but I've heard of instances like that.



How could have someone seen it when it was dark?



How about the fact that people should acknowledge that you shouldn't enter their home without their permission? If I had seen a purse out, I would have gone to the front door and rang the bell, I wouldn't have entered the garage.

If I got really suspicious, I would have gone to a neighbor and ask them to call the police. I wouldn't head into another person's garage or home like that.

Even that's dangerous with people like this guy.

Florida man shoots door-to-door salesman dead for 'trespassing' — RT USA

 

[Manic Spinoza]

Maybe he's trying to tell himself that he should have no regrets, I'm not a psychologist but I've heard of instances like that.

I'm no scientist but that theory sounds really dumb.

How could have someone seen it when it was dark?

Streetlights. The Moon.

How about the fact that people should acknowledge that you shouldn't enter their home without their permission? If I had seen a purse out, I would have gone to the front door and rang the bell, I wouldn't have entered the garage.

If I got really suspicious, I would have gone to a neighbor and ask them to call the police. I wouldn't head into another person's garage or home like that.

Against this is irrelevant. If there was a bad storm outside and someone entered your garage for shelter, do you shoot them?

 

[GarfieldJL]

Far. Out.

It's called not letting emotions influence one's thought process. I'm saddened that the kid was killed, but I'm seperating my emotional reaction from my thought process as I look at the facts.

I know it's a very emotional issue, there's a dead kid, but reacting due to your emotions without regard to the facts usually is the wrong course of action.

Even that's dangerous with people like this guy.


Florida man shoots door-to-door salesman dead for 'trespassing' — RT USA

I would consider that to arguably be cold-blooded murder. I don't like door-to-door salesmen, but that's taking things way too far.

I'm no scientist but that theory sounds really dumb.

People aren't always logical.

Streetlights. The Moon.

It would depend on the position of the street lights and where this "purse" was, but there is a good chance it wouldn't be very visible from the street.

Against this is irrelevant. If there was a bad storm outside and someone entered your garage for shelter, do you shoot them?

I'd be less likely to assume it was a burglar in that situation, because I doubt people are likely to commit burglaries in extremely bad weather (for obvious reasons). I would prefer them knocking on my front door and getting permission first though.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

A civilized person calls it self defense.

The homeowner placed cameras in the garage. He then put a purse in the garage in plain site. He then stayed up and waited to see if someone came in. He then went in and, without issuing a warning, fired a shotgun at the person in his garage.

He did this because he was mad that someone stole his weed.

He has admitted all of this. Its all there. His lawyer has already had to lie about the law to make this case seem even remotely relevant to self-defence.

It was not self-defence. If this is self-defence, then what is premeditated murder? I see no distinction.

Here's a hint. If you don't want to die in the course of criminal behavior, it's an excellent life choice to avoid criminal behavior.

This is logically valid. If you don't engage in criminal behavior then it is impossible to die while engaging in criminal behavior. It is indeed a good life choice and I would discourage criminal behavior obviously.

However, punishment should fit the crime. This is something that everyone knows and recognizes intuitively. We don't give life sentences to people that steal a $2 candy bar from the convenience store. We don't give the death penalty to someone with a couple of grams of marijuana in their possession. It goes both ways too: we don't just give a few hours of community to a pedophile and we don't just give a $100 fine to a serial killer.

The punishment should fit the crime. I agree that the teenager was engaging in criminal activity which should have warranted punishment. As the story develops it seems both him and the homeowner were in possession of marijuana (illegal substance). The teenager was also trespassing. Do I think he deserved to die for it?

No!

So...some guy gets to violate my home, and I have to run away from him?

If he is not directly threatening you or your family, then it is your responsibility to call law enforcement and get as many details about the burglar as possible so that he can be caught, tried and given a justifiable and reasonable punishment.

Perhaps the homeowner did not want to call the cops...because he was also a criminal (in possession of illegal marijuana).

So you justify when a criminal kills another criminal, thus making killing less reprehensible than whatever the two criminals were engaging in (trespassing, possession of marijuana, etc).

Which is worse: taking a human life, or possessing marijuana?

Which is worse: taking a human life, or trespassing on property?

It's not murder. It's self defense.

Its not self-defense. Here let me show you why:

A man had some weed stolen from his house and he wants to catch (and kill) whoever did it. So, in something that looks suspiciously premeditated, he sets up motion sensors and cameras in his garage and a purse in plain sight to lure someone in. Someone comes into the garage and the homeowner goes out to kill him but the marijuana thief gets away and so the homeowner follows him out into the alley and then shoots him in the street.

Notice how everything about the situation is identical up until the last sentence where the homeowner delays killing the marijuana thief until a few moments later when he is off his property.

If that had been the case, would you still claim self-defense?

Then tell the burglars that nothing in your garage is worth dying for. Why do you want to put all the onus all the law-abiding citizen, here? If someone gets shot during the commission of a crime, the police response should not be to arrest the shooter. The police response should be to tell the criminal to, "Stop breaking the law."

You can't tell someone to stop breaking the law if they are already dead.

Do you seriously not see the difference between crimes and the need for reasonable punishment to fit the crime? Do you seriously believe that this teenager deserved to die because he was being a stupid teenager and wanted to score some free weed?

I did a lot of stupid things when I was a teenager. I shoplifted a few times. I did some stupid stuff on dares and in an effort to look 'cool' or 'rebellious'.

But now I'm a well-educated, hard-working member of society. I was straightened up and sorted out and had some good support networks.

This German teenager wasn't a part of the criminal underworld. I think he was just being a stupid teenager. He had his life ahead of him. And what he did was stupid. Stealing weed? That's dumb. But its the kind of dumb thing that a teenager would do that, if punished, he could learn from and grow up a little.

Instead. He's dead. He wasn't a hard core criminal. He was just a stupid teenager.

If you're justifying the killing of the stupid, then we've got a lot of people to kill. And not many would make it out of their teenager years

To me, people that defend criminals are on par with plantation slave owners that want to force others to engage in labor for free. There is no difference between a slave owner forcing someone to work, and a criminal who steals someone's property. The criminal has forced his victim to work for him for the amount of labor/time that it took the person to acquire the money to acquire the stolen property. Crime is a form of slavery, and the criminals are the slavers. Why do people defend slavers?

Do you not see the difference in severity between crimes?

What this teenager did was a stupid thing to do that millions of teenagers have probably done to various degrees. Did you seriously never commit a single petty crime when you were a teenager?

Did you never trespass into the neighbors yard? Did you never steal a thing in your life?

Perhaps you are lily white, but most people aren't. Most people go through a few dumb risk-taking, 'rebellious' years in their teens. They grow out of it and they move on and very few descend into the world of criminality.

Also, an exchange trip is probably a great time for a teenager to be rebellious. When I was 16, I went on an exchange to Spain and probably did more shenanigans and tom-foolery then anytime in Canada. It was the first time I was free from my parents and able to go out and be a stupid teenager.

Was the teenager a criminal? I don't think so. He did not make his living doing crime. He was not a criminal.

Was he doing something illegal? Yea sure. We all break the law a bunch, that doesn't make us all criminals. I have broken the law by speeding sometimes and running a few red lights (late at night). Does that make me a criminal? No. Does that mean I've done something illegal? Yes.

I'm not defending a criminal. I'm defending a teenager who was doing something that stupid teenagers do.

You're defending a criminal. A man who was already doing something illegal (possessing marijuana) and who then committed a premeditated murder via vigilante justice and is now, ironically, trying to hide behind the law to escape prison.

 

[Manic Spinoza]

It would depend on the position of the street lights and where this "purse" was, but there is a good chance it wouldn't be very visible from the street.

And I'm sure you would know because you were there.

I'd be less likely to assume it was a burglar in that situation, because I doubt people are likely to commit burglaries in extremely bad weather (for obvious reasons). I would prefer them knocking on my front door and getting permission first though.

When you assume someone is a burglar and kill them when they aren't, you are still convicted with murder.

 

[Belk]

Your argument would have more merit if he had left something out that was clearly valuable in plain sight, I wouldn't consider a duck blind to constitute valuable property.

OK. Let's see if we can straighten this out. There was no duck blind. That was just a simile another poster used.

The man told people he was setting a trap so that he could shoot someone. He then went and opened his garage, put a purse in plain view, and put sensors and cameras in place. He then, once the cameras showed someone in the garage, blind fired multiple shots killing the person. He set out to kill someone with malice and forethought. That is the definition of premeditated murder.

Your argument would have more merit if the shooting had taken place in the guy's yard, but that's not where it happened, it happened inside the guy's garage (meaning it was in the guy's home).

I think the death of the student is tragic, but I'm not going to rush to rake a guy over the coals for defending himself from an intruder.

He was NOT defending himself. He was setting up a situation in which he felt he could use the law get out of the consequences of killing someone.

If the student had gone to the guy's front porch and rang the doorbell, I presume he'd still be alive, and if the guy had shot him there, then that would be murder.

If the man had not set up a situation in which he felt he could get away with shooting someone the guy would still be alive as well.

All you people are doing is trying to exploit a tragedy to push for more anti-gun laws to try to do away with the 2nd Amendment.

Garfield, I am not trying to use this do anything other then state people who attempt to set up situations to use self defense laws to shoot someone are committing murder. The prosecutor seems to agree with me.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

The homeowner placed cameras in the garage. He then put a purse in the garage in plain site. He then stayed up and waited to see if someone came in. He then went in and, without issuing a warning, fired a shotgun at the person in his garage.

None of which is illegal.

He did this because he was mad that someone stole his weed.

It's not illegal to be mad because someone stole your weed.

He has admitted all of this. Its all there. His lawyer has already had to lie about the law to make this case seem even remotely relevant to self-defence.

And he still hasn't admitted to anything illegal.

It was not self-defence. If this is self-defence, then what is premeditated murder? I see no distinction.

He didn't have a specific intent to kill anyone unless they came into his garage. Guarding one's possessions and place of about his hardly evidence of intent to kill a specific person.

However, punishment should fit the crime. This is something that everyone knows and recognizes intuitively. We don't give life sentences to people that steal a $2 candy bar from the convenience store. We don't give the death penalty to someone with a couple of grams of marijuana in their possession. It goes both ways too: we don't just give a few hours of community to a pedophile and we don't just give a $100 fine to a serial killer.

It's not a punishment unless the state imposed it.

This is an instance of a citizen catching someone in the act of committing a crime, and acting to defend his property.

Its not self-defense. Here let me show you why:

A man had some weed stolen from his house and he wants to catch (and kill) whoever did it. So, in something that looks suspiciously premeditated, he sets up motion sensors and cameras in his garage and a purse in plain sight to lure someone in. Someone comes into the garage and the homeowner goes out to kill him but the marijuana thief gets away and so the homeowner follows him out into the alley and then shoots him in the street.

Notice how everything about the situation is identical up until the last sentence where the homeowner delays killing the marijuana thief until a few moments later when he is off his property.

If that had been the case, would you still claim self-defense?

In that instance, no, because it's not during the commission of the crime.

This was during the commission of a crime.

You can't tell someone to stop breaking the law if they are already dead.

And?

Do you seriously not see the difference between crimes and the need for reasonable punishment to fit the crime? Do you seriously believe that this teenager deserved to die because he was being a stupid teenager and wanted to score some free weed?

I don't really care what his motivations were. If he's stupid enough to commit a crime, well, you pay your money and take your chances. In his case, his stupid was terminal. His parents should have raised him better.

I did a lot of stupid things when I was a teenager. I shoplifted a few times. I did some stupid stuff on dares and in an effort to look 'cool' or 'rebellious'.

I never did. Why do you think criminal behavior is cool?

But now I'm a well-educated, hard-working member of society. I was straightened up and sorted out and had some good support networks.

Good for you.

This German teenager wasn't a part of the criminal underworld. I think he was just being a stupid teenager. He had his life ahead of him. And what he did was stupid. Stealing weed? That's dumb. But its the kind of dumb thing that a teenager would do that, if punished, he could learn from and grow up a little.

So what. We're probably better off without people that dumb.

Instead. He's dead. He wasn't a hard core criminal. He was just a stupid teenager.

If you're justifying the killing of the stupid, then we've got a lot of people to kill. And not many would make it out of their teenager years

The world would be better off if we didn't try to protect people from their own stupidity so much.

Do you not see the difference in severity between crimes?

No, I don't. Either way, you're stealing a portion of someone's life.

What this teenager did was a stupid thing to do that millions of teenagers have probably done to various degrees. Did you seriously never commit a single petty crime when you were a teenager?

That doesn't make it any less stupid, any less excusable, or any less terminal. "Because other people do it," is not a valid excuse for any sort of criminal behavior.

Did you never trespass into the neighbors yard?

What does that have to do with skulking around someone's garage in the middle of the night?

 

[Nithavela]

If I ever travel to the USA, I will never enter anyones private property out of fear of being killed.

Not even if I am invited.

After all, the host might decide that I look threatening and go get his Magnum.

 

[GarfieldJL]

And I'm sure you would know because you were there.

I have a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Graphics Technology, understanding how lighting works, the angle of lighting, hard & soft shadows, ray-tracing, etc. would be something that I would have working knowledge on.

When you assume someone is a burglar and kill them when they aren't, you are still convicted with murder.

Glad I live in a State that has some sanity then.

 

[TheChristianSurvivalGuide]

Panzer - where you live do you have the right to use deadly force in defense of property?

Everybody - Understand that some states have laws that do allow the use of deadly force not only for reasonable response to an imminent threat of great bodily harm/death but also of property when in specific settings. Generally, this is an extension of Castle Doctrine, but that is not to say that each state that utilizes Castle Doctrine allows the same.

 

[TheChristianSurvivalGuide]

Panzer - where you live do you have the right to use deadly force in defense of property?

Everybody - Understand that some states have laws that do allow the use of deadly force not only for reasonable response to an imminent threat of great bodily harm/death but also of property when in specific settings. Generally, this is an extension of Castle Doctrine, but that is not to say that each state that utilizes Castle Doctrine allows the same.

 

[Manic Spinoza]

I have a Bachelor's Degree in Computer Graphics Technology, understanding how lighting works, the angle of lighting, hard & soft shadows, ray-tracing, etc. would be something that I would have working knowledge on.

I'm assuming you don't the street light grid plan or the atmospheric conditions of Missoula, Montana the night of the murder.

Glad I live in a State that has some sanity then.

Let's kill everyone who wanders on our property!

 

[GarfieldJL]

I'm assuming you don't the street light grid plan or the atmospheric conditions of Missoula, Montana the night of the murder.

I may have in fact been to Missoula, Montana in the past, actually.

Let's kill everyone who wanders on our property!

People generally don't wander onto other people's property in the middle of the night...

 

[Manic Spinoza]

I may have in fact been to Missoula, Montana in the past, actually.

Give it up. You have no idea what the lighting was like on the night of the murder.

People generally don't wander onto other people's property in the middle of the night...

Who cares why they were on my property, let's kill them anyways! I need to feel like a man!

 

[katherine2001]

If I was a girl scout, I sure wouldn't go to the door to try and sell girl scout cookies. After all, she has wandered on the property--go ahead and shoot her! While we're at it, if you have a teen who likes to sneak out at night, go ahead and shoot before looking to see who is coming in. Maybe if you kill your teen, you won't have to worry about them sneaking out at night anymore! Problem solved!

 

[stamperben]

Y'know what? Bottom line is this guy got his message out, and that's no doubt what his preparation was all about. Ain't nobody gonna steal his weed again. Fear factor at work.

 

[Nithavela]

I hope the next time he feels the need to defend his property, he will have to do so with a sharpened spoon.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

None of which is illegal.

It's not illegal to be mad because someone stole your weed.

And he still hasn't admitted to anything illegal.

1)Man buys chainsaw. Not illegal.
2)Man buys body bag. Not illegal.
3)Man researches how to hide a body on Google. Not illegal.

4)Body is found to have been killed by a chainsaw in the man's house.

Does the legality of Steps 1 to 3 influence the legality of Step 4?

No, but it adds to the case. It builds a motive and contributes to the man's guilt.

In this case, the man had a motive: he was mad that someone stole his weed. He also influenced events to make sure he could kill someone: motion sensors, cameras. He also didn't give any warning, implying it was not his main desire to catch the thief, but rather to kill the thief.

He didn't have a specific intent to kill anyone unless they came into his garage.

And the man with the chainsaw didn't have any intent to kill unless someone got in the way of his chainsaw...

"I only intended to kill someone if..." doesn't hold up in court. Intent to kill was there. The conditionals on that intent do not build a good case.

Guarding one's possessions and place of about his hardly evidence of intent to kill a specific person.

Keep in mind, his main focus appears to be that he wants to guard someone from stealing an illegal substance.

Do you condone Mexican drug cartels? They kill people who try to steal their drugs as well.

It's not a punishment unless the state imposed it.

This is an instance of a citizen catching someone in the act of committing a crime, and acting to defend his property.

Vigilante justice: Service Somalia since 1991

In that instance, no, because it's not during the commission of the crime.

This was during the commission of a crime.

To be clear, the "crime" here is trespassing on private property, right?

If the trespasser had been caught by law enforcement rather than killed, would you support the death penalty being given?

And?

Do you support the death penalty for all criminals regarding any and all crimes?

I don't really care what his motivations were. If he's stupid enough to commit a crime, well, you pay your money and take your chances. In his case, his stupid was terminal. His parents should have raised him better.

In my world, compassion and empathy are virtues.

I never did. Why do you think criminal behavior is cool?

I don't think criminal behavior is "cool". But a teenage brain tends to enjoy risks more than an adult. A teenager is also generally very heavily influenced by peer pressure.

I don't even think "cool" should be a thing, which is why I always put it in quotes. "Cool" generally just means "conforming".

Good for you.

Thanks.

So what. We're probably better off without people that dumb.

The world would be better off if we didn't try to protect people from their own stupidity so much.

Compassion and empathy are virtues in my world.

No, I don't. Either way, you're stealing a portion of someone's life.

Stealing someone's weed and taking someone's life are different things in my books.

Also, stealing 'a portion' of someone's life is significantly different than stealing the whole thing. If you kill someone, you didn't just take a portion, you took the whole thing. And they can't get it back.

That doesn't make it any less stupid, any less excusable, or any less terminal. "Because other people do it," is not a valid excuse for any sort of criminal behavior.

No it doesn't make it less stupid or less excusable. But it does imply that the death penalty (via courts of vigilante justice) is a ridiculous argument to make because it implies that vast swathes of society should be put to death for petty offenses.

It is still stupid and inexcusable and a reasonable penalty might be a hefty fine, community service or some jail time.



"Because he was in my garage" isn't a valid excuse to kill someone.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I hope the next time he feels the need to defend his property, he will have to do so with a sharpened spoon.

I hope the only property he'll be defending for a long time will be his jail cell.

 

[katherine2001]

Teens do a lot of stupid things. I certainly know that I did. However, a lot of these teens have grown into people of great character. We'll never know what kind of person this young man would have become because he won't have a chance to grow up into adulthood.

I personally would have made sure the rest of the house was locked up and hide somewhere and call the cops, or I would have left the house another way and called the cops and let them handle it.