Drunk teen killed

[Sweetpumper]

Or to put one down if they are dying a slow death in one of the illegal traps poachers put out for them.

Or a deer hit by a car...numerous situations.

[Insaniac]

I've been camping and hiking for forty something years and have never had to shoot an animal. That doesn't mean I won't have the means to protect myself if the need arises. Or to put one down if they are dying a slow death in one of the illegal traps poachers put out for them.

If they are wounded and suffering, putting them out of their misery is fine. I see no problem with that.

And again, you wouldn't have the means to protect yourself, you'd have the means to slaughter an animal which is only doing what comes naturally to it: Defending it's territory and it's young.

If you're in a position where you're being attacked by a bear, chances are you're the problem and need to leave it's claimed territory. That's what any sane, kind-hearted, rational, lover of Nature would do.

[Sweetpumper]

chances are you're the problem and need to leave it's claimed territory.

We have printouts at ranger stations of which bears own what territory.

[Insaniac]

We have printouts at ranger stations of which bears own what territory.

And you expect the bears to understand that, do you? LMAO.

Sometimes I wonder if your avatar is symbolic for the back of your head.

[Gummug]

Have you ever noticed anytime a news event involving a shooting is reported, it almost always turns into a gun ownership debate? *sigh*

[freetoroam]

What do you want them to do to protect their customers...shoot them? We have thousands upon thousands of square miles of state parks/preserves here. Even though, the bears will wander into any area where humans are known to occupy because it's a good chance to grab a little easy food. They will even tear a car to pieces to get to it. We don't normally camp in official camp sites though.

I do not know about those campsites roaming with bears, so you tell me, how many bears are killed each year by campers and how many campers are killed each year by bears?

Are you still contemplating scuba diving in the shark infested waters? personally I have never tried it myself, but would really advice you not to do it.

please understand my point, you are wanting to go into the bear territory and yet you feel you have the first right to be there and shoot it if it gets near you? I can not get my head round that? protect your own home my all means, shoot the intruder even if he is not armed if it makes you feel more secure, but come on, you want to go to someone elses territory and shoot the occupant if ti gets near you? I assume the bears are not armed so the camper with the gun has the advantage?

Anyway, if you got any stats on the amount of deaths by bears on regular campers each year, it will give me some idea of the severity of the situation within these official camping sites, and the number of bears shoot too. thanks.

[freetoroam]

I've been camping and hiking for forty something years and have never had to shoot an animal. That doesn't mean I won't have the means to protect myself if the need arises. Or to put one down if they are dying a slow death in one of the illegal traps poachers put out for them.

Absolutely agree with this.

[Michelle]

If they are wounded and suffering, putting them out of their misery is fine. I see no problem with that.

And again, you wouldn't have the means to protect yourself, you'd have the means to slaughter an animal which is only doing what comes naturally to it: Defending it's territory and it's young.

If you're in a position where you're being attacked by a bear, chances are you're the problem and need to leave it's claimed territory. That's what any sane, kind-hearted, rational, lover of Nature would do.

Oh pulease...tell that to your fox hunters. I have been at one with nature my entire life and have never shot an animal.

[Sweetpumper]

Anyway, if you got any stats on the amount of deaths by bears on regular campers each year, it will give me some idea of the severity of the situation within these official camping sites, and the number of bears shoot too. thanks.

I don't think it happens a lot but I don't want to be like that girl whose dad and sister were mauled to death and then she was eaten alive while on the cell phone with her mom.

And you expect the bears to understand that, do you? LMAO.

Sometimes I wonder if your avatar is symbolic for the back of your head.

You have a wonderful sense of humor, I see.

[CrimsonKing]

My actually point is the reaction by the man, The guy was NOT armed, yes he was entering someone elses house, but does that warrant DEATH without question?

As I have said, the owner knows his home, surely he could have spared that extra couple of seconds watching as the drunk was staggering about to evaluate the situation first?

This lad was not breaking in to a property he had no business to be in, he did not know he was in the wrong house, but of course the owner was not to know that, but I still say that if he held fire a bit longer, he would have seen the lad was not threat.

I understand the situation, purely because it is in a country where guns are the law maker to many, but REALLY?? KILL HIM?? could he not have shoot at his leg or arm or is that not an option? you break into my house, you die?

I can think of a whole lot of cretins of society who really do deserve the death sentence, but they had time and lawyers on their side, unlike this lad, which is unfortunate, because with a couple of extra seconds of time he would still be alive and his parents would not be with out a son.

I agree the teen did not deserve death and usually one should always identify the target

An example of not so clear thinking

Say its 3 am and one has been asleep for an hour or two then hears something break or someone stumbling around in their house.All lights are off and there had been rumors of people running around doing all kinds of bad things in the neighborhood recently.What are you going to do?

Keep in mind you have no clue if the person is armed or not with no lights on.Do you cut the light on or start asking questions to give away your location,never know this person could be armed and a better trained shot than even yourself.This situation should not be judged by anyone with so few facts given,none of us were there and the article wasnt very informitive.

[Rafterman]

Authorities say he entered the house through the rear window. Not a good idea if its not your house but I think you should make sure someone is a real threat before you pull the trigger.

If someone enters my house through a rear window, they are a threat.

[Sweetpumper]

If someone enters my house through a rear window, they are a threat.

C'mon, you mean you're not going to offer him a beverage and discuss his day at the table with him?

[freetoroam]

Have you ever noticed anytime a news event involving a shooting is reported, it almost always turns into a gun ownership debate? *sigh*

yep, and its always the same lot on these threads, me included. Funny the difference in opinions on guns never changes with any of us, and yet give us another subject and some of us are in complete agreement. I think its healthy debating, as long as Michelle doesn`t go scubba diving in shark infested waters and tries to say i told her to.

[Collateral Damage]

My actually point is the reaction by the man, The guy was NOT armed, yes he was entering someone elses house, but does that warrant DEATH without question?

As I have said, the owner knows his home, surely he could have spared that extra couple of seconds watching as the drunk was staggering about to evaluate the situation first?

This lad was not breaking in to a property he had no business to be in, he did not know he was in the wrong house, but of course the owner was not to know that, but I still say that if he held fire a bit longer, he would have seen the lad was not threat.

I understand the situation, purely because it is in a country where guns are the law maker to many, but REALLY?? KILL HIM?? could he not have shoot at his leg or arm or is that not an option? you break into my house, you die?

I can think of a whole lot of cretins of society who really do deserve the death sentence, but they had time and lawyers on their side, unlike this lad, which is unfortunate, because with a couple of extra seconds of time he would still be alive and his parents would not be with out a son.

The child being unarmed is something we can now verify after the situation has ended. That's coming from a completely different perspective than to when it had been occurring. The homeowner had absolutely no idea whether or not the intruder was armed and it was most likely dark in the house at the time. Why put your own life in danger for that extra few seconds just to verify whether or not this intruder was dangerous? In those seconds the homeowner could have easily been the one to be killed in his own house, had he followed what you've suggested, had the child been armed. This lad was breaking into a house he had no business in, whether aware of his actions or not, underage drinking doesn't excuse his actions. This is something we're going to agree to disagree on. One thing I'm sure we can agree on is being this is a tragedy and may the poor child rest in peace.

edit: typo

Edited March 18, 2013 by Collateral Damage

[Thanato]

Assuming you've been taught self-defence techniques, you'd be able to disarm the gunman and hold him at gunpoint, at which point you order the attacker onto the ground and call the police, thus arresting the one committing the offence.

So, no thanks. I believe it cowardly to hide behind the barrel of a gun. I'd much rather use my fists.

Self defence does not nessessarily include skills in fighting opposition armed with a firearm. Even then you would have to be in very close proximity to be able to attempt to disarm them. Then it all depends on the type of weapon they are using, is it a shot gun? A pistol? A rilfe? What if they are wearing a sling? good luck taking the weapon.

People react very differently when their enemy has a weapon and all they have is there fists. Using a firearm is as cowardly as using a sword, or a knife, or a hammer. All of these are tools, it is up to the user to define there use.

Anyway, on topic. I'd like to say that it is in the American Culture to shoot first and sort it out later. It's in the movies, the games, the news. If you have a gun, you need to properly ID your target before engaging, this can take as little as a millisecond. But if you just shoot first, with out IDing your target, and he gets killed and it turns out that he was just a drunk kid. You just murdered someone, in the second degree. If they are armed, you can figure that out fast. If they are unarmed it is very easy to take control of the situation.

~Thanato

[freetoroam]

I agree the teen did not deserve death and usually one should always identify the target

An example of not so clear thinking

Say its 3 am and one has been asleep for an hour or two then hears something break or someone stumbling around in their house.All lights are off and there had been rumors of people running around doing all kinds of bad things in the neighborhood recently.What are you going to do?

Keep in mind you have no clue if the person is armed or not with no lights on.Do you cut the light on or start asking questions to give away your location,never know this person could be armed and a better trained shot than even yourself.This situation should not be judged by anyone with so few facts given,none of us were there and the article wasnt very informitive.

Absolute understand that. he must have been a very good shot to shoot him with no lights on and manage to kill him outright, someone who is very well trained i would imagine, but not trained enough to evaluate the situation, someone scared and yes, panicked. to tell the truth, I would panic too at that time in the morning if an intruder broke into my house, whether I could compose myself to be able to aim a gun and shoot him dead without saying anything first is another story.

But as you say, not enough info, so i will take it that the home owner got woken up at 3am from his sleep, got up and got his gun and shot the intruder dead in the dark with out trying to scare him off or even just shooting at his leg.

[Insaniac]

People react very differently when their enemy has a weapon and all they have is there fists. Using a firearm is as cowardly as using a sword, or a knife, or a hammer. All of these are tools, it is up to the user to define there use.

And it's nationally accepted that swords are defensive weapons, knifes are kitchen utensils, and hammers, I think, are offensive weapons. They all have very specific uses.

And again, firearms are offensive weapons.

I agree with the rest of your post, Thanato.

Edit: By hammers I was thinking of battlehammers, not a sledgehammer which is a demolition tool.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Insaniac

[Glorfindel]

I wonder if we compared crime statistics on break and enters, if most are due to intoxicated accidents, or if most are related to theft, assault or murder... Im gonna go ahead and guess the latter... Anyone who would start asking questions like "are you armed" is going to get exactly what coming to them, unfortunately, and if the person has a spouse or kids in the house, not defending with force is by far the cowardly action.

And it's nationally accepted that swords are defensive weapons, knifes are kitchen utensils, and hammers, I think, are offensive weapons. They all have very specific uses.

So a kitchen knife is a utensil but a hammer is an offensive weapon? I dont understand how a hammer is not a tool yet a knife is. There is no logic to that assessment.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Glorfindel

[Michelle]

I do not know about those campsites roaming with bears, so you tell me, how many bears are killed each year by campers and how many campers are killed each year by bears?

Are you still contemplating scuba diving in the shark infested waters? personally I have never tried it myself, but would really advice you not to do it.

please understand my point, you are wanting to go into the bear territory and yet you feel you have the first right to be there and shoot it if it gets near you? I can not get my head round that? protect your own home my all means, shoot the intruder even if he is not armed if it makes you feel more secure, but come on, you want to go to someone elses territory and shoot the occupant if ti gets near you? I assume the bears are not armed so the camper with the gun has the advantage?

Anyway, if you got any stats on the amount of deaths by bears on regular campers each year, it will give me some idea of the severity of the situation within these official camping sites, and the number of bears shoot too. thanks.

Where do you get these twisted ideas? Very few campers or hikers have been hurt or killed by bears and almost no bears are shot by the average person. Maybe once every couple of years you will hear about a bear that has become a severe problem and they will try and relocate them farther away from the city. If it keeps coming back, and is still a menace, officials will put it down. And by the way, my house stands at the edge of the city, bordering park property, for over a hundred years and the only thing I have to do is go into my yard to get into "bear territory". How many fish, has your boat, that you live on, been killed by your propellor? You have no right invading their territory. Apparently, if your boat has a motor you have no idea what kind of damage you've done to the wildlife. Certainly more than I do walking through the woods.

I have scuba dived with sharks, they aren't a problem. I can assume, by your responce, you are generally scared of the animals we inhabit the earth with?

People who enjoy enteracting with nature will do just that. But, all of a sudden, we who do are now the bad guys for the simple reason we have a gun....whether we use it or not.

[Insaniac]

I wonder if we compared crime statistics on break and enters, if most are due to intoxicated accidents, or if most are related to theft, assault or murder... Im gonna go ahead and guess the latter... Anyone who would start asking questions like "are you armed" is going to get exactly what coming to them, unfortunately, and if the person has a spouse or kids in the house, not defending with force is by far the cowardly action.

If you stand there like a complete fool, of course you're going to die.

And given the circumstances, it's probably a wise idea not to immediately fire at the intruder, as it could start a firefight, getting you, your spouse and your kids killed.

*I think* In this scenario, any rational person would've taken cover, demanded an explanation first and fired if necessary.

[freetoroam]

The child being unarmed is something we can now verify after the situation has ended. That's coming from a completely different perspective than to when it had been occurring. The homeowner had absolutely no idea whether or not the intruder was armed and it was most likely dark in the house at the time. Why put your own life in danger for that extra few seconds just to verify whether or not this intruder was dangerous? In those seconds the homeowner could have easily been the one to be killed in his own house, had he followed what you've suggested, had the child been armed. This lad was breaking into a house he had no business in, whether aware of his actions or not, underage drinking doesn't excuse his actions. This is something we're going to agree to disagree on. One thing I'm sure we can agree on is being this is a tragedy and may the poor child rest in peace.

edit: typo

The home owner obviously knew how to use a gun, but i am going to change my stance on this in defense of the home owner, had his intentions been to shoot the intruder and kill him there and then in the dark, then this would surely be an insult to a trained gun man who knows how to use his gun and knows how to evaluate a situation in when having to fire, as it is clear the home owner DID NOT evaluate it. So i will say that the homeowner fired in the dark at a target and got "lucky" as it turned out to be the perfect shot....I would imagine as a rule only a trained gun man would not need the lights on to shoot to kill and only a trained person would have known whether to try and evaluate the situation first, so I will say I fully understand this homeowners reaction, he was not trained in shooting a target dead in the dark because this kind of training would have to include some form of evaluation process on the target you are shooting on whether it is armed or not.

The owner shot in the dark and instead of injuring him, he killed him.

i will quote this bit too because I do feel that if people are worried about this and resort to shooting dead intruders on the spur of the moment panic... in the dark at 3am in the morning, then SURELY they should make sure all their windows are secure, unless someone can come back and say the window was smashed in by the lad, i take it the window was easy to open for the heavily drunken teen........"All lights are off and there had been rumors of people running around doing all kinds of bad things in the neighborhood recently."

[freetoroam]

Anyone who would start asking questions like "are you armed" is going to get exactly what coming to them, unfortunately,

The homeowner only needed to watch for a few seconds to see that the lad was rat ar$ed, but ok, he didn`t do that, fine, but KILL him? why not shoot him in the leg, FCOL the owner was a good shoot as he could shoot at his target in the dark and kill him outright.

Has any of you seen a really drunk person before, they are not difficult to spot. Please do not say it was dark though, cos it did not affect the owners shooting skills.

[Collateral Damage]

Please do not say it was dark though, cos it did not affect the owners shooting skills.

How can you assume the man's shooting skill? This report fails to specify the type of gun used. For all were know it may have been a shotgun. In which case spreads when fired making the target an easier hit.

[pallidin]

Don't let drunk "friends" drive a drunk person "home"

[freetoroam]

Where do you get these twisted ideas? Very few campers or hikers have been hurt or killed by bears and almost no bears are shot by the average person. Maybe once every couple of years you will hear about a bear that has become a severe problem and they will try and relocate them farther away from the city. If it keeps coming back, and is still a menace, officials will put it down. And by the way, my house stands at the edge of the city, bordering park property, for over a hundred years and the only thing I have to do is go into my yard to get into "bear territory". How many fish, has your boat, that you live on, been killed by your propellor? You have no right invading their territory. Apparently, if your boat has a motor you have no idea what kind of damage you've done to the wildlife. Certainly more than I do walking through the woods.

I have scuba dived with sharks, they aren't a problem. I can assume, by your responce, you are generally scared of the animals we inhabit the earth with?

People who enjoy enteracting with nature will do just that. But, all of a sudden, we who do are now the bad guys for the simple reason we have a gun....whether we use it or not.

I have never had the pleasure of swimming with sharks and envy you, would i try it? yes and have absolute respect for the fact that it is their territory.

The twisted idea came from you. you do respect nature, i know that, it was the point about shooting a bear or boar in their environment to defend yourself which got to me, it is their environment and they should not be killed by an outsider, if they appear as a threat then get out of there, we do not have the right to kill them, its their home. If you want to go camping or swimming in their home, fine, but don`t threaten to shoot them.

As it stands you have pointed out they are not a threat at all as very few campers have been hurt or killed by bears, so really threatening to shoot one was not called for....I just took it as another " we would because we can".

Your love of nature is not far behind mine, but I do not live near bears or boars, our animals are different. I do on the other hand live on a boat and make my own heating and light and show every bit of respect for the wildlife around me. I live within nature and it means a lot to my survival, sorry, i just don`t do the "we would because we can" thing, but even though it came across that way, I take it you did not actually mean it to appear like that, but hey! you know me, I pick up on all these things, its healthy.

peace