Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

Drunk teen killed


  • Please log in to reply
395 replies to this topic

#1    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,453 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 18 March 2013 - 02:31 PM

Quote

A teenager who was shot and killed in Sterling, Virginia over the weekend may have accidentally entered the wrong home after a night of drinking.

Drunk teen shot and killed after friends drop him at wrong house

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.


#2    Orcseeker

Orcseeker

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,767 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 18 March 2013 - 03:22 PM

This is the problem I have with people defending their homes with a gun. Shoot first, ask questions later. Sometimes, it's not worth it. I guess some people are ok with shooting people like this and spending the rest of their lives telling themselves the guy could have had a gun and shot first.

Hypothetically he did have the gun and had malicious intentions to kill or maim people. You know your house better than he does, you would have the jump on him and you'd know where he probably is or where he could go.


#3    Bavarian Raven

Bavarian Raven

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined:14 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia

Posted 18 March 2013 - 03:48 PM

Quote


This is the problem I have with people defending their homes with a gun. Shoot first, ask questions later. Sometimes, it's not worth it. I guess some people are ok with shooting people like this and spending the rest of their lives telling themselves the guy could have had a gun and shot first.

Hypothetically he did have the gun and had malicious intentions to kill or maim people. You know your house better than he does, you would have the jump on him and you'd know where he probably is or where he could go.

Sadly, if he hadn't been uber-drunk and broken into the wrong house, he would be alive. Something to be said about not going overly drunk... Its sad that the home owner had to do this, but it is not the home owners fault.


#4    Insaniac

Insaniac

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,060 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 18 March 2013 - 04:21 PM

View PostBavarian Raven, on 18 March 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Sadly, if he hadn't been uber-drunk and broken into the wrong house, he would be alive. Something to be said about not going overly drunk... Its sad that the home owner had to do this, but it is not the home owners fault.

Like Orcseeker said, it's the "shoot first, ask questions later" coward-mentality that is the problem. That, and being dumb enough to get drunk in the first place. Both of them are idiotic.

Guns don't shoot themselves so I hold the home owner at fault. Should've asked the intruder what his intentions were.

"He is wise in heart and mighty in strength. Who has hardened their heart against Him, and succeeded"? ~ Job 9:4

#5    Bavarian Raven

Bavarian Raven

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined:14 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia

Posted 18 March 2013 - 04:31 PM

Quote

Like Orcseeker said, it's the "shoot first, ask questions later" coward-mentality that is the problem. That, and being dumb enough to get drunk in the first place. Both of them are idiotic.

When your life (or your family or friends) is on the line, sometimes mistakes are made sadly. Oftentimes, especially when its dark, its hard to know if the person breaking in is armed, or what their intentions are. This man chose to protect himself (and his family and property, if he has one). It has nothing to do with a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality. It has to do with survival. He did what he (thought) he had to do to keep his family/property safe. The fact it turned out to be a stupid drunk breaking into the wrong house is a moot point. He had no way of knowing that. All he knew was that there was a threat approaching and he did what he had to do to stop the threat and protect his family. Protecting himself and his family comes first (as it should).

That being said, 101% of the blame falls upon the drunk in this case.

~



Quote

Guns don't shoot themselves so I hold the home owner at fault. Should've asked the intruder what his intentions were.

That's a good way to get oneself killed. Not advocating opening fire at the slightest sound...but (again sadly), when it's dark, its hard to tell what the other person is doing. Would you risk your own life/your children and wife's life? It's so easy to say "he should have done x" when one is not there, watching the scene unfold. Eitherway its a tough and sad situation.


Edited by Bavarian Raven, 18 March 2013 - 04:34 PM.


#6    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,453 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 18 March 2013 - 04:40 PM

I can actually see both sides.  You don't want to take a chance with someone killing your family.  After all they are the one breaking into your house not the other way around.  Then again you don't want to see some drunk entering the wrong house killed.  What do you do?

He should of knocked on the front door instead of going through a window.


#7    supervike

supervike

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,491 posts
  • Joined:16 May 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 March 2013 - 04:44 PM

Yeah, I agree, its very easy to say what should have been done, but going on the information we have, I too see the home owner as at least partially to blame for this.


#8    Collateral Damage

Collateral Damage

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 255 posts
  • Joined:30 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In midst with the Sands of Time.

  • "Anti-Americanism is a pure totalitarian concept. The very notion is idiotic."

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:16 PM

The homeowner has done what any normal person would have. I wouldn't take lightly to an intrusion within my own household.

Undated letter from J.F.K. said:

   "War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today."

      "The nation which forgets its defenders will be itself forgotten."

#9    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:23 PM

Back window...Wrong house....65million gun purchases over past 4 years by Americans...Bad idea.

RIP drunk teen.


#10    Insaniac

Insaniac

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,060 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:28 PM

View PostBavarian Raven, on 18 March 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

When your life (or your family or friends) is on the line, sometimes mistakes are made sadly. Oftentimes, especially when its dark, its hard to know if the person breaking in is armed, or what their intentions are. This man chose to protect himself (and his family and property, if he has one). It has nothing to do with a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality. It has to do with survival. He did what he (thought) he had to do to keep his family/property safe. The fact it turned out to be a stupid drunk breaking into the wrong house is a moot point. He had no way of knowing that. All he knew was that there was a threat approaching and he did what he had to do to stop the threat and protect his family. Protecting himself and his family comes first (as it should).

That being said, 101% of the blame falls upon the drunk in this case.

That's a good way to get oneself killed. Not advocating opening fire at the slightest sound...but (again sadly), when it's dark, its hard to tell what the other person is doing. Would you risk your own life/your children and wife's life? It's so easy to say "he should have done x" when one is not there, watching the scene unfold. Eitherway its a tough and sad situation.

Sorry, I'd forgotten this took place at night. I understand it's easier to panic when you see this happen in the dark - and through a window at that. Just think the situation could have been defused positively considering the drunkard wasn't a psychopath wanting to kill the home owner.


People shouldn't even be allowed guns anyway. They're not defensive weapons.

"He is wise in heart and mighty in strength. Who has hardened their heart against Him, and succeeded"? ~ Job 9:4

#11    pallidin

pallidin

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,346 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:39 PM

Huh. Yeah, I guess hind-sight is 20/20.

But if someone was crawling through my window in the middle of the night, I have to be honest: the last thing I would think of is that he's an unarmed drunk at the wrong house.

And if there was my wife and children in the house, I think I would be ultra-protective. Not sure if I would shoot him, but I damn sure would at least hold him at gunpoint 'till the police arrived.

The problem is, though, I wouldn't know if there are more of them outside waiting to get in, so, maybe I would react violently.

I don't know. Never been in that situation and hope I never am.


#12    CrimsonKing

CrimsonKing

    Common Sense Aficionado

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,575 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DarkSide of TheMoon

  • "It does not require a majority to prevail,but rather an irate,tireless minority keen to set brushfires in peoples minds" Sam Adams

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:41 PM

*
POPULAR

View PostInsaniac, on 18 March 2013 - 05:28 PM, said:



People shouldn't even be allowed guns anyway. They're not defensive weapons.

People should not be allowed cars either they are not meant to be used as weapons,though irresponsible drivers kill thousands with them every year.

"If it is not advantageous,do not move.If objectives can not be attained,do not employ the army.Unless endangered do not engage in warfare.The ruler cannot mobilize the army out of personal anger.The general can not engage in battle because of personal frustration.When it is advantageous,move;when not advantageous,stop.Anger can revert to happiness,annoyance can revert to joy,but a vanquished state cannot be revived,the dead cannot be brought back to life." Sun-Tzu

#13    Insaniac

Insaniac

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,060 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:47 PM

View PostCrimsonKing, on 18 March 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

People should not be allowed cars either they are not meant to be used as weapons,though irresponsible drivers kill thousands with them every year.

That barely even makes sense.

A car isn't intended to be a weapon. The only reason people shouldn't be allowed cars is because most pollute the environment.

My point stands: Guns aren't defensive weapons.

"He is wise in heart and mighty in strength. Who has hardened their heart against Him, and succeeded"? ~ Job 9:4

#14    Collateral Damage

Collateral Damage

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 255 posts
  • Joined:30 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In midst with the Sands of Time.

  • "Anti-Americanism is a pure totalitarian concept. The very notion is idiotic."

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:54 PM

View PostInsaniac, on 18 March 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

My point stands: Guns aren't defensive weapons.
They most certainly can be used for defensive purposes.

Undated letter from J.F.K. said:

   "War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today."

      "The nation which forgets its defenders will be itself forgotten."

#15    CrimsonKing

CrimsonKing

    Common Sense Aficionado

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,575 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DarkSide of TheMoon

  • "It does not require a majority to prevail,but rather an irate,tireless minority keen to set brushfires in peoples minds" Sam Adams

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:57 PM

View PostInsaniac, on 18 March 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

That barely even makes sense.

A car isn't intended to be a weapon. The only reason people shouldn't be allowed cars is because most pollute the environment.

My point stands: Guns aren't defensive weapons.

That barely makes sense.

If someone has a gun and is shooting at you and you have a gun to defend yourself back with,then exactly what do you define as being defensive?

It does not change the fact if it was itended to be a weapon or not several use them as weapons every year,it also does not change the fact that people die from them either.Just remember guns do not roam around in packs looking to hurt people  :tu:

"If it is not advantageous,do not move.If objectives can not be attained,do not employ the army.Unless endangered do not engage in warfare.The ruler cannot mobilize the army out of personal anger.The general can not engage in battle because of personal frustration.When it is advantageous,move;when not advantageous,stop.Anger can revert to happiness,annoyance can revert to joy,but a vanquished state cannot be revived,the dead cannot be brought back to life." Sun-Tzu




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users