Outrage after popular students are found murdered in man's basement after 'they robbed his home on

I believe there are two issues, while inter-related; require a bit of separation in this story.

Home invasion and this case in specific.

I can see an argument against deadly force for simply trespassing on a person’s property.
Once the line is crossed and a person forcibly breaks into somebody’s home, the rules change entirely.
This is the point that the perpetrator loses his right to his/her life. The occupant of the home has every right to use deadly force to protect themselves. Home invasion is not a “petty” crime, and I welcome anybody that thinks that to post their home address here. I write this knowing nobody would do this, as deep inside they know the statement that home invasion is a “petty” crime is absolutely ridiculous.

I can also tell those who claim “shooting to wound” have never taken a gun safety course. There is no “shooting to wound”. When one aims a gun at another human being, the only intention when making the decision to pull the trigger is to KILL..PERIOD.

If your intention is anything other than to kill, you do not pull the trigger.

“Warning shots” are dangerous because the bullet must go somewhere and could easily exit the house hitting anything or ANYBODY. They also give an armed intruder the time they need to pull a weapon and attack you or your family.

That being said:

This case is a strange one and the determination the state must make is whether or not this is a home invasion or something else that had the old man inviting the teens into his home for whatever reason.
The problem we have is we are depending on news stories and not actual evidence. The media has a tendency to twist facts to increase sensationalism. Nothing makes that more obvious then presenting photos of the teens in their absolute best while publishing awful mug shots of the old man that looks like they were taken post-integration.
In truth, none of us can make an informed judgment until all the facts and evidence come to light.
I am not stating if the old man is guilty of a crime or not, I cannot make that judgment now even if his story stinks like week old fish.

For the record:
I have had gun safety training
I do not own a gun
I am anti-capital punishment (And before people jump on that, capital punishment is after the fact and not the act of immediate self-defense as defending against home invasion is)

I doubt I will change any minds here, but people in this thread really need to separate the argument of home defense and the particulars of this case. While intertwined at some point, most of the argument in this thread is beyond the intertwined core.

Does anybody remember when a man used a noise complaint to justify walking onto his neighbor's property and shoot the man while on the phone with 911 claiming that he was "standing his ground"? Just because somebody claims self-defense doesn't absolve them of the unique circumstances of their case.

I would have shot them too, since I would have no way of knowing that they didn't intend to kill me. One crime indicates a willingness to commit crimes. I, however, like most posters here, would have immediately called in a report once the situation had been contained - meaning kneecapping the little punks, not killshots.

Originally posted by luciddream

Now why would he *someone who is defending his home, with perfect justification*after incapacitating them, he executed..close up from chin to the cranium...then and hide the bodies in basement?

You can go there - - I'm not. I am only defending the right to shoot and kill an intruder.

Everything else will depend on the investigation - - courts - - laws - - etc.

reply to post by MidnightTide


People who own guns should have to take a self-defense course and learn how to incapacitate their targets, as opposed to outright death. Obviously shooting someone in the face is not an attempt to do anything other than murder them, you do not need to take someones life to defend yourself, only prevent them from doing you harm. We are not talking about traumatic assault, or taking the guys family hostage, we are talking about a break and enter. I highly doubt an 18yr old girl would pose much of a threat to anyone with a gun, and would not need to be shot to death. Apologetics get no sympathy, this is an excuse to kill.

This sequence of events is very hard to believe:

www.dailymail.co.uk...

In a criminal complaint, Smith said he was in the basement of his home when he heard a window breaking and footsteps. Fearful of other recent break-ins, he shot Schaeffel when he came into view.

When the teenager tumbled down the stars, Smith shot him in the face as he lay on the floor, looking up.

'I want him dead,' the complaint quoted Smith as telling an investigator.

He dragged the body into his workshop and then sat in the chair, the complaint said. When Kifer began walking down the stairs, he shot her and she fell down the stairs.

He tried to shoot her again with his rifle, but the gun jammed and Kifer laughed at him, the complaint noted.

'If you're trying to shoot somebody and they laugh at you, you go again,' Smith, 64, told investigators, according to a criminal complaint filed Monday.

He then shot her several times in the chest with a .22-caliber revolver, dragged her next to her cousin, and with as she gasped for air, fired a shot under her chin 'up into the cranium'.

'Smith described it as "a good clean finishing shot",' according to the compliant, and acknowledged he had fired 'more shots than (he) needed to'.

im glad these little, over-privileged punks are dead. oh but they were high school students i guess they should be allowed to do whatever they want

reply to post by JustToSatisfyYou


they were still in High school...

reply to post by Dreamwatcher

as deep inside they know the statement that home invasion is a “petty” crime is absolutely ridiculous.

I said it was a relatively petty crime, as in relative to murder.

Here:

It's ridiculous to say that people who commit relatively petty crimes deserve to dies.

pet·ty/ˈpetē/
Adjective:
Of little importance; trivial.

google definition


Breaking and entering is relatively petty when considering the context..

I see all points and sides of this sad scenario. BUT if I was in bed in my house and heard someone going through my house I would walk out the bedroom door with the gun next to my bed. I beleive warning shot first. but then you think what would happen if they got to my bedroom without waking us. would they kill me and accost my wife who knows. I say when it comes to B&E shoot first and let god sort it out. don't try to take what i've earned. these were obviously ohh whatever popular students who cares they are theives and should be treated as such. I just beleive for all in the world should have the right to defend what they own

Originally posted by JustToSatisfyYou
im glad these little, over-privileged punks are dead. oh but they were high school students i guess they should be allowed to do whatever they want

edit on 27-11-2012 by JustToSatisfyYou because: (no reason given)

Hate much....I'm just saying.

What if...the 64 year old man is lying about them breaking into his house...what if he somehow talked them into his house...what if he is a sexual predator...and he was trying to capture them in his basement...he did not want them to tell...so he killed them.

What if - they did not break into his house; he just made up that story; so he wouldn't have to do life in prison. What if he staged the scene to look like a breakin.

Friends and family have expressed their outrage over the deaths of two popular students shot by a homeowner while they robbed his home - as he revealed he fired 'more shots than he needed to'.

They should of, and, more than likely, did, know better. Now its to late, for them.

A perp, is a perp, is a perp.

I have had it with hearing how a "good kid", "star student", "popular student", etc... is wrongfully killed for breaking and entering, armed robbery, attempted car jacking, etc.... "Good kids" etc... dont do these things, because once you do commit these crimes, guess what......... YOUR NO LONGER A "GOOD KID"!! Your a criminal and deserve to be treated like one, not coddled like some sniveling, whiney, infant, that just got caught stealing a cookie. and the fact that their family and friends think that they were "good kids" (or whatever definition they are given) just goes to show that the friends and family dont know the perps as well as they thought.

And as for "firing more shots than needed"? There is no such thing! When in doubt- EMPTY THE CLIP!!

Not only do they rob this man but then laugh when his weapon jams? Yea sorry they needed to be put down. Too bad the homeowner did not call right away.


Gs

Let's see. A pair of criminals break into your house, place your family at risk, and you are supposed to "hope" these law breakers don't rape or kill your loved ones while you call the police and wait?

I'm sorry, I will blow their heads clean off their bodies and not blink an eye. My family is at the very least 10,000,000 times more important to me than the lives of criminals invading my home intent on who knows what.

Criminals breaking into my home, who might rape or kill my loved ones, have no right other than the right to a burial. You can moralize and rationalize all you want.

People who want to plead for the rights of low life scum (regardless of their academic standing or how popular they might be with others) who place our families and societies at risk by breaking into homes and businesses so they can fund their criminal lifestyles are delusional to say the least.

If you don't want to be shot to death by a homeowner don't break into his house. It is just that simple. You break down a door, you get what is coming to you, hopefully the load from a shotgun.

Homeowners shouldn't pause to "card" scum breaking down their door or to "ask a criminal's intentions." They should assume they are coming in the home to rape, kill, and steal, since by breaking into the house, they have demonstrated a total disregard for the rights of anyone living there.

Get real.

He says:

'Smith described it as "a good clean finishing shot",' according to the compliant, and acknowledged he had fired 'more shots than (he) needed to'.

This is one of the reasons I don't believe his story. Why would he say that he had fired "more shots than he needed to"? That is a statement that no attorney would allow a client to make.

But it doesn't answer the question, "Why would he say it?"

I think he said it because it is a lie. He is acknowledging a less damaging fault in order to head off a more penetrating inquiry into why all those shots were fired in that impossible to believe scenario.

I think he fired exactly the amount of shots he needed to in order to make sure that nobody was left alive to contradict his story.

Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
I said it was a relatively petty crime, as in relative to murder.

Perhaps you are unaware that many home invasions turn violent when the owners confront the perps.

I dont care what you think, a home invasion is anything BUT petty. I dont care what you compare it to. Your home is YOUR HOME. If we cannot expect to be safe and secure in our very own abode, we can expect to be safe nowhere. I know people who were victims of a home invasion that went wrong, and i can tell you it is a truely traumatizing event to those who suffered at the hands of these sick kids.

I hope many, many home invaders read this article and realize it could happen to them.

reply to post by ipsedixit


People who find themselves in these types of situations often "empty the weapon." Once the trigger gets pulled it is often pulled repeatedly until it won't fire any more. I was watching something the other day where the shooter expressed dismay that he had emptied the handgun into the robbers, he thought he had one round left to fire at the fleeing car. This guy was a marine, so he had some training and even he lost count.

A criminal who places an armed citizen in danger has no right to expect they will only be "shot enough."

Second guessing this from news reports is futile. A jury trail is the answer.

In principle, I have no sympathy for burglars or "home invaders" because people who engage in that activity show no regard for the rights of others and therefore cannot expect any concentration of their perceived right to rob, kill, rape, or invade whatsoever.

Google search Massad Ayoob. He has written books on how and when one can use deadly force. First, we don't know if any part of the man's story is true. Generally, one can only use deadly force until the threat is stopped. Using finishing shots after someone is incapacitated will lead to prison. It is best to shoot center mass of the chest, as this is the most reliable way to stop an attack. No more than two shots should be fired, then see if the attack has been stopped. There is a legal right to self defense, not to murder. There is a death rate of 25% from a handgun shot to the chest. A head shot looks like murder and will lead to a conviction. As this was daytime, not night time, and the man according to his version of events, would have seen the teenager had no gun or weapon of any kind. Therefore he had no right to shoot the teenager.
Often people have entered a house and should not be shot. Sometimes, people are looking for help after a car accident. I personally know a man Joe who heard an intruder at night. He got his rifle and was aiming at the intruder and was ready to shoot. Fortunately, he verified his target, which should always be done. It turned out, he had played cards with his neighbors that night. Later, after Joe had gone to bed, the neighbors wife had forgotten her purse, and not wanting to disturb anyone, had let herself in with a key she had been given, as she did not want to wake Joe and his wife. She left after she got her purse, Joe never told her he had pointed a rifle at her with his finger on the trigger.
A lot of what has been written here is sheer idiocy - saying kill anyone who is in your house. You will go to jail. As Ayoob writes, if you do have an intruder, you should not seek a confrontation. Retreat to a secure room, lock the door, and call the police with your cell phone. Wait in the room with your gun ready to shoot if the intruder breaks into your room. Never shoot until you have verified your target. Many times idiots have shot their own children. Ayoob is an expert witness, as well as a police officer, and has testified in many shooting trials.
I support second amendment rights, I own guns. I have never shot anyone.

reply to post by trainedobserver

I take your point, but in this case I think there is much more going on. What victim of a house breaking, shoots the house breaker and then leaves the body in the house overnight before asking a neighbor to call the police?

I think he wanted to make double triple quadruple sure those people were dead and was so shy of police involvement in the case that he then asked a neighbor to report the incident.

This story is way wrong, in my opinion.