Current Events > 77 year-old Oakland Homeowner arrested for shooting home burglar

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.ktvu.com/news/oakland-homeowner-arrested-after-fatally-shooting-robbery-suspect

Republicans are gonna whine about him being arrested

I think the exact way it went down will matter. Did he shoot the guy when he was trying to flee? Did he sneak up on them? Did the robbers ever threaten him before the gun went off?

I'm not sure I feel that people should be allowed to kill to defend objects. Its kind of a fucked up premise

The would be burglar who was shot and killed had a crowbar with them and the other guy had a replica gun.

The homeowner hasn't been charged with anything yet.

They should only get charged with illegal possession of the gun and only get probation if they were acting in self defense and that seems like what the story seems to indicate.

Funny how cops are never arrested after fatally shooting someone though.

Zikten posted...

Republicans are gonna whine about him being arrested

I think the exact way it went down will matter. Did he shoot the guy when he was trying to flee? Did he sneak up on them? Did the robbers ever threaten him before the gun went off?

I'm not sure I feel that people should be allowed to kill to defend objects. Its kind of a fucked up premise

People shouldn't be able to defend their property?

Mr_Karate_II posted...

People shouldn't be able to defend their property?

It depends i guess. Big difference between defending the money you need to survive the next month, or some rich jerk killing someone just to defend some object they could easily buy again for what to them is a pittance

Zikten posted...

Republicans are gonna whine about him being arrested

I think the exact way it went down will matter. Did he shoot the guy when he was trying to flee? Did he sneak up on them? Did the robbers ever threaten him before the gun went off?

I'm not sure I feel that people should be allowed to kill to defend objects. Its kind of a fucked up premise

There are many, many instances where home burglaries end with murder.
If someone breaks into your home and they are armed with weapons, you should every right to defend yourself, your loved ones, and your home with deadly force.

Why are we trying to victimize criminals who break into homes with weapons?
Should they not expect any consequences or retaliation for their malicious actions?

Zikten posted...

It depends i guess. Big difference between defending the money you need to survive the next month, or some rich jerk killing someone just to defend some object they could easily buy again for what to them is a pittance

They broke into someones home while the homeowner was in it. You must not understand how fucking scary it is for someone to shatter your feeling of safety by breaking into the place you should feel safe in.
You must be sheltered if you think home burglars wont harm you and they just want to steal the rich mans shiny object to sell it so they can feed their children.

Let's go ahead and get to the point in the argument where you just have to stand there and do nothing as long as the less fortunate aren't being violent.

Zikten posted...

It depends i guess. Big difference between defending the money you need to survive the next month, or some rich jerk killing someone just to defend some object they could easily buy again for what to them is a pittance

Maybe don't defend criminals?

Zikten posted...

Republicans are gonna whine about him being arrested

I think the exact way it went down will matter. Did he shoot the guy when he was trying to flee? Did he sneak up on them? Did the robbers ever threaten him before the gun went off?

I'm not sure I feel that people should be allowed to kill to defend objects. Its kind of a fucked up premise

How do you know their intentions stopped at robbery?

I can't feel bad for anybody who violates someone's home or their feeling of safety and security. Homeowners don't have an obligation to deter criminals after the fact.

Best case scenario they might flee when given a warning. Worst case you're now in a shootout.

That guy isn't even going to get a warning. They probably arrested him for some other reason.

Zikten posted...

Republicans are gonna whine about him being arrested

I think the exact way it went down will matter. Did he shoot the guy when he was trying to flee? Did he sneak up on them? Did the robbers ever threaten him before the gun went off?

I'm not sure I feel that people should be allowed to kill to defend objects. Its kind of a fucked up premise

shut the fuck up

I hope the home owner is acquitted if he was legally allowed to own a firearm

One less piece of thieving shit the rest of us have to worry about

Zikten posted...

Republicans are gonna whine about him being arrested

I think the exact way it went down will matter. Did he shoot the guy when he was trying to flee? Did he sneak up on them? Did the robbers ever threaten him before the gun went off?

I'm not sure I feel that people should be allowed to kill to defend objects. Its kind of a fucked up premise

Holy shit

Zikten posted...

It depends i guess. Big difference between defending the money you need to survive the next month, or some rich jerk killing someone just to defend some object they could easily buy again for what to them is a pittance

You have children, homie?

Guy got killed cause he entered somebodys property with ill intentions. The how of it shouldnt matter more than this.

Only on CE do I see people saying, "think about the poor armed robbers"

Zikten posted...

It depends i guess. Big difference between defending the money you need to survive the next month, or some rich jerk killing someone just to defend some object they could easily buy again for what to them is a pittance

Some items are irreplaceable and cant be purchased again. You dont get to decide what can and cannot be replaced. Maybe people shouldnt break into peoples homes armed.

Mr_Karate_II posted...

The would be burglar who was shot and killed had a crowbar with them and the other guy had a replica gun.

The homeowner hasn't been charged with anything yet.

They should only get charged with illegal possession of the gun and only get probation if they were acting in self defense and that seems like what the story seems to indicate.

Funny how cops are never arrested after fatally shooting someone though.

The article made it sound like they were all in front of the house which means they hadn't even threatened anybody.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

You do NOT know that

This is going to be one of those threads where I argue with extremists on both sides, isn't it?

The materialism and fear is real itt

All life is beautiful and second chances can be amazing to experience

Mr_Karate_II posted...

People shouldn't be able to defend their property?

Someone breaking into your house should not give you a universal license to murder them.

Captain_Qwark posted...

If you break into a house with a crowbar it shouldn't matter if you start running away. You were gonna kill that homeowner if you had the opportunity so your life is forfeit imho

It's impossible to break into a house if you're just standing in a driveway.

Zikten posted...

It depends i guess. Big difference between defending the money you need to survive the next month, or some rich jerk killing someone just to defend some object they could easily buy again for what to them is a pittance

Bruh, you're saying when someone breaks into your home, you're only worrying about money?

It's interesting how quickly you can see who in this topic never actually read the article.

bsp77 posted...

Only on CE do I see people saying, "think about the poor armed robbers"

this lol

The scenario sounds pretty weird, so hard to say until more details come out. On a general basis, nothing wrong with shooting an active threat who has entered your property.

Thats fucked up, no one should be in trouble for self defense.

Zikten posted...

It depends i guess. Big difference between defending the money you need to survive the next month, or some rich jerk killing someone just to defend some object they could easily buy again for what to them is a pittance

You need to take a step back and realize that you just declared that your right to self defense against somebody breaking into your home with a weapon is dependent on how much money you have in the bank. Is that really where you want your moral compass pointing?

sorry but if someone breaks into your home, intentionally, you should (and 99% of the time you do) have the right to shoot them

but if i'm reading the article right, did the homeowners have a stolen gun?

There's also very few juries that will convict you for defending your home. It's a very easy case to defend and that's why many prosecutors don't even bother charging it

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


shoot all you want if they're attacking, but once they're leaving, they stop being a threath

Garioshi posted...

Someone breaking into your house should not give you a universal license to murder them.

If someone breaks into my home, it absolutely gives me the universal license to do whatever it means to protect myself and my family from someone whose intent I don't know of. If that leads to the burglar's death, then so be it.

No one should have to weigh the consideration of having to potentially go to jail for murder when someone breaks into their home - it's as simple as that. Now obviously in this article we're lacking some details here and only have the information give to the article by the witness and authorities, which claims that the man shot the intruders in the yard of his property, before they actually entered his home, but we also don't know if there was an altercation before the shooting that lead to him feeling threatened, or what.

Even then, however, what should the elderly man done instead? Allow the people to break into his home first before acting? Call the police and hope they arrived before the intruders harmed him or anyone else in the home?

All this, however, is besides the point. The fact that *anyone* in this topic is giving any kind of sympathy or both sides to the burglars is beyond insane. They stole a vehicle, drove it to this man's home, and clearly had the intent to break and enter the home and threaten the man at gunpoint with a replica gun. The man felt threatened, and he took action.

If the three burglars didn't want to risk their lives, they probably shouldn't have committed the crimes that lead them to this point in the first place, which circles back to my original point - if someone breaks into my home while I am there, it absolutely gives me the universal right to do whatever needs doing to protect myself, my family, and my property, include the potential of the person breaking and entering into my home ending up dead, without any fear of repercussions to myself in doing so.

Nemu posted...

The scenario sounds pretty weird, so hard to say until more details come out. On a general basis, nothing wrong with shooting an active threat who has entered your property.

Nothing was entered.

Bladesyphon posted...

If someone breaks into my home, it absolutely gives me the universal license to do whatever it means to protect myself and my family from someone whose intent I don't know of. If that leads to the burglar's death, then so be it.

It categorically does not. There have been many, many cases in which people drunk on the fantasy of "defending their home" have killed burglars that either posed no threat or were actively fleeing the house. The law does not magically end at your doorstep, and your home being broken into does not give you a license to be a psychopath.

it literally says one was armed with a crowbar and the other had a fake handgun they were trying to pass off as real. Unless Im missing something. You guys just want people to roll over and die?

Zikten posted...

It depends i guess. Big difference between defending the money you need to survive the next month, or some rich jerk killing someone just to defend some object they could easily buy again for what to them is a pittance

Lmfao no. He owns the object he is allowed to keep it from being stolen from him. Whats he supposed to do let the theif walk away? At the point in which you're encroaching upon someone else's property you open yourself up to this in afraid.

Noname13 posted...

it literally says one was armed with a crowbar and the other had a fake handgun they were trying to pass off as real. Unless Im missing something. You guys just want people to roll over and die?

They were shot outside, and the homeowner shot them with a stolen gun, so there's clearly more to this story.

I'll never understand this "bu bu but he was trying to flee! So you have to let him go!"
Let's just ignore the fact he was doing something he shouldn't have been doing

SauI_Goodman posted...

I'll never understand this "bu bu but he was trying to flee! So you have to let him go!"

It's the law. There's not really much more to understand. If somebody is fleeing, it doesn't matter if they robbed you, you cannot legally kill them.

HashtagSEP posted...

They were shot outside, and the homeowner shot them with a stolen gun, so there's clearly more to this story.

Oh. This is tweaker drug related stuff for sure

SauI_Goodman posted...

I'll never understand this "bu bu but he was trying to flee! So you have to let him go!"
Let's just ignore the fact he was doing something he shouldn't have been doing

The law, reasonably, does not think that your Funko Pop collection has the same value as someone's life

Butterfiles posted...

The law, reasonably, does not think that your Funko Pop collection has the same value as someone's life

Lmao funky pop. Only a fool would argue they were trying to steal "zomg my funkos" instead of their life. But you do you.

SauI_Goodman posted...

Lmao funky pop. Only a fool would argue they were trying to steal "zomg my funkos" instead of their life. But you do you.

I'm not sure bringing a fake gun is proof you want to take somebody's life, but that's just me.

Hey, if it's a stolen gun then that's an entirely separate incident which should be reviewed. But again, don't do things you shouldn't be doing and you'd still be alive. No sympathy at all for morons.

Garioshi posted...

Someone breaking into your house should not give you a universal license to murder them.

its a good thing self defense isnt murder, then

It's pretty easy to follow the logic here:

If you don't want to get shot, don't break into someone else's property.