Teen Seeking Help After Car Accident Rang Doorbell, Was Shot In The Head

Irlandczyk · 10-11-2013 12:58AM

MadsL wrote: »

I don't know the full circumstances.

But, Americans do have a right to defend their property, and themselves and family on their own property. What happens after that it up to them to justify to the cops, or possibly a court of law.

As is also the case in Ireland.

Then why does it seem like you are trying to justify it? What case does anyone have for shooting someone in the head as 'self-defence'? Everyone has the right to defend themselves and their property. For the great majority of people, that does not involve murder/manslaughter. A great many cases of such (or perhaps just the most reported/attention-drawing) are in America, hence the 'Murika comments.

Bepolite · 10-11-2013 12:59AM

MadsL wrote: »

As is also the case in Ireland.

Ironically enough because we don't have the social problems of certain cities/states of the US it would be very difficult to convince an Irish jury under the ambit of the Irish Act in the circumstances in the US case.

If Dublin had the issues that Detroit does it might very well be likely. Thankfully I know which one I'd prefer. If someone is banging on my door at 3am it's unlikely I need a gun. My inability to have one, in my view is a small price to pay for society as it stands in Ireland.

I know your view differs. You seem to be under the impression guns would put manners on people. I personally think we should trial this in certain areas in Dublin and see how it turns out but that's just me :pac:

skimpydoo · 10-11-2013 01:00AM

Sky news reported that her car accident was several blocks away from this house. I am wondering why this was the first house she knocked on.

Bepolite · 10-11-2013 01:02AM

skimpydoo wrote: »

Sky news reported that her car accident was several blocks away from this house. I am wondering why this was the first house she knocked on.

Theres always much, much more to the story than it first appears. Frankly in certain parts of Detroit I understand where the homeowner was coming from, accidents happen which IMHO is enough of a justification for strict gun controls.

Irlandczyk · 10-11-2013 01:11AM

Red Nissan wrote: »

Presumably because she may actually have entered the other thirty doors, I too find it hard to have sympathy..

So... what? A valid punishment for whatever it was she was doing was to be shot in the head? Can't imagine why you'd have to shoot an attacker/aggressor in the head just to defend yourself.

MadsL · 10-11-2013 04:03AM

Irlandczyk wrote: »

Then why does it seem like you are trying to justify it? What case does anyone have for shooting someone in the head as 'self-defence'?

Fear of their life, or their family's lives. Or, as in the case of a friend of mine, fear of being raped, then murdered.

Everyone has the right to defend themselves and their property. For the great majority of people, that does not involve murder/manslaughter. [/QUOTE]
Self-defence is not murder/manslaughter. As in the case of a guy down about 3 miles from me who returned fire and shot a neighbour who was running from a another neighbours garage with a gun in his hand - the cops are likely to say "no probable cause" to arrest you.

A great many cases of such (or perhaps just the most reported/attention-drawing) are in America, hence the 'Murika comments.

'Merika comments are just ignorance/trolling tbh.

Irlandczyk wrote: »

So... what? A valid punishment for whatever it was she was doing was to be shot in the head? Can't imagine why you'd have to shoot an attacker/aggressor in the head just to defend yourself.

You wouldn't shoot someone under ANY circumastances?

Bepolite wrote: »

If Dublin had the issues that Detroit does it might very well be likely. Thankfully I know which one I'd prefer. If someone is banging on my door at 3am it's unlikely I need a gun. My inability to have one, in my view is a small price to pay for society as it stands in Ireland.

At the risk of repeating myself - there are 220,000 gun licences in Ireland. You are able to have one.

I know your view differs. You seem to be under the impression guns would put manners on people. I personally think we should trial this in certain areas in Dublin and see how it turns out but that's just me :pac:

A start would be properly arming the Gardai. Let's not pretend there are no shootings in Ireland.

Irlandczyk · 10-11-2013 09:55AM

MadsL wrote: »

Fear of their life, or their family's lives. Or, as in the case of a friend of mine, fear of being raped, then murdered.

Think you misunderstood me. Shooting them in the head.

MadsL wrote: »

Self-defence is not murder/manslaughter. As in the case of a guy down about 3 miles from me who returned fire and shot a neighbour who was running from a another neighbours garage with a gun in his hand - the cops are likely to say "no probable cause" to arrest you.

You're right, self-defence isn't murder/manslaughter. So why did this girl end up dead with a hole in her head? Did your neighbour shoot said person in the head? Did your neighbour kill this person?

MadsL wrote: »

'Merika comments are just ignorance/trolling tbh.

Which at times (given the ridiculousness of some things that go on over there), are somewhat justified. Frankly, your arguments aren't making me come around on this one.

MadsL wrote: »

You wouldn't shoot someone under ANY circumastances?

I wouldn't shoot anyone in the head under ANY circumstances. That is not self-defence. No matter what way you can spin it to the cops. So you think a fitting punishment for trespassing and/or thieving (which are probably the most likely cases, if the girl wasn't innocent) is shooting the unarmed person in the head? Ending someone's life? Is that justice?

Red Nissan · 10-11-2013 12:31PM

Irlandczyk wrote: »

I wouldn't shoot anyone in the head under ANY circumstances. That is not self-defence. No matter what way you can spin it to the cops. So you think a fitting punishment for trespassing and/or thieving (which are probably the most likely cases, if the girl wasn't innocent) is shooting the unarmed person in the head? Ending someone's life? Is that justice?

Justice comes from a courtroom. I would expect we will hear how the gun was discharged. And the autopsy evidence will also have a weight.

Xeyn · 10-11-2013 01:40PM

The 'Murika tact is a bit long in the tooth. I certainly dont have any appreciation for the American 'way of life' or the governments global politics but Im fairly certain the average American isnt a trigger happy gun wielding murderer waiting to happen.
Guns certainly arent the root of the problem as countries with similar gun ownership have much lower gun related crimes than the US.
That isnt to say that they should bury their head in the sand and hide behind those kind of statistics.

At a risk of over simplifying the problem, picture a day care centre:

10 little kids all playing together on the floor, all have access to the exact same toy. This toy whilst fun to play with happens to have very sharp edges. Despite this all the kids manage to play quite well together. All but one. Little Johnny every now and again happens to resort to stabbing some of the other kids and make them cry. Johnny's mother states he comes from a broken home, its not his fault and he is acting out.
Now clearly the root problem isnt the toy as the other kids seem to play just fine with it. The problem lies with Johnny and his state of mind given his unfortunate background.
So there are a few options here:
1. Carry on as is, and hide behind the fact that its neither Johnny's fault or the toys even though kids will continue to get hurt.
2. Take away Johnny's toy until he learns to play nice.

bigron2109 · 10-11-2013 01:43PM

Crazy story altogether. Poor Girl. And their Family.

Mike 1972 · 10-11-2013 01:54PM

theblaqueguy wrote: »

Thats crazy why would you shoot someone that just knocked on your door its not as if she was trying to break into the house fe

Mistaken for a doorstep chugger ?

clashburke · 10-11-2013 01:55PM

MadsL wrote: »

There are 220,000 gun licenses in Ireland, so you probably ought to get yours straight. Chances are that you haven't managed to completely avoid almost 5% of the population.

Just to clarify that it would not be 5% as many people will have multiple licenses. I have 3 and each one counts towards that 220,000 separately

czx · 10-11-2013 04:10PM

Irlandczyk wrote: »

Which at times (given the ridiculousness of some things that go on over there), are somewhat justified. Frankly, your arguments aren't making me come around on this one.

Ridiculous things happen everywhere. Certain people just jump at the chance to run America down, likely stemming from their political/social/economic views. No other country is held to that standard

Xeyn · 10-11-2013 04:21PM

czx wrote: »

Ridiculous things happen everywhere. Certain people just jump at the chance to run America down, likely stemming from their political/social/economic views. No other country is held to that standard

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, it's their own standard and they are well know for publicising that thy are the best country in the world.

czx · 10-11-2013 04:36PM

Xeyn wrote: »

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, it's their own standard and they are well know for publicising that thy are the best country in the world.

How is it their own standard?

The majority of countries would make a similar claim. Is it that nobody takes these claims seriously or that they just don't care about these claims if they aren't about the US?

It seems to particularly irk people when the US is spoken of positively.

Overheal · 10-11-2013 06:09PM

Xeyn wrote: »

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, it's their own standard and they are well know for publicising that thy are the best country in the world.

Who is they?

If you're talking about media outlets run by Rupert Murdoch and are hosted by caricatures like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly, or radio hosts such as Limbaugh or Beck, yes, they love the notion of American Exceptionalism. Absolutely love it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

It's really hard to make a claim that "they" refers to Americans either in whole or majority. There are, aside from 2 major political parties, hundreds if not thousands of political schools of thought, and there isn't a religious philosophy or atheist philosophy that isn't somehow represented by a demographic within the population. So one ought to be extremely cautious about making generalizations about the way "Americans" think and act.

Bepolite · 10-11-2013 06:22PM

MadsL wrote: »

At the risk of repeating myself - there are 220,000 gun licences in Ireland. You are able to have one.

No I'm not, I don't have the safes to keep them in or a need that would allow a license to be granted. Trying to compare the US with Ireland in gun license numbers is simply ridiculous.

MadsL wrote: »

A start would be properly arming the Gardai. Let's not pretend there are no shootings in Ireland.

America is in the mess it is, lets not export that to other countries. It's very unusual for a shooting in Dublin to be a 'civilian', there is normally a gangland connection or a case of mistaken identity. It's equally unusual for a member of the Gardai to be shot. It does happen but wholesale arming of the Gardai is not the answer.

EDIT: sorry my first comment (deleted - in relation to arming the guards) was a little harsh. You have an opinion shared by many of your country-folk and to be fair shared by some here too.

Xeyn · 10-11-2013 06:26PM

Overheal wrote: »

Who is they?

They obviously refers to Americans.
Of course generalisations do not represent individuals or even majority. There is great diversity in the country but even if it's the loud mouths who sound it, it still represents a voice to be countered. They are speaking directly from the viewpoint of 'an American'

MadsL · 10-11-2013 06:40PM

Irlandczyk wrote: »

Think you misunderstood me. Shooting them in the head.

I think you are massively misundersanding how accurate someone can be understress. Highly trained NYPD cops have an accuracy rating of 10% in actual firefights.
In the 41 years, 1971 – 2011, there were 13,059 incidents, and 37,373 shots were fired from NYPD Officers guns. A total of 3,448 subjects were shot (2,399 injured, and 1,049 killed). The hit rate was 9 percent, and conversley the miss rate was 91 percent.

You're right, self-defence isn't murder/manslaughter. So why did this girl end up dead with a hole in her head?

I have no idea. Do you expect me to know?

Did your neighbour shoot said person in the head? Did your neighbour kill this person?

You seem obsessed with headshots (CoD player?) The guy was shot dead. No idea where he got shot, I don't suppose anyone cared where in his body he got shot - there are no points or penalties for headshots.

Which at times (given the ridiculousness of some things that go on over there), are somewhat justified. Frankly, your arguments aren't making me come around on this one.

You disagree with the concept of self-defence?

I wouldn't shoot anyone in the head under ANY circumstances. That is not self-defence.

You have the fantasy of shooting them in the leg if your life is threatened you?
The myth of disabling your attacker by a well placed shot to the knee is the stuff of movies. There is a well know video of a Highway Patrol officer who shot an agrressor 5 times centre mass with a .357 Magnum. The guy shot back after the final shot. It penetrated the officers chest at the armpit missing his vest and killed him.

No matter what way you can spin it to the cops. So you think a fitting punishment for trespassing and/or thieving (which are probably the most likely cases, if the girl wasn't innocent) is shooting the unarmed person in the head?

Where did I say that?

Ending someone's life? Is that justice?

Justice is for the courts, taking someone's life to protect your family or your own is justified in my view and US (and Irish) law.

Xeyn wrote: »

At a risk of over simplifying the problem.

You pretty much have. You excluded all other factors except the toy. What if the child is being bullied by the others, or they hit him with other toys? Does you solution change then?

Xeyn · 10-11-2013 06:45PM

MadsL wrote: »

You pretty much have. You excluded all other factors except the toy. What if the child is being bullied by the others, or they hit him with other toys? Does you solution change then?

I think you missed the point a bit, I didnt exclude the other factors - infact I stated that the reason he is stabbing other kids has nothing to do with the toy. The solution doesnt change, because even if the child was being bullied, taking away the toy still solves the immediate problem while the social issue can also be dealt with.
My point is there are reason why gun violence is a problem in the US and it doesnt necessarily stem from the fact so many own gun, the problem is deeper. That said, its burying your head in the sand to suggest that tighter gun laws wont help the situation whilst the bigger picture is dealt with.

MadsL · 10-11-2013 07:35PM

Xeyn wrote: »

I think you missed the point a bit, I didnt exclude the other factors - infact I stated that the reason he is stabbing other kids has nothing to do with the toy. The solution doesnt change, because even if the child was being bullied, taking away the toy still solves the immediate problem while the social issue can also be dealt with.

Except once you take away the toy, the other children have an unlimited supply of toys to bash the other child with, everytime you take those toys away they find more. The other child then is able to obtain a sharp edged toy from children outside of the creche.

Your analogy is far, far too simple. You cannot magic 300 million guns out of existence.

My point is there are reason why gun violence is a problem in the US and it doesnt necessarily stem from the fact so many own gun, the problem is deeper. That said, its burying your head in the sand to suggest that tighter gun laws wont help the situation whilst the bigger picture is dealt with.

Here we go again. What 'tighter' controls do you mean? Specifically please.

For my own view, the closest correlation I have found between gun violence and a social factor is income inequality.

http://aphyr.com/data/posts/261/homicide-vs-income-gini.png

Xeyn · 10-11-2013 07:45PM

No one said you can magic away the guns. An analogy is not meant to be taken so literally.
'Here we go again' - are you frustrated that people are trying to find a way to make people safer? Or do you think people who want tighter restrictions on guns are just being stuck in the muds trying to do it out of spite?

People convicted of alcohol and drug charges are still able to buy guns in most states or in other after a nominal period. There are no background checks in most states for buying ammunition. Most states allow the purchase of semi-automatic weapons.

That graph looks dubious to say the least. India has a better income co-efficient than USA?

MadsL · 10-11-2013 08:00PM

Xeyn wrote: »

No one said you can magic away the guns. An analogy is not meant to be taken so literally.

It really doesn't help then in setting policy.

'Here we go again' - are you frustrated that people are trying to find a way to make people safer?

I'm frustrated that people throw out "American needs better gun control" and then walk away from the debate - when pressed they are unable to come up with any more workable or practical ways of dealing with controls when the US has a constitutional right of ownership.

I simply expect the same old tired ideas that are unworkable in practice and people like Blay or Sparks (Shooting mod) that have a very strong handle on legislation end up having to constantly correct or explain why they are unworkable.

Sparks has given up participating in most threads like this because of such repetitive responses.

Or do you think people who want tighter restrictions on guns are just being stuck in the muds trying to do it out of spite?

The people best placed and most in favour of sensible gun control are largely gun owners themselves. Not one of Obama changes to the law recently following Sandy Hook had gun owners complaining.

People convicted of alcohol and drug charges are still able to buy guns in most states or in other after a nominal period.

If you are convicted of a felony you cannot even touch a gun, ever. Equally any form of drug conviction or domestic violence rules out concealed carry licences.

There are no background checks in most states for buying ammunition.

A background check every time you bought ammo?? Who the hell would pay for the cost of that? Even in Ireland you only have to show your licence to the firearms dealer.

Most states allow the purchase of semi-automatic weapons.

Huh? ALL states allow the purchase of semi-automatic firearms. So does Ireland.

That graph looks dubious to say the least. India has a better income co-efficient than USA?

Think about how rich the richest people in India are, now compare to US. There you go.

Irlandczyk · 10-11-2013 11:37PM

MadsL wrote: »

I think you are massively misundersanding how accurate someone can be understress. Highly trained NYPD cops have an accuracy rating of 10% in actual firefights.
In the 41 years, 1971 – 2011, there were 13,059 incidents, and 37,373 shots were fired from NYPD Officers guns. A total of 3,448 subjects were shot (2,399 injured, and 1,049 killed). The hit rate was 9 percent, and conversley the miss rate was 91 percent.

In firefights? Against a young, unarmed girl?

MadsL wrote: »

You seem obsessed with headshots (CoD player?) The guy was shot dead. No idea where he got shot, I don't suppose anyone cared where in his body he got shot - there are no points or penalties for headshots.

Why am I 'obsessed' with head shots? Because they are overwhelmingly often fatal, or can lead to brain damage. Which I really don't see as being a fitting end for this girl, regardless of what she was doing in all probability. I asked did your neighbour shoot this person in the head, because if not, there is little comparison to the case we're discussing.

MadsL wrote: »

You disagree with the concept of self-defence?

Where did I say that? I simply stated that self-defence does not involve shooting someone in the head/killing someone.

MadsL wrote: »

You have the fantasy of shooting them in the leg if your life is threatened you?
The myth of disabling your attacker by a well placed shot to the knee is the stuff of movies. There is a well know video of a Highway Patrol officer who shot an agrressor 5 times centre mass with a .357 Magnum. The guy shot back after the final shot. It penetrated the officers chest at the armpit missing his vest and killed him.

Oh please. Spout off some fact about a cop facing down a gunman while we're discussing why an unarmed young girl was shot in the head. Ridiculous comparison. I have no fantasies about shooting anyone, which suits me fine, as I live in a country where the odds of me ever staring down the barrel of a gun are near-as-makes-no-difference nothing. The right to bear arms in the American constitution is ridiculously outdated by now, yet Americans cling on to it for dear life.

MadsL wrote: »

Where did I say that?

There is a question mark there. Means I was asking you what your opinion on the matter is. I ask out of curiosity, as you seem to have deemed this an action of self-defense, and I just can't see it.

ted1 · 11-11-2013 12:07AM

Riddle101 wrote: »

Kind've Reminds me of Oscar Pistorius, when he shot his girlfriend. The guy who shot Renisha McBride probably got spooked out at someone ringing his doorbell in the middle of the night. I mean Detroit does have a high crime rate so some people are probably a bit edgy. Just like in South Africa which has a high crime and murder rate too, and people over there are almost always armed with a weapon.

But I don't know, it's just a theory.

He suffered roid rage. Nothing like what you described.

MadsL · 11-11-2013 04:08AM

Irlandczyk wrote: »

In firefights? Against a young, unarmed girl?

Out of interest how do you know a stranger knocking on your door at 3am is unarmed?

Why am I 'obsessed' with head shots? Because they are overwhelmingly often fatal, or can lead to brain damage. Which I really don't see as being a fitting end for this girl, regardless of what she was doing in all probability. I asked did your neighbour shoot this person in the head, because if not, there is little comparison to the case we're discussing.

I have no idea where the dead guy was shot, how is it relevent if he is dead?

Where did I say that? I simply stated that self-defence does not involve shooting someone in the head/killing someone.

Really? You would not consider someone returning fire at someone shooting at you "self-defence". What a strange definition you must have - care to share your definition?

Oh please. Spout off some fact about a cop facing down a gunman while we're discussing why an unarmed young girl was shot in the head. Ridiculous comparison.

You seem to be making the argument that disabling shots are reality rather than a fantasy. Good luck with making that case.

I have no fantasies about shooting anyone, which suits me fine, as I live in a country where the odds of me ever staring down the barrel of a gun are near-as-makes-no-difference nothing.

Oddly enough, the two times I have stared down the wrong end of a gun have been in a European country.

The right to bear arms in the American constitution is ridiculously outdated by now, yet Americans cling on to it for dear life.

Outdated? Like those other outdated principles of free speech and freedom of assembly?

There is a question mark there. Means I was asking you what your opinion on the matter is. I ask out of curiosity, as you seem to have deemed this an action of self-defense, and I just can't see it.

I don't know the facts of the case, nor do you. I do however support the right to defend yourself if in fear of your life, if this guy was or not, I have no idea.

diomed · 11-11-2013 08:19AM

America is the land of the free and the home of the brave drone controllers, shoot-first law enforcement, and make up a story about being in a life threatening situation.

MadsL · 11-11-2013 09:30AM

diomed wrote: »

America is the land of the free and the home of the brave drone controllers, shoot-first law enforcement, and make up a story about being in a life threatening situation.

Thank you for your insights.

Skylinehead · 11-11-2013 01:06PM

MadsL wrote: »

Outdated? Like those other outdated principles of free speech and freedom of assembly?

They're nothing alike. Most civilised countries get by perfectly well without the right to bear arms, why can't the States?

RasTa · 11-11-2013 01:31PM

Let the yanks keep on killing each other, I don't particular care.

Although anyone who thinks assault riffles in the house are a right, deserves to be killed.

Teen Seeking Help After Car Accident Rang Doorbell, Was Shot In The Head

Comments