Hopkins student kills intruder with samurai sword

[stevenaa]

Sharia law wins!

I'm pro-life, and think this is 'really' skirting the edges of the law.

He defended his detached garage? But all in all, you break in to a person home you takes your chances.

I'm pro-life as well, but at some point the value placed on ones life is determined by the individual. The victim had a right to defend his property. The criminal placed very little value on his own life, by the very act of risking his life to rob someone.

[MisterPinstripe]

Rice was crouching beneath a counter, police said. The student asked him what he was doing and threatened to call police.

"When he said that, the suspect lunged at him, kind of forced the kid against the wall, and he struck him with the sword," Guglielmi said.

Based on the above, he had every right to kill him. He gave the guy an option.

[greenspandan]

Ummmm if you shoot to kill, who is going to testify against you and if you don't who is going to take a career criminals word over a law abiding citizen?

i didn't say you can't get away with it. i said it's murder in the eyes of the law. take it up with your congressperson.

[HailGreen28]

i don't think anyone is questioning the bloodthirst of americans here any more than they are defending criminals.

Wrong again.

Self-defence does not equal "bloodthirst".

You're the one jumping to conclusions here. About the student and people on this board.

But hey, as long as you're making assumptions:

You don't think an intruder, under normal circumstances, is threatening?

Can you tell instantly when a stranger in front of you is armed?

Those are some of the reasons why burglary is dangerous for everybody.

I feel sorry for the student. Stuff like he just went through probably doesn't go away. And he didn't ask for this situation, unless you post a link that he had a sign in front of the garage saying "Rob me!"

[greenspandan]

Wrong again. Self-defence does not equal "bloodthirst".

i'm not talking about self defense, i'm talking about STUFF defense. nobody, including me, is claiming you don't have a right to defend your SELF. this kid went outside to find the guy who wanted to take his playstation.

You're the one jumping to conclusions here. About the student and people on this board. But hey, as long as you're making assumptions:

You don't think an intruder, under normal circumstances, is threatening?

Can you tell instantly when a stranger in front of you is armed?

Those are some of the reasons why burglary is dangerous for everybody.

the law is not on your side here. if there is a prowler in your home and you shoot him in the back, you will go to jail. that's the way it is, dude. breaking and entering is not a free pass to kill someone. society has ruled against that idea (except in texas, apparently).

I feel sorry for the student. Stuff like he just went through probably doesn't go away. And he didn't ask for this situation, unless you post a link that he had a sign in front of the garage saying "Rob me!"

except he DID ask for the situation, by grabbing a sword and leaving his house to go into his detached garage where he believed the robber was, instead of staying inside and calling the police.

[PokerPacker]

bloodthirst? you're too much. the spin-doctor is in the house!

[GoSkins561]

Going to jail for killing someone or shooting them in the back for breaking into your house is stupid. We are so easy on criminals in this country, no wonder why our crime rates are so high.

[kubstix]

the law is not on your side here. if there is a prowler in your home and you shoot him in the back, you will go to jail. that's the way it is, dude. breaking and entering is not a free pass to kill someone. society has ruled against that idea (except in texas, apparently).

It's a free pass for me and I'll take my chances. It's our word against a piece of scum who got what he deserved....death. This case won't even go to trial. 29 convictions, 1:20AM, forced entry? We need a law passed that gives owners the right to do anything they want when someone is in their home unwelcomed. Maybe then we won't have so many home invasions, rape victims, and burglary's. Love reading about these stories.

[MurrayH81]

i'm not talking about self defense, i'm talking about STUFF defense. nobody, including me, is claiming you don't have a right to defend your SELF. this kid went outside to find the guy who wanted to take his playstation.

Okay, so once you prudently arm yourself and go investigate something unusual on your property, what rights do you have after leaving the main structure?

except he DID ask for the situation, by grabbing a sword and leaving his house to go into his detached garage where he believed the robber was, instead of staying inside and calling the police.

Are you implying that a person has no right to investigate an unusual occurrence on their property, suitably prepared to defend themselves if need be? Or are you saying that without a tangible and immediate threat to a person within the confines of their primary living structure, their first and only valid response is to call on the police?

In today's society, if the only goal was "kill any trespasser", the student would have had a loaded firearm. Picking up a sword, knife, golf club or bat is much more indicative of the desire to cause an intruder to flee or provide for self defense. Challenging an intruder is an intrinsic right in a society where individual ownership of property is provided for.

[HailYeah]

In today's society, if the only goal was "kill any trespasser", the student would have had a loaded firearm. Picking up a sword, knife, golf club or bat is much more indicative of the desire to cause an intruder to flee or provide for self defense. Challenging an intruder is an intrinsic right in a society where individual ownership of property is provided for.

At the same time, how many times do you need to cut someone up with a samarai sword for it to cross over from being self-defense to murder? I think that is why it is being investigated. In some ways, a gun being used in self-defense can understandibly lead to a death. The defender gets scared, shoots, and somebody dies. A samarai sword? And somebody's dead with multiple facial and body lascerations? Just not your run-of-the-mill self-defense weapon.

I'm not calling it either way - just saying I understand why they are going to do a thorough investigation.

[Predicto]

If the guy's story checks out, then fine.

I feel like some of you are angry that they are even checking out his story.

[Commander PK]

the law is not on your side here. if there is a prowler in your home and you shoot him in the back, you will go to jail. that's the way it is, dude. breaking and entering is not a free pass to kill someone. society has ruled against that idea (except in texas, apparently).

Not necessarily. Shooting somebody in the back may only mean that is where you shot the person. You do not have to retreat, and in many cases you have the right to remove yourself from all harm. Force has to be judged from the perspective of the person who uses force, and from their perspective.

It's 1:20 in the morning, you are awakened by a scream from your 12 year old daughter's room. You grab your gun from the night stand, and run into the hallway. The masked intruder runs out into the hallway, and tackles you to floor. Before you can react, he starts running down the hall towards your Son's room.

You don't think you have the right to shoot this guy in the back?

[Predicto]

Not necessarily. Shooting somebody in the back may only mean that is where you shot the person. You do not have to retreat, and in many cases you have the right to remove yourself from all harm. Force has to be judged from the perspective of the person who uses force, and from their perspective.

It's 1:20 in the morning, you are awakened by a scream from your 12 year old daughter's room. You grab your gun from the night stand, and run into the hallway. The masked intruder runs out into the hallway, and tackles you to floor. Before you can react, he starts running down the hall towards your Son's room.

You don't think you have the right to shoot this guy in the back?

If we are going to use absurd hypotheticals, how about this one?

It's 11 pm, you hear a noise in your carport. You peek out there, and see your neighbor's ten year old kid trying to steal a can of soda pop. You grab your samurai sword and run out there and cut him in half in rightful defense of your property.

I'm not sure that hypotheticals are of much use in these discussions.

[Special K]

Check the story out, if the Hopkins' student's story is true...well, I owe him a beer for a job well done, lol.

Sorry if that seems callous...but if someone truly breaks into someone else's home, I have no problem with the homeowner/renter defending him/herself.

[Smoot4Prez]

Looks like the intruder became the victim of a three swipes law.

:hysterical:

I think this is my favorite post ever in the tailgate. lol

[Commander PK]

If we are going to use absurd hypotheticals, how about this one?

Predicto, it's not an absurd hypothetical situation. Situations like this happen every single day...how often do you watch the news?

It's 11 pm, you hear a noise in your carport. You peek out there, and see your neighbor's ten year old kid trying to steal a can of soda pop. You grab your samurai sword and run out there and cut him in half in rightful defense of your property.

I'm not sure that hypotheticals are of much use in these discussions.

I'm not sure your hypothetical was of much use in this discussion, because it's not even in the same hemisphere as the incident that kicked off this thread, or my own.

but I'll play anyway. Depending on what happens when you confront him, YES you could be justified to cut him in half with your Samurai Sword. First off, your assuming he is only there for a can of soda, (which I would have to think the guy just escaped from a loony bin for this to be the case). Secondly, your confronting him and asking him what he is doing there before you make him into two parts. (If you just arbritarily went out and sliced him up, yes that would be murder) Let's say the kid states when you ask him why he is on your car port, that "Well, I saw this tasty beverage on top of your shelf, and I just couldn't resist...I also have been watching your wife from a distance for days, and I would like to get some of that." As he states this, he starts towards the door you just exited from your house proper. (Your wife is waiting for you to return in your bedroom.)

Do you let him enter the house? Do you order him to stop? Do you freak out because you should have just let him rummage around on your car port until the nearest police officer who is 20 minutes away decides to show up?

Or do you cut the guy in half?

My point is every situation is different, not everything is what it seems, and incidents like this are constantly evolving where potential victims have to make split second decisions on what action to take if any. Case law in this country has proven MANY times over, that it does not always have to be run and hide until somebody comes to save you.

[stickyshooZ]

One of my room mates works at Hopkins and actually knows the guy. Crazy stuff.

[HailGreen28]

i'm not talking about self defense, i'm talking about STUFF defense. nobody, including me, is claiming you don't have a right to defend your SELF. this kid went outside to find the guy who wanted to take his playstation.

You don't realize what I'm saying. The student had every right to confront the thief. And if attacked by the thief, the student had every right to defend himself in his own domicile. Including lethal force when circumstances provide a reasonable fear of ones life. See what I'm saying?

the law is not on your side here. if there is a prowler in your home and you shoot him in the back, you will go to jail. that's the way it is, dude. breaking and entering is not a free pass to kill someone. society has ruled against that idea (except in texas, apparently).

The law is on my side, and if his story checks out, the victim also. (the student, just because he apparently fought back does not mean he is no longer the victim)

"Shoot in the back", what are you talking about?

I'm in North Carolina, dude.

Get it through your head: It's not a theft that would justify killing in self-defense, it's an attack. That's what the police are probably investigating.

except he DID ask for the situation, by grabbing a sword and leaving his house to go into his detached garage where he believed the robber was, instead of staying inside and calling the police.

No, the student did not "ask for it" merely confronting the thief with a weapon, in his own garage. The thief should have backed down, shouldn't have even been there. And already demonstrated bad intentions by B&E. As long as the student's story checks out, that the thief attacked instead of fleeing, watch what happens.

Asked for it? Prove the student asked for the guy to try robbing him. Prove the student didn't just want the thief to not take his stuff. Prove the student, not the thief, was the guy responsible for this situation.

Who do you think really puts property over life in cases like this? The B&E victim, or the guy threatening bodily harm when confronted over his theft?

[MurrayH81]

Asked for it? Prove the student asked for the guy to try robbing him. Prove the student didn't just want the thief to not take his stuff. Prove the student, not the thief, was the guy responsible for this situation.

Who do you think really puts property over life in cases like this? The B&E victim, or the guy threatening bodily harm when confronted over his theft?

Well stated!

Some folks seem to have the mentality that a person already trespassing on your property in violation of the law retains all rights, privileges and expectations of courteous and civil behavior.

Others seem to have an expectation that a free person obeying all the laws does not have the right to investigate anything on their own property, provide for their own safety/defense, or use force when a threat is perceived.

I wonder what type of upbringing or other life events could breed such expectations/thought processes in a person?

[Commander PK]

I wonder what type of upbringing or other life events could breed such expectations/thought processes in a person?

Thank god everybody doesn't think that way, or everything would be fair game. Burglarize my home, rape my wife, molest my kids, destroy my property. Do whatever you want. I will not fight you, I will not defend myself or others from you. I will argue to vilify, anyone who does take action.

There is nothing worth fighting for.

There is nothing worth dying for.

There is nothing worth defending.

[Mooka]

Do you let him enter the house? Do you order him to stop? Do you freak out because you should have just let him rummage around on your car port until the nearest police officer who is 20 minutes away decides to show up?

Or do you cut the guy in half?

I think you can stop a 10 year old child without chopping him in half.

[chow184]

I think you can stop a 10 year old child without chopping him in half.

10 year old children don't just get out of jail and start breaking into houses like the now deceased burgler did.

if you're going to break into peoples homes to steal others hard earned property I have no pity for your death, I feel bad for the family,but a burglar dying in the process of a break in?

good riddance

[Mooka]

10 year old children don't just get out of jail and start breaking into houses like the now deceased burgler did.

In the imaginary universe that everyone likes to argue about so much they can.

I think Painkiller missed predicto's point. The 10 year burglar example was as absurd as an intruder attacking your own 10 year old.

if you're going to break into peoples homes to steal others hard earned property I have no pity for your death, I feel bad for the family,but a burglar dying in the process of a break in?

good riddance

For the record, I would feel pity for a 10 year old burglar killed in the process.

[Predicto]

I think you can stop a 10 year old child without chopping him in half.

That was my point.

You have the right to defend yourself and your property, but that right is not 100 percent absolute. You have to be at least somewhat reasonable in what you do, under the circumstances.

Just saying this seems to piss off almost everyone posting on here, many of whom are up in arms because anyone even dares to question this guy's actions or even want to have his story checked out before we absolve him.

We are "taking the side of the criminals." We are cowards. We hate America.

It's annoying.

[GoSkins561]

In the imaginary universe that everyone likes to argue about so much they can.

I think Painkiller missed predicto's point. The 10 year burglar example was as absurd as an intruder attacking your own 10 year old.

Not really, my house is laid out so if the burglar turned and ran away from me in my room, he would be running towards my sons room, and I would have to shoot him in the back.