KHOU.com: "Deputies: Dad fatally shoots teen boy daughter snuck into her bedroom"

[Commander PK]

Of course, not one person in this thread has made that claim.

Whereas several people have claimed that Daddy was perfectly justified.

Now, which side of this argument is staking out unreasonable, absolute, positions?

I realize you're making **** up because you're trying to defend something terrible, but you don't have to shovel so hard.

 

 

 

Larry   we have been here before, and most of those hypotheticals I came up with have been discussed here in the past in other "gun" threads or shooting threads. 

 

it is also as predictable as the sun rising tomorrow morning who is going to be on which side of these arguments. (it seems no matter what the circumstances are of this particular incident)

 

I admit, to some extent I am one of those, and I do thoroughly enjoy these conversations. 

 

[KevinthePRF]

I think for some the term "resonsible gun owner" means under zero circumstances, unless the shooter is a nanosecond away from gasping his last breath on this earth should he use that gun.

And yes that's ridiculous too. I think that a citizen using deadly force should at the very be held to the same standard as police. But cases like Dunn, Zimmerman, or this if the "he was reaching" thing flies, clearly the standard is lower.

[Commander PK]

now if ya can show the father shot him for simply being there I might go with manslaughter.....your burden

 

and those last two words are what always seem to infuritate people.  Like it or not, we have to go with the shooter's story because most likely there is no physical evidence that would lead an investigator to believe he is lying, and the person shot is dead. 

 

there is also the daughter who was witness to the shooting, who now has to chose where her loyalties lie if asked what happened. 

 

Her dead boyfriend/lover or her father?  She gets to live with that decision also. 

[Slateman]

Ok, seriously Larry.  The kid should have used better judgement to begin with, like not sneak into the girls house and into her bedroom.  It doesn't matter if she let him in or not.  The father had no clue.  Does he deserve to get shot to death, no, assuming he did nothing but get caught in the house.  

 

When I was 17, I worked at a groc store and we had to wax the floors on a Sat. night after closing, meaning we would be out around 1:30 am.  This one girl calls me up, tells me she would do x,y and z with me if I came over to her aunt/uncles house (she was sleeping over at her cousins) after work.

 

She wanted to sneak me in her cousins bedroom window.  I asked her what if her uncle/aunt walked in.  She said I could hide in the closet.  Yeah, not happening lol.  Hormones or not, you gotta think things through.

Walking through the front door is sneaking?

[Commander PK]

And yes that's ridiculous too. I think that a citizen using deadly force should at the very be held to the same standard as police. But cases like Dunn, Zimmerman, or this if the "he was reaching" thing flies, clearly the standard is lower.

 

actually, a citizen using deadly force is held to a tighter standard than that of police.  A cop can shoot a fleeing felon if he believes that person is a threat or imminent danger to society.  Even if the person is running away from them and not engaging them. 

 

A citizen can only shoot someone in self-defense (usually) if they believe their life is in imminent danger based on a persons words and actions. 

 

For interested parties, this is a great overview of self-defense.

 

an excerpt:

 

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-law-basics/self-defense-overview.html

 

 

Castle Doctrine

Even in states that require a person to retreat from the threat of imminent harm before defending themselves, a person can often use deadly force against someone who unlawfully enters their home.  This rule, also known as “the castle doctrine,” allows people to defend their homes against intruder through lethal force.  Like most of these rules, the exact result will vary according to the jurisdiction and the specific facts of the case, so it’s always a good idea to consult an attorney to learn more.

[twa]

And yes that's ridiculous too. I think that a citizen using deadly force should at the very be held to the same standard as police. But cases like Dunn, Zimmerman, or this if the "he was reaching" thing flies, clearly the standard is lower.

 

This is nothing like Dunn or Zimmerman.....and yes the standard is lower in a place you have no right to be.

 

Here you can be shot for being in the wrong place

 

Walking through the front door is sneaking?

at 2:00 in the morning while the parent is unaware and home?....ya damn right it is sneaking

 

ya might ask the guy hiding under the bed why he is hiding

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Walking through the front door is sneaking?

A girl calls you up, texts you, whatever, late/middle of the night, tells you to come over to her house that her father/brother were asleep.  Knowing this, you get there, she lets you in the front door.  You then proceed to go to her bedroom.  Her father and brother had no idea anyone else besides the three of them were in the house.

 

Weather she opened the front door, back door, side door, you climbed in through her bedroom window, etc.  She snuck you into her house/bedroom behind her father and brother's back.  

 

Yes.  Absolutely, it was sneaking into the house and her bedroom.  Otherwise, she would have told the father and brother she was inviting a boy over late/middle of the night.

 

Hell, when I was a kid, I'd sneak out of the house by opening the sliding glass door in our kitchen to the back patio and walking out.  Just because I didn't climb out my bedroom window doesn't mean it wasn't sneaking out of the house.  Use some common sense everyone.  

 

That boy knew exactly that he was sneaking into the house to be with that girl, unless she lied to him before hand telling him that her dad/brother were gone or didnt care if she had boys over at 2am, which I would think should trigger all kinds of "dont ****ing go in the house" warnings, regardless of hormones.  

 

Again, not saying the kid deserved to be killed, that's not for me to decide.  Based on what we know about the situation right now, it's not surprising that this unfortunate tragedy happened.  Especially if he got into it with a person holding a gun on him, who thought he was an intruder in his home/daughters bedroom, then made a move/went into his pockets.  Not smart at all.

[Slateman]

Someone who lives in a home invites you over to the house and lets you in, it's not sneaking. Daughter should be on trial.

[Commander PK]

Walking through the front door is sneaking?

 

agreed strictly to this point.  The daughter brought him in the home. 

 

(I do wonder though if he thought the girl's father would approve if he caught him there taking care of business with his daughter)

ya might ask the guy hiding under the bed why he is hiding

 

Maybe she didn't have any furniture other than the bed.  Maybe her room was a bit cramped. 

Someone who lives in a home invites you over to the house and lets you in, it's not sneaking. Daughter should be on trial.

 

and what should she be charged with? 

 

Honest question, just curious.

[twa]

Someone who lives in a home invites you over to the house and lets you in, it's not sneaking. Daughter should be on trial.

 

it is sneaking,and he knew it since he was hiding(as did the daughter)

 

What will you charge the minor with?.....I certainly agree she was complicit in his death

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

agreed strictly to this point.  The daughter brought him in the home. 

 

(I do wonder though if he thought the girl's father would approve if he caught him there taking care of business with his daughter)

I'll try and explain this again.  It is 100%, 100/100 times sneaking the boy into the house if the father and brother did not know anything about it.  It was at 2:00 am.  It doesn't matter if she let him in through the front door or not, that is irrelevant.  

 

She waited until she thought she could get away with letting him in.  It was sneaking him in.  PERIOD.  The venue of entry does not matter.   She could have snuck him in the back door, through the garage, through the guest room window, her window, etc.  She snuck him in.

 

I don't understand how anyone cannot comprehend this.

 

 

Edit:  Don't let traditional "sneaking out" through a bedroom window cliche warp your perspective.  That's old school thinking, **** my dad would tell me he did when he was a kid.  I lived in a small two bedroom 1 story house, my room beside my parents.  Sneaking out my window would have been so obvious and noisy, I would have definitely gotten caught.  Walking out the back patio sliding glass door on the opposite end of the house, never a problem.  Two of my friends, twins, they had a balcony at their bedroom, sneaking out their front/back door, not an option, climbing down the side of the house from the balcony, definitely.  Just depends on how you're home is set-up.

[Commander PK]

She waited until she thought she could get away with letting him in.  It was sneaking him in.  PERIOD.  The venue of entry does not matter.   She could have snuck him in the back door, through the garage, through the guest room window, her window, etc.  She snuck him in.

 

 

You forgot the doggie door or down the chimney.  "One does not simply sneak into Mordor"

 

Sorry, just trying to bring some dark humor into the thread, lol.  I think the world of all you guys, even the ones I can't stand. 

 

[Larry]

not true.

 

The person must be proved to not have done anything that could cause a reasonble person to feel they should be in fear for their life under the same circumstances.  (circumstances that can be proven)

But you keep citing "he talked back, and moved", as though that rises to that level.

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

You forgot the doggie door or down the chimney.  "One does not simply sneak into Mordor"

 

Sorry, just trying to bring some dark humor into the thread, lol.  I think the world of all you guys, even the ones I can't stand. 

 

LOL!    Hope I'm not in the "Can't Stand List"..........although, I could 100% understand if I was, saddly.  But like wine, I grow better with age.   

[Larry]

The boy has to bear some blame though. As do his parents.

Wow, we're willing to spread the blame all over the place, aren't we?

Well, everywhere except the person who pointed a gun at an unarmed child, and pulled the trigger. He is completely 100% blameless.

and what should she be charged with? 

 

Honest question, just curious.

I'm one of the folks saying that (assuming what we have is true, of course) daughter certainly has some blame.

But IMO, absolutely nothing criminal.

(Just like "sneaking in". Yeah, it's sneaking. No, it's not criminal, let alone carrying the death penalty.)

[Slateman]

agreed strictly to this point.  The daughter brought him in the home. 

 

(I do wonder though if he thought the girl's father would approve if he caught him there taking care of business with his daughter)

 

Maybe she didn't have any furniture other than the bed.  Maybe her room was a bit cramped. 

 

and what should she be charged with? 

 

Honest question, just curious.

Manslaughter. She lied and someone died as a result of that lie. In fact, it would mitigate the father's actions. Someone says they don't know why someone is in the room = probably criminal intent. Someone says that person is there for sex = not criminal.

 

Better question would be if he had found his son with a woman (or another man) would have automatically assumed that his son was under attack and shot the girl he was with.

[Kilmer17]

Wow, we're willing to spread the blame all over the place, aren't we?

Well, everywhere except the person who pointed a gun at an unarmed child, and pulled the trigger. He is completely 100% blameless.

I'm one of the folks saying that (assuming what we have is true, of course) daughter certainly has some blame.

But IMO, absolutely nothing criminal.

(Just like "sneaking in". Yeah, it's sneaking. No, it's not criminal, let alone carrying the death penalty.)

Yes. Plenty of blame to go around. Just none for the father.

[twa]

Yes. Plenty of blame to go around. Just none for the father.

 

Oh he carries some blame for a daughter that sneaks a boy in and lies about it, along with not being more restrained.

 

Not criminal blame though 

 

add

Larry, that child put himself in a mans place....and obviously didn't live up to it when judged as a adult

[Commander PK]

But you keep citing "he talked back, and moved", as though that rises to that level.

 

depends on how he talked back, and how he moved. 

 

If I am holding a gun on you for whatever reason...(in this case perfectly justifiable reasons given what we know as reported) and you begin to argue with me and move in a provacative way after I tell you "don't move." 

 

it could rise to that level absolutely

 

Something that is very important to remember here also, is that this boy is in that man's house.  It's not like this took place out on the street, or in a mall.  This stranger is in that man's house, and his daughter just told him she doesn't know who the stranger is hiding under her bed. 

 

think about that.

[Slateman]

Oh he carries some blame for a daughter that sneaks a boy in and lies about it, along with not being more restrained.

 

Not criminal blame though 

 

add

Larry, that child put himself in a mans place....and obviously didn't live up to it when judged as a adult

Oh it's criminal. There's just no way to prove it. Dad and daughter will get lawyers. Lawyers will tell them to shut up. Then lawyers will get their stories straight. The victim will have done something that was a threat and, under the circumstances, the shoot will be justified.

 

The daughter will cry and explain she was scared and blah blah blah. Nothing will happen. She should be convicted of manslaughter because if she had told her dad the truth, that she was having sex with the boy, then there's no way he shoots him unless he wants to murder the kid. Which I seriously doubt, in this case.

 

So, in other words, if American men would just learn to not be so puritanical and draconian about their daughters having sex, this would have been avoided and everyone would have walked away with some embarrassment and a funny story to tell a few years from now.

[Commander PK]

 who pointed a gun at an unarmed child.

 

 

Larry, he is not an "unarmed child." 

 

He is a 17 year old (almost an adult) stranger in that man's home who was hiding under his daughter's bed.

 

So, in other words, if American men would just learn to not be so puritanical and draconian about their daughters having sex, this would have been avoided and everyone would have walked away with some embarrassment and a funny story to tell a few years from now.

 

not sure if serious, but if so...it's clear you do not have a daughter.

[SkinInsite]

A girl is not getting shot if she sneaks in to some boy's room.

[Commander PK]

LOL!    Hope I'm not in the "Can't Stand List"..........although, I could 100% understand if I was, saddly.  But like wine, I grow better with age.   

 

not at all...that was just sarcasm, lol.

 

[twa]

in this case.

 

So, in other words, if American men would just learn to not be so puritanical and draconian about their daughters having sex, this would have been avoided and everyone would have walked away with some embarrassment and a funny story to tell a few years from now.

 

Ya think so?.....I don't

 

A girl is not getting shot if she sneaks in to some boy's room.

 

girls are seen as less of a threat....just the way it is

[Commander PK]

A girl is not getting shot if she sneaks in to some boy's room.

 

because rarely does a girl rape a boy in his own home.