The 3 three teens that lived get convicted of murder because the homeowner shot & killed one of the intruders and they get sentenced to about 50 years each in prison.
IMO - Pretty harsh for not having a weapon and I'm surprised that the prosecutors pushed the meaning of the law to apply to this case. They "thought" the house was empty but the homeowner was sleeping. I was no angel when young, but I'd never break into someones house.
I have a feeling this will get overturned eventually and a lesser sentence will be applied but it'd be good if parents could take the time of explaining how you can end up in situations like this because of being stupid.
The 3 three teens that lived get convicted of murder because the homeowner shot & killed one of the intruders and they get sentenced to about 50 years each in prison.
IMO - Pretty harsh for not having a weapon and I'm surprised that the prosecutors pushed the meaning of the law to apply to this case. They "thought" the house was empty but the homeowner was sleeping. I was no angel when young, but I'd never break into someones house.
I have a feeling this will get overturned eventually and a lesser sentence will be applied but it'd be good if parents could take the time of explaining how you can end up in situations like this because of being stupid.
I believe the law was designed for situations like 3 losers knocking off a 7-11 and killing the clerk - all 3 get charged with murder which I have no problem with. I'm amazed that this type of law was even considered in this case, factoring in the idiots ages and that they didn't bring a weapon or cause injury or death to anyone. The homeowner killing one of their friends and shooting the other could be considered a punishment. I would like a fitting sentence would be 1-2 years in jail and 5 years of probation. 50 fkn years is ridiculous.
I believe this will get overturned eventually but to be sitting there rotting away waiting for someone to save you must be brutal and you know how long these things take, they could sit there for 5 years, nobody's in a hurry to get them out.
0
I believe the law was designed for situations like 3 losers knocking off a 7-11 and killing the clerk - all 3 get charged with murder which I have no problem with. I'm amazed that this type of law was even considered in this case, factoring in the idiots ages and that they didn't bring a weapon or cause injury or death to anyone. The homeowner killing one of their friends and shooting the other could be considered a punishment. I would like a fitting sentence would be 1-2 years in jail and 5 years of probation. 50 fkn years is ridiculous.
I believe this will get overturned eventually but to be sitting there rotting away waiting for someone to save you must be brutal and you know how long these things take, they could sit there for 5 years, nobody's in a hurry to get them out.
"They attended an alternative school, which let out early, and they were hanging out at Quiroz's front porch. They discussed ways to get some quick cash to buy weed. Breaking into a home seemed like a good idea. So they began looking for an empty house."
Alternative school?
Cash to buy weed?
B & E seemed like a good idea?
These punks would've been locked up for something eventually anyways. Maybe even eventually killing innocent people. I like this precedent, better than those "Scared Straight" programs
0
Quote Originally Posted by steve1203:
4 less thugs who can do another home invasion.
Sounds good to me.
"They attended an alternative school, which let out early, and they were hanging out at Quiroz's front porch. They discussed ways to get some quick cash to buy weed. Breaking into a home seemed like a good idea. So they began looking for an empty house."
Alternative school?
Cash to buy weed?
B & E seemed like a good idea?
These punks would've been locked up for something eventually anyways. Maybe even eventually killing innocent people. I like this precedent, better than those "Scared Straight" programs
Not supporting what they did, but how do you charge people for murder when they didn't kill anyone?
This is ridiculous. Nothing short of ridiculous.
It is called felony-murder and it is not uncommon. The rationale is that the commission of a felony is an inherently bad and dangerous act. There is no telling what bad things will happen when you engage in this course of conduct. So, if you commit a felony and someone gets killed, you are guilty of felony-murder. It is a wonderful law, designed to screw dirtbags who are forced to suffer the consequences when someone gets killed in the commission of a felony. If you are anti-dirtbag, you are pro felony-murder. Count me in.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SteelCash:
Not supporting what they did, but how do you charge people for murder when they didn't kill anyone?
This is ridiculous. Nothing short of ridiculous.
It is called felony-murder and it is not uncommon. The rationale is that the commission of a felony is an inherently bad and dangerous act. There is no telling what bad things will happen when you engage in this course of conduct. So, if you commit a felony and someone gets killed, you are guilty of felony-murder. It is a wonderful law, designed to screw dirtbags who are forced to suffer the consequences when someone gets killed in the commission of a felony. If you are anti-dirtbag, you are pro felony-murder. Count me in.
It is called felony-murder and it is not uncommon. The rationale is that the commission of a felony is an inherently bad and dangerous act. There is no telling what bad things will happen when you engage in this course of conduct. So, if you commit a felony and someone gets killed, you are guilty of felony-murder. It is a wonderful law, designed to screw dirtbags who are forced to suffer the consequences when someone gets killed in the commission of a felony. If you are anti-dirtbag, you are pro felony-murder. Count me in.
Exactly, 100 percent. What happens if these 5 basterds run into this guy, he didn't hear anything, and he's still sleeping in his bed? One of these morons probably has a knife on them, 5 against 1, then what?
"SORRY! SORRY!"
Punk was only yelling that when that shiny .38 was point blank.....
Fukk these punks, and fukk anyone in "support" of their "rights" Same situation, but
Your house, your kids.......... Still marching in protest????
0
Quote Originally Posted by 1129ken:
It is called felony-murder and it is not uncommon. The rationale is that the commission of a felony is an inherently bad and dangerous act. There is no telling what bad things will happen when you engage in this course of conduct. So, if you commit a felony and someone gets killed, you are guilty of felony-murder. It is a wonderful law, designed to screw dirtbags who are forced to suffer the consequences when someone gets killed in the commission of a felony. If you are anti-dirtbag, you are pro felony-murder. Count me in.
Exactly, 100 percent. What happens if these 5 basterds run into this guy, he didn't hear anything, and he's still sleeping in his bed? One of these morons probably has a knife on them, 5 against 1, then what?
"SORRY! SORRY!"
Punk was only yelling that when that shiny .38 was point blank.....
Fukk these punks, and fukk anyone in "support" of their "rights" Same situation, but
Your house, your kids.......... Still marching in protest????
Exactly, 100 percent. What happens if these 5 basterds run into this guy, he didn't hear anything, and he's still sleeping in his bed? One of these morons probably has a knife on them, 5 against 1, then what?
"SORRY! SORRY!"
Punk was only yelling that when that shiny .38 was point blank.....
Fukk these punks, and fukk anyone in "support" of their "rights" Same situation, but
Your house, your kids.......... Still marching in protest????
0
Quote Originally Posted by GimmeMoneyNow:
Exactly, 100 percent. What happens if these 5 basterds run into this guy, he didn't hear anything, and he's still sleeping in his bed? One of these morons probably has a knife on them, 5 against 1, then what?
"SORRY! SORRY!"
Punk was only yelling that when that shiny .38 was point blank.....
Fukk these punks, and fukk anyone in "support" of their "rights" Same situation, but
Your house, your kids.......... Still marching in protest????
Exactly, 100 percent. What happens if these 5 basterds run into this guy, he didn't hear anything, and he's still sleeping in his bed? One of these morons probably has a knife on them, 5 against 1, then what?
"SORRY! SORRY!"
Punk was only yelling that when that shiny .38 was point blank.....
Fukk these punks, and fukk anyone in "support" of their "rights" Same situation, but
Your house, your kids.......... Still marching in protest????
I do not think anybody is faulting the homeowner for using his gun.
They are questioning the charges of murder for the other people involved.
0
Quote Originally Posted by GimmeMoneyNow:
Exactly, 100 percent. What happens if these 5 basterds run into this guy, he didn't hear anything, and he's still sleeping in his bed? One of these morons probably has a knife on them, 5 against 1, then what?
"SORRY! SORRY!"
Punk was only yelling that when that shiny .38 was point blank.....
Fukk these punks, and fukk anyone in "support" of their "rights" Same situation, but
Your house, your kids.......... Still marching in protest????
I do not think anybody is faulting the homeowner for using his gun.
They are questioning the charges of murder for the other people involved.
I believe the law was designed for situations like 3 losers knocking off a 7-11 and killing the clerk - all 3 get charged with murder which I have no problem with. I'm amazed that this type of law was even considered in this case, factoring in the idiots ages and that they didn't bring a weapon or cause injury or death to anyone. The homeowner killing one of their friends and shooting the other could be considered a punishment. I would like a fitting sentence would be 1-2 years in jail and 5 years of probation. 50 fkn years is ridiculous.
I believe this will get overturned eventually but to be sitting there rotting away waiting for someone to save you must be brutal and you know how long these things take, they could sit there for 5 years, nobody's in a hurry to get them out.
One of the four is dead. So their actions DID100% cause DEATH for someone. I'm not saying the punishment is justified, but let's at least understand the facts here. The fact that they did not bring their own weapons seems completely irrelevant.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:
I believe the law was designed for situations like 3 losers knocking off a 7-11 and killing the clerk - all 3 get charged with murder which I have no problem with. I'm amazed that this type of law was even considered in this case, factoring in the idiots ages and that they didn't bring a weapon or cause injury or death to anyone. The homeowner killing one of their friends and shooting the other could be considered a punishment. I would like a fitting sentence would be 1-2 years in jail and 5 years of probation. 50 fkn years is ridiculous.
I believe this will get overturned eventually but to be sitting there rotting away waiting for someone to save you must be brutal and you know how long these things take, they could sit there for 5 years, nobody's in a hurry to get them out.
One of the four is dead. So their actions DID100% cause DEATH for someone. I'm not saying the punishment is justified, but let's at least understand the facts here. The fact that they did not bring their own weapons seems completely irrelevant.
I know up here in Canada the guy that pulled the trigger would of gotten a manslaughter charge. I love the laws in the States for something like this. Felony murder. It is about time us folks north of the border should be allowed to carry or posses a handgun.
0
I know up here in Canada the guy that pulled the trigger would of gotten a manslaughter charge. I love the laws in the States for something like this. Felony murder. It is about time us folks north of the border should be allowed to carry or posses a handgun.
Thanks for the explanation, but it's still wrong. In this country, and any other country, there are laws against murder. It's really cut and dried... if you murder someone, you shall pay consequences. But if you don't murder someone, then you're not guilty of murder. You didn't murder someone, so you you're not a murderer. I don't how else to say it, but if there is a law against an act, and you DON'T do it, then being charged for it is unconstitutional. Next thing you know, someone will make an error in judgement while driving, and someone will die. Then they'll charge him with murder, and people will actually be okay with it.
But he's not a murderer. When you put millions of machines on the roads going 50+ mph that weigh several thousand pounds, and there are people operating them, people will make mistakes and die. It's inevitable. This doesn't mean they're murderers.
How do you charge someone with murder when he didn't kill anyone?
For years, people have been charged with murder, and there has always been one common denominator... they killed someone! If they were an accomplice, they got charged as such. Pinning these guys with murder is absurd. They broke into a house and should get charged with breaking and entering. After this event, I seriously don't see them doing this again. I'm sure they've learned their lesson.
0
Thanks for the explanation, but it's still wrong. In this country, and any other country, there are laws against murder. It's really cut and dried... if you murder someone, you shall pay consequences. But if you don't murder someone, then you're not guilty of murder. You didn't murder someone, so you you're not a murderer. I don't how else to say it, but if there is a law against an act, and you DON'T do it, then being charged for it is unconstitutional. Next thing you know, someone will make an error in judgement while driving, and someone will die. Then they'll charge him with murder, and people will actually be okay with it.
But he's not a murderer. When you put millions of machines on the roads going 50+ mph that weigh several thousand pounds, and there are people operating them, people will make mistakes and die. It's inevitable. This doesn't mean they're murderers.
How do you charge someone with murder when he didn't kill anyone?
For years, people have been charged with murder, and there has always been one common denominator... they killed someone! If they were an accomplice, they got charged as such. Pinning these guys with murder is absurd. They broke into a house and should get charged with breaking and entering. After this event, I seriously don't see them doing this again. I'm sure they've learned their lesson.
Broke into the wrong damned house didn't y'all???
Hot Forum Topics
