<p>
I have experienced some this emotion when I chase after a squirrel that has been eating my tomatoes.</p>
<p>“I have experienced some of this emotion when I chase after a squirrel that has been eating my tomatoes”</p>
<p>Okay, now that I’ve finished laughing, I actually know what you’re talking about. We had a mountain beaver that was eating all my husbands newly planted flowers. Then he’d just stroll across the road, looking at us, as if he was saying, “Yeah, what are YOU going to do about it?”</p>
<p>“The judge/prosecutor would then ask, why didn’t you call the cops right after the burglars fled and take precautions by securing the property and/or going to neighbor’s to await the cops’ arrival?”</p>
<p>Are you for real? Securing the property? He DID that and these scumbags still got in. What, you think he hadn’t locked his doors? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or deliberately firing a second shot to kill a scumbag after he/she’s already been wounded from the first shot and making pleadings. </p>
<p>Especially when one or both shots took place off of the property which was under threat until the scumbags started fleeing. </p>
<p>Since I’m lazy about looking things up, is there a link that supports the “execution” version of the second shot? The one or two stories that I’ve read haven’t said that, but I’m willing to be persuaded.</p>
<p>Law enforcement clearly wasn’t protecting he or his property, and it couldn’t be reasonably expected that they would. So what does the gentleman do? Never sleep and 24/7 walk the interior of the house with his hand gun at the ready?
His behavior is understandable given what he endured. I understand two wrongs don’t make a right, but I have absolutely no sympathy for the attackers. (Beyond how their family or society failed them)
Knowing our court system, this will go on for years with mean momma’s boyfriend suing civilly for loss of consortium, he will be awarded $10,000,000, get an amazing book deal and be featured on Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. Only in America! Other countries don’t have time for this nonsense!</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.wptv.com/news/national/tom-greer-california-homeowner-has-no-regrets-after-shooting-and-killing-pregnant-intruder”>http://www.wptv.com/news/national/tom-greer-california-homeowner-has-no-regrets-after-shooting-and-killing-pregnant-intruder</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I hope other burglars, even in their drug addled immoral states of mind, will hear the public cheering this old guy and think twice or three times about breaking and entering people’s homes. I hope they realize that they could be shot and killed for doing this, on the spot, rather than getting some light sentence on a plea deal if caught. </p>
<p>If this had been just another story about an old person beat up by burglars in his own home, it wouldn’t have been even a paragraph in the Times. </p>
<p>Who thinks when they broke in if they would have stopped and not hurt the old man if he did not have a gun and he said, “I am old and cannot hurt you, please do not hurt me?” No, they would not have cared one lick.</p>
<p>It is interesting how after causing trouble the number of people who rush to protect criminals after the criminals get a taste of their own self-caused violence, as there would be no shooting if they did not 'attack" his space first.</p>
<p>It seems quite likely he was really tired of being victimized. How many of us can fathom having our home robbed once and the psychological trauma that would come with that, especially if there was confrontation involved? This was the fourth time he had been robbed, that would put most anyone over the edge of thinking rationally.</p>
<p>I read that story to imply that she made her statement before she took off with her accomplice. Not after a first shot hit her. We’ll see if more information comes out. He may have executed her. Only two people knew. </p>
<p>I’d argue that he shot at them to prevent them from getting away. I’m inferring from the story that had they simply stood still he might not have shot at them. But who knows? When you’re angry and have been mugged, you might behave in a way that varies from how you’d treat a friendly visitor. I think the story said that she was directly involve in physically attacking the old fellow while her buddy worked on the safe.</p>
<p>Side Note: This case is one of the reasons that I’m not keen on having a safe. It encourages dimwits and ne’er-do-wells to imagine that there’s something in there of serious value. If you have a safe, I think it needs to be kept well hidden. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And with a few unusual exceptions, using a gun for that purpose would not be considered a justification for invoking self-defense under most laws. </p>
<p>If the criminals are fleeing and out of the home/property, the “imminent threat” would be considered gone by the standards of most self-defense laws. </p>
<p>The death penalty aspect of this case is a bit confusing. The death penalty is on the line for the ROBBER, not the old man, because a death occurred while a felony was in progress. Because the robber was committing the felony, he is the one potentially facing the death penalty. </p>
<p>Also, I’m anti-gun in that I think the vast majority of gun owners do not take the responsibility seriously enough, but I can understand what the old man did and I wouldn’t prosecute him for it at all. </p>
<p>Expecting mercy after having participated in the beating of an elderly person to the extent you had broken his collarbone is a bit ironic wouldn’t you say? Had he not had a gun they very well may have beaten him to death. Now let’s waste years of the courts time and millions of taxpayer dollars to sort this all out.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I understand that, although I don’t think there is going to be a need to figure out how to choose from among the DA’s who are clamoring to be able to prosecute this case. There may be a short-straw lottery to choose who gets this “plum” prosecutorial assignment. </p>
<p>The homeowner was not lying-in-wait, he got beat up and injured upon entering his own property, they were 50 years younger than he was, and they were attempting to redistribute his property without going through the legislative process. I’d say he’ll probably come out OK in a trial, even if it is California.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The police and prosecution are still investigating and assessing whether to charge the burglary victim turned shooter as well. </p>
<p>If he had not made statements like this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“California man, 80, who gunned down ‘pregnant’ home invader could face charges as woman’s accomplice is arrested: police – New York Daily News”>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/man-80-killed-pregnant-burglar-face-charges-cops-article-1.1879554</a></p>
<p>it’s likely the cops/DAs, if sympathetically inclined would have quietly dropped the case on self-defense grounds already. </p>
<p>Yea, he would have been FAARRRR better served if he had kept his mouth firmly shut and let an attorney speak on his behalf (if anyone needed to).</p>
<p>""“The elderly gentleman will never see jail time, nor should he”""</p>
<p>Exactly. He did not commit a crime. </p>
<p>“You can be pro-gun and not in favor of shooting fleeing scum bags”</p>
<p>I’m anti-gun and yet in favor of shooting fleeing scumbags. Or more accurately, not feeling the need to throw the book at someone defending their home. </p>
<p>The senior who shot the thieves was not only defending his home, given the past break-ins and the beating and broken collar bone, he was defending himself from them coming back with a weapon or just to kill him off. I am a “dove,” but honestly don’t see that he did anything wrong, other than to talk to the media before being advised by an attorney to keep his mouth shut.</p>