Interesting gun case about to be tried in Oklahoma City

[Zoolander]

As others have said, that was fucking murder. He wasn't rushed or anything, he calmly walked back, got the second gun, walked right to the guy laying down and unloaded those 5 shots into him. He wasn't running or obviously panicked, he walked lol. Utterly ridiculous, big props to the DA of Oklahoma City for realizing that this went far beyond self defense and having the balls to go after this guy.

Now, First Degree Murder...I don't know. Probably would have preferred him getting charged with something a little less just to make a conviction by a jury more plausible. Wouldn't be surprised if both sides agree to a plea deal, depending on how much the DA is willing to compromise.

 

[Tomasello]

Bravo shop keep. Bravo! I hope he gets off scott free. If every shop owner was packing and handled their business that way robberies would decrease by 99%.

Was it cold blooded? Absolutely. So what? Looks like that fucking punk messed with the wrong old man and got what he deserved. Lets not forget who fucked with who in the first place. If he didn't decide to commit a crime in the first place he'd be alive.

 

[Morcheeba]

Bravo shop keep. Bravo! I hope he gets off scott free. If every shop owner was packing and handled their business that way robberies would decrease by 99%.

Was it cold blooded? Absolutely. So what? Looks like that fucking punk messed with the wrong old man and got what he deserved. Lets not forget who fucked with who in the first place. If he didn't decide to commit a crime in the first place he'd be alive.

None of that makes it right for that man to be the deciding factor on whether the kid lives or dies. He cannot make that decision. If it is found by a jury that his actions were in cold blood he should also get what he deserves.

 

[Skaw]

None of that makes it right for that man to be the deciding factor on whether the kid lives or dies. He cannot make that decision. If it is found by a jury that his actions were in cold blood he should also get what he deserves.

It's okay, Morcheeba. If the kid wasn't black, our resident racist wouldn't even be posting in this thread.

Lets not forget who fucked with who in the first place. If he didn't decide to commit a crime in the first place he'd be alive.

Let's not forget he didn't even shoot the one who had a gun, because it seems you've already done so for the rest of us.

 

[Acutie]

He may have crossed the line from self defense to murder. I mean if you broke into my house and I incapacitated you somehow, say knocked you out with a shovel to the face, then took out my gun and shot you in the head, that's murder not self defense.

The issue with this is that he disabled the first robber(who may or may not have been armed at all, there really isn't much information in the article) and then killed him.

It's also worth it to note than if he did in fact catch the others who ran away(does anyone else wonder how this disabled guy couldn't run away in the first place but managed to chase after two supposedly dangerous criminals after shooted one in the head?) he would probably be looked at 3 counts of 1st degree murder.

They were definetly in the wrong, but I do think he may have gone too far. I don't know about in the US, but in Canada unless someone is threatening your life, you don't have the right to kill them.

 

[Pompidou]

First degree murder is premeditated. This is more like walking in on your wife having sex and getting your shotgun out of the cupboard and blowing them away. That's 2nd degree murder, all the way. The shopkeeper was out of line, but the DA needs to go back to law school. How can you prosecute the law if you don't know what it is?

EDIT: If in fact, the shop keeper conspired with the perpetrators who got away, to lure the unarmed kid who got killed into the shop for the purpose of killing him, then perhaps 1st degree murder is appropriate. Till then, the charge is nonsense.

 

[Raesvelg]

Aye, if the prosecutor goes for 1st, he'll have a tough time making that charge stick. 2nd degree is about as much as they can hope for.

We'll see though. I wouldn't be overly surprised to see a plea on this one, but it depends on how obstinate the defendant wants to be, and how his defense wants to play it.

 

[Tomasello]

It's okay, Morcheeba. If the kid wasn't black, our resident racist wouldn't even be posting in this thread.

This from a person who openly admits its ok to discriminate. Look up the word racist before you accuse someone of it then look in the mirror.

Let's not forget he didn't even shoot the one who had a gun, because it seems you've already done so for the rest of us.

Who fucking cares? You or your accomplices point a loaded at me and all bets are off whether I let you live or die. Your just another lefty liberal arguing semantics. If he killed him with the first shot it would of been ok but because he decides to finish the job, "oh, boo hoo, the poor criminal".

That piece of shit would of ended up in prison sooner or later. The best part about this is my tax money isn't going to be wasted feeding, housing and clothing this piece of garbage.

That "victim" CHOOSE to play with fire and guess what? He got BURNED...

 

[Morcheeba]

If he killed him with the first shot it would of been ok but because he decides to finish the job, "oh, boo hoo, the poor criminal". That "victim" CHOOSE to play with fire and guess what? He got BURNED...

You're damn right it would be 'ok', nothing anyone really wants to see happen to a 14 year old, but if he does get killed in self defense after being shot once from attempted armed robbery then it's acceptable under law.

To 'finish the job' is up to no one. There's not a soul on earth that can make that decision under these circumstances. To 'finish the job' is not an option our society allows us the liberty of executing, not when the 'job' pertains to human life.

 

[Tomasello]

You're damn right it would be 'ok', nothing anyone really wants to see happen to a 14 year old, but if he does get killed in self defense after being shot once from attempted armed robbery then it's acceptable under law.

To 'finish the job' is up to no one. There's not a soul on earth that can make that decision under these circumstances. To 'finish the job' is not an option our society allows us the liberty of executing, not when the 'job' pertains to human life.

And that is the way the law is written. Which is fine with me.

Now let me tell you something. Someone breaks into my house, armed ready to hurt me or my family, and I'm able to subdue them, I'm not calling the cops. I'm going to tie them up, throw them in the truck of my car and take them to an undisclosed location where I would inflict such atrocities on them they are going to beg me to kill them.

 

[Eilistrae]

He may have crossed the line from self defense to murder. I mean if you broke into my house and I incapacitated you somehow, say knocked you out with a shovel to the face, then took out my gun and shot you in the head, that's murder not self defense.

you keep shovels inside your house?

 

[Zaltana]

This sort or reminds me of a story about a Navy SEAL who found his dog dead at his home. He knew of the people that killed it and called the police. But not just to report what happened, to inform them that "they better fined those guys first, cause of i do i'm gonna kill them."

The SEAL was the sole survivor of his team that died in an ambush. i think he adopted the dog or it was given to him as a gift to overcome the stress of what happened and ease back into civilian life. My point is that when you threaten or wrong someone with military training you're walking on the thinnest of ice. Especially if they have served in true combat, you don't wanna know what that does to you.

 

[Skaw]

Now let me tell you something. Someone breaks into my house, armed ready to hurt me or my family, and I'm able to subdue them, I'm not calling the cops. I'm going to tie them up, throw them in the truck of my car and take them to an undisclosed location where I would inflict such atrocities on them they are going to beg me to kill them.

Okay Mr. Internet Tough Guy. Have fun getting fucked in the ass in prison afterwards like the little bitch we all know you actually are.

 

[Rips]

Okay Mr. Internet Tough Guy. Have fun getting fucked in the ass in prison afterwards like the little bitch we all know you actually are.

I would say the popular phrase take the stick out of your ass... but I think he'll need the loosening up.

Tom. I think the best case scenario for you would to just solve your problem with that robber in the house. Don't take revenge, no good ever comes from it.

As for this man that killed the robber, of course I'm not going to say good for him. Everyone needs to be a little more sensitive with these topics and the words they choose. I'll say good for him for defending himself. Bad for him for killing the robber, despite what the robber should have or not have been doing.

He put 6 bullets in him? One to take him down... then the robber twitches and the clerk puts FIVE more bullets in him? Jail time, that's NOT self defense, that's murder and for anyone else who says he was raddled, I'm sure he wasn't calm, but to put 5 consecutive bullets in him means he was pissed off.

I don't think you get off scott free for being pissed off or afraid.

Not first degree murder, second yes. It better not be man slaughter.

 

[Valandil]

I believe the logic behind pursuing a First Degree charge as opposed to something else, is two-fold. One, as others have said, is that the DA is expecting a plea bargain on a lesser charge--something that would likely satisfy the most number of people on both sides of the issue. Two, the "pre-meditative" nature of a First Degree charge occured during the moments after the pharmacist gave up his pursuit of the second perpetrator. As others have pointed out, he didn't appear to be visibly disturbed or shaken and it's plausible that during those few seconds he decided to go back and "punish," if you will, the incapacitated individual both for his accomplice having got away and out of anger. If this case actually makes it to trial it will all come down to the jury's interpretation of just how long someone needs to "pre-meditate" murder or what exactly defines a "crime of passion" (Second Degree).

If it does go to trial it will be a very interesting jury selection process. Most Oklahomans are social conservatives but political liberals. If the case were tried in rural Oklahoma, there's no way you could get a jury to convict as most of the rural Oklahomans are as entrenched Second Amendment supporters as anyone you could find in the NRA (I grew up in rural Oklahoma). However, as Oklahoma County encompasses all of the Oklahoma City metro and some of the other suburbs, the per capita population of Second Amendment zealots decreases quite a bit. Not to mention the fact that Oklahoma City will obviously have the highest proportion of minorities, be it African American, Hispanic, or Asian, than other other area in Oklahoma and it's likely that those jurists would be more inclined to sympathize with the victim and not the shooter.

 

[Morcheeba]

Now let me tell you something. Someone breaks into my house, armed ready to hurt me or my family, and I'm able to subdue them, I'm not calling the cops. I'm going to tie them up, throw them in the truck of my car and take them to an undisclosed location where I would inflict such atrocities on them they are going to beg me to kill them.

Then there's something wrong with your head and you may want to seek medical attention. To gain pleasure out of such horrid acts makes you no better than the perpetrator.

Like I said earlier, I have defended beating a man to death if I were to find myself in that situation, scared for my life, alone, armed with a bat and unable to stop myself once I swung the first hit. Difference being, if the ROBBER were to be knocked out after my first hit I WOULD call the cops and have them dispatched, I would then stand over top of the perpetrator ensuring that the man doesn't wake. I could never find it in me to drag the man off for some twisted type of torture, OR smash his skull in while he's laying there helpless.

The only chance there would be for me to act in such an immoral inhumane way is if I were acting in a way to punish a man for lets say, raping my child, or torturing my child until death or spouse for that matter. Of course the likelihood of my coming into a intimate and private setting with the person that committed such crimes are slim-to-none.

I would be charged, and although in hindsight I would take it back because it's not worth further destroying my life and inhibiting me from ever fully recovering a life for myself. That's a waste of my life. Not-to-mention it's not MY right.. I haven't been afforded that right.

 

[Tomasello]

The only chance there would be for me to act in such an immoral inhumane way is if I were acting in a way to punish a man for lets say, raping my child, or torturing my child until death or spouse for that matter.

This is all I'm saying. It's not a matter of it being something I would enjoy doing because I probably would at best just kill him and make it look like self defense. I think I really would torture him if he raped my kid in front of me though. I wouldn't lose a second of sleep over it either. Someone breaks into my home and tries to hurt me, my spouse, and/or my children, I'm going to make sure he never does it again to anyone.

The scum of the world are no different then crazy dogs. They bite you once and they got to be put down. I'm not going to let some liberal judge give him 18 months in the slammer and then I spend the rest of my life watching my back to see if this guys going to come after me or my family for getting him lock up. Fuck that.

 

[Morcheeba]

This is all I'm saying. It's not a matter of it being something I would enjoy doing because I probably would at best just kill him and make it look like self defense. I think I really would torture him if he raped my kid in front of me though. I wouldn't lose a second of sleep over it either. Someone breaks into my home and tries to hurt me, my spouse, and/or my children, I'm going to make sure he never does it again to anyone.

The scum of the world are no different then crazy dogs. They bite you once and they got to be put down. I'm not going to let some liberal judge give him 18 months in the slammer and then I spend the rest of my life watching my back to see if this guys going to come after me or my family for getting him lock up. Fuck that.

Yes but that act is much much worse than attempted armed robbery, especially considering the kid that was chosen to pay for their dirty deeds wasn't armed and hadn't actually harmed anyone.

Also considering I had said this man is experienced in handling terrible situations and has the know-how to properly use weapons and properly incapacitate threats... he did not use his better judgment.

I also did say I understand that given the circumstances many thoughts would obstruct better judgment, but after viewing the way in which the shopkeeper decided to handle the situation, he deserves punishment himself, he seemed to be very much in control of his actions and chose to ignore his better judgment.

I can respect your feelings on wanting to brutalize a disgusting monster for horrendous immoral treacherous crimes, but this is just not one of those situations. Those were two very stupid kids, stupid means they also are dangerous, but the threat was removed when the armed kid took off, and the threat obviously wasn't too much a concern if the shopkeeper felt it safe enough to drop his weapon and turn his back on the wounded kid.

There are a number of things that man could have done, he could have walked over and shot the kid once more but in the shin, or in the ankle.. in the knee, in the thigh.. once in any one of those spots would pretty much guarantee he would not be getting away anytime soon. BUT it would also guarantee this kid would be able to see his family again, possibly MAYBE learn from his actions. I can't say the shopkeeper KNEW that... but for anyone to argue that he didn't know would be just as stupid a comment.

What this shop keeper is despicable.

 

[Tomasello]

Also considering I had said this man is experienced in handling terrible situations and has the know-how to properly use weapons and properly incapacitate threats... he did not use his better judgment.

There are a number of things that man could have done, he could have walked over and shot the kid once more but in the shin, or in the ankle.. in the knee, in the thigh.. once in any one of those spots would pretty much guarantee he would not be getting away anytime soon. BUT it would also guarantee this kid would be able to see his family again, possibly MAYBE learn from his actions. I can't say the shopkeeper KNEW that... but for anyone to argue that he didn't know would be just as stupid a comment.

If your saying he should of known better because of his training then you need to understand that whether it be police or military, they are trained such that when they encounter an imminent threat and have no choice but to discharge their weapon then you shoot to kill. There is no such thing as shooting to incapacitate. Every shot is a kill shot. Now once he was obviously not longer a threat then yeah all of a sudden he "did something wrong".

What he SHOULD of done was discharged the entire magazine at once on the dirt bag THEN he would of been all set. Unfortunately he was saving his bullets for the other criminal who got away.

Too bad.

 

[Morcheeba]

If your saying he should of known better because of his training then you need to understand that whether it be police or military, they are trained such that when they encounter an imminent threat and have no choice but to discharge their weapon then you shoot to kill. There is no such thing as shooting to incapacitate. Every shot is a kill shot. Now once he was obviously not longer a threat then yeah all of a sudden he "did something wrong".

What he SHOULD of done was discharged the entire magazine at once on the dirt bag THEN he would of been all set. Unfortunately he was saving his bullets for the other criminal who got away.

Too bad.

You're missing the point. It was not up to him to make the decision whether that kid was to live or die.

After he shot him once and went about chasing the other, or grabbing another weapon all in a fairly calm manner, he altered the situation from self defense to murder. Like I said earlier, if he was acting in self defense and literally scared for his life he wouldn't have turned his back on him and disarmed himself, he wouldn't have walked to stand over top of the immediate threat putting himself at further risk of injury and kept behind the counter with his gun drawn. He SHOULD have announced the kid stay down or he WOULD shoot again.. he decided instead to execute him.

So yeah.. he was in the wrong.

To add, IF it had been an officer who shot this kid in the street, then seeing him struggle to get up shot him 5 more times in the stomach ultimately killing him, kid being unarmed, the cop would face consequences.. I don't want to say WHAT charges if any he /she may get, because I know cops seem to get away with a lot more than any citizen would be allowed in the exact same situation. None-the-less, it would also be murder. There would be a wicked outcry from the community as well.