92-year old vet kills a man with one shot

110 posts

Flag Post

This is why you shouldn’t be disrespecting old people. they could have been a WWII veteran, such as Earl Jones.

Article here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57506377-504083/earl-jones-92-year-old-kentucky-farmer-and-world-war-ii-veteran-fatally-shoots-home-intruder-report-says/

 
Flag Post

A bit silly to kill them, really. I didn’t read anything about them being armed- I personally would have gone for the legs, seeing as in that sort of situation, I’d have the element of surprise. Still, nice shot.

 
Flag Post

i don’t see what’s so difficult about pointing a gun at someone, pulling a trigger and actually hitting them. i’m not impressed.

otherwise i don’t care either way. they were probably just some kids being stupid, and not out to murder someone. i bet at the first sound of any resident they’d have fled. definitely at the sound of a gunshot.

probably simply too bad their little adventure had a fatal end. probably not much more to the story.

but it is a very interesting discussion about how far you can go in self-defence. i bet different cultures have different ideas about that…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

i don’t see what’s so difficult about pointing a gun at someone, pulling a trigger and actually hitting them. i’m not impressed.

It’s really situational, like how far away something is, how big it is, the conditions (bad gun condition, maybe wind if it’s far away), whether or not you were actually aiming, etc.

 
Flag Post

Killing is fine in self defense.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by QuabbinHiker:

Killing is fine in self defense.

Good to know, now I can go back and plan that killing spree some more…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by QuabbinHiker:

Killing is fine in self defense.

At what “point” do ya consider someone to be “offensive”?
 
Flag Post

that’s why i keep jabbing at people with insults and threats and stuff like that, touching and displacing their stuff, pulling their hair etc., until they attack me and i can kill them in self-defence.

 
Flag Post

The idea of using a gun for self-defense isn’t far-fetched, but Jones didn’t know the men’s intentions, so I wouldn’t justify him killing the victim.

 
Flag Post

I’m pretty sure it isn’t that simple to fire a gun, Omega. There’s a reason why there’s training in the military for gun control, only because a thug can fire a gun doesn’t mean he’s pin-point accurate. Self defense is only needed in a dire situation. For Example, someone pulls out a knife on you, or someone wants to kick your ass. Now I’m not saying that you shoot someone if they’re going to beat you up, not even if they pull a knife on you. There’s martial arts or self defense classes for a reason. Earl didn’t know that the guy wasn’t armed.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by 1132:

A bit silly to kill them, really. I didn’t read anything about them being armed- I personally would have gone for the legs, seeing as in that sort of situation, I’d have the element of surprise. Still, nice shot.

And you probably would have missed. You always aim center mass, as this soldier was probably trained to do.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

i don’t see what’s so difficult about pointing a gun at someone, pulling a trigger and actually hitting them. i’m not impressed.

For a 90’s + man, I’m pretty impressed. I hope I’m that mentally acute when I’m older.

 
Flag Post

That is pretty impressive, and completely justified.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Lightningcould:

I’m pretty sure it isn’t that simple to fire a gun, Omega. There’s a reason why there’s training in the military for gun control, only because a thug can fire a gun doesn’t mean he’s pin-point accurate.

There’s training in the military because you are up against more than just some thug that’s trying to make a living off you.
Sure you might encounter some people who don’t know how to use guns too well, but often times you are being fired at by Automatic weapons, snipers and bombs.

Plus on top of that, the gun this guy used vs the guns most military personnel use are much different.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Zachary_Greene:
Originally posted by Lightningcould:

I’m pretty sure it isn’t that simple to fire a gun, Omega. There’s a reason why there’s training in the military for gun control, only because a thug can fire a gun doesn’t mean he’s pin-point accurate.

There’s training in the military because you are up against more than just some thug that’s trying to make a living off you.
Sure you might encounter some people who don’t know how to use guns too well, but often times you are being fired at by Automatic weapons, snipers and bombs.

Plus on top of that, the gun this guy used vs the guns most military personnel use are much different.

Well yeah, when a thug uses an automatic gun he’s bound to hit someone, either injure them or kill them.

 
Flag Post

So, in summary of the story (as reported)…

Man hears intruder(s) in basement of house… not currently a threat.
No mention in story of man calling the police.
Man decides sit at exit to basement and shoot on sight (rather than, say, laying at the top of the stairs, issuing a challenge and shooting if necessary)
Man kills one intruder… two more escape (taking the body with them!)

As the story concludes “Authorities are continuing to investigate the shooting. Kentucky law allows the use of physical force if someone believes it’s needed to prevent criminal trespass, robbery or burglary in their house.”

I can’t see how he would rationally believe the use of deadly force was needed to prevent the burglary based on the information provided in the story… sure, if he’d yelled out as the intruder came through the basement door and held him at gunpoint (or shot if the intruder reached for something that could be a weapon) fair enough but, I’d expect him to face charges of some sort over his, apparent, over-reaction.

That said, in the same circumstances, can’t say I wouldn’t of done something similar (human nature being what it is).

 
Flag Post

I’d like to know something…

What became of the old man? Was he let off free since it was in self defence? Or did he have to face some sort of sentence? (probably not prision for someone as old as him, but was anything done?)

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by fma1:

I’d like to know something…

What became of the old man? Was he let off free since it was in self defence? Or did he have to face some sort of sentence? (probably not prision for someone as old as him, but was anything done?)

Probably not. He was within the law.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by fma1:

I’d like to know something…

What became of the old man? Was he let off free since it was in self defence? Or did he have to face some sort of sentence? (probably not prision for someone as old as him, but was anything done?)

Probably not. He was within the law.

I think it might actually depend on what state he was in.

The article says Kentuky. Southern states have looser laws about this kind of stuff.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by donseptico:
As the story concludes “Authorities are continuing to investigate the shooting. Kentucky law allows the use of physical force if someone believes it’s needed to prevent criminal trespass, robbery or burglary in their house.”
 
Flag Post

But surely, even in the south, the force used must be proportionate to the risk faced, etc to remain within the law??? e.g. ya can’t just shoot and kill someone simply because they’ve broken in… if they surprise you, draw a gun/other weapon on you, etc… that’s another matter.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Lightningcould:
Originally posted by Zachary_Greene:
Originally posted by Lightningcould:

I’m pretty sure it isn’t that simple to fire a gun, Omega. There’s a reason why there’s training in the military for gun control, only because a thug can fire a gun doesn’t mean he’s pin-point accurate.

There’s training in the military because you are up against more than just some thug that’s trying to make a living off you.
Sure you might encounter some people who don’t know how to use guns too well, but often times you are being fired at by Automatic weapons, snipers and bombs.

Plus on top of that, the gun this guy used vs the guns most military personnel use are much different.

Well yeah, when a thug uses an automatic gun he’s bound to hit someone, either injure them or kill them.

I would seriously doubt you would ever come in contact with a criminal armed with an automatic weapon. We don’t have enough information to make a determination of what actually went on. It is possible that he did call out a warning that may have been loss in the retelling of what happened. Still, a 90 year old man does not have the physical ability to restrain the burglars and a firearm may have been all he could muster for his defense.

 
Flag Post

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by donseptico:

But surely, even in the south, the force used must be proportionate to the risk faced, etc to remain within the law??? e.g. ya can’t just shoot and kill someone simply because they’ve broken in… if they surprise you, draw a gun/other weapon on you, etc… that’s another matter.

I’m afraid not. That shithole of a state is / was my home. The law is quite clear. If they’ve used force to break in (broken a window counts as forceful entry – use of force) and you have every right to be in that property, then you are fully within your rights to use lethal force pretty much with impunity.

If you have reason to suspect they have gained forceful entry (you thought you locked the back door, and they must surely have forced it, as they’ve come in), even if they did not actually use force (you forgot to lock it, and they just turned the handle) then you have every legal right to open fire on them.

You also have legal protection if you decide to face them rather than retreat to safety. It is codified under the law that you are fully allowed, (and by culture expected) to stand and fight for your belongings, with use of deadly force. It is your choice to seek safety for yourself and your family, there is no legal mandate to do so.

The only times this law is waived are when the person is another resident of the house, or when it is a law enforcement official who has ‘broken in’. You shoot a cop and you are in serious trouble.

The same laws govern your car. You have a right to shoot anyone who enters it illegally.

Kentucky Castle Doctrine Law (PDF)

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by ColtArmy:
Originally posted by Lightningcould:
Originally posted by Zachary_Greene:
Originally posted by Lightningcould:

I’m pretty sure it isn’t that simple to fire a gun, Omega. There’s a reason why there’s training in the military for gun control, only because a thug can fire a gun doesn’t mean he’s pin-point accurate.

There’s training in the military because you are up against more than just some thug that’s trying to make a living off you.
Sure you might encounter some people who don’t know how to use guns too well, but often times you are being fired at by Automatic weapons, snipers and bombs.

Plus on top of that, the gun this guy used vs the guns most military personnel use are much different.

Well yeah, when a thug uses an automatic gun he’s bound to hit someone, either injure them or kill them.

I would seriously doubt you would ever come in contact with a criminal armed with an automatic weapon. We don’t have enough information to make a determination of what actually went on. It is possible that he did call out a warning that may have been loss in the retelling of what happened. Still, a 90 year old man does not have the physical ability to restrain the burglars and a firearm may have been all he could muster for his defense.

Three words: Go to L.A, they’re always carrying uzi’s or Ak’s, but I only live near there.