I've been following this case. Any thoughts on the verdict? Girlfriend's statements to a neighbor that they were gonna try and catch a burglar themselves (cause the cops weren't taking neighborhood burglaries seriously) must have been very damning. Prosecution claimed the deliberately left the garage door open with a purse inside to set up and opportunity to use deadly force. Watching the news coverage, one thing that was overwhelmingly obvious: the Missoulian was sure doing alot of heavy lifting for the prosecution in their coverage of this case.

In my opinion this situation was no more 'self-defense', than shooting deer over feeders is 'hunting'.

I really do not know all the details but if what I have read it true, and that is a big if, then shooting hand feed deer in a 10' by 3' cage might just be called hunting in comparison.

They bragged about the then bated a trap. That is not self defence in my book.

It's Missoula so who knows how it will go. He's been tried and convicted in the papers.

The SOB murdered that German kid...

Good analogy...

found guilty of deliberate homicide today

Yep, only police are allowed to engage in entrapment without suffering a penalty.

It wasn't the entrapment, it was the murder that happened along with it.

Yeah. There was absolutely no question what outcome the Missoulian wanted.

and the school kids that take part in "garage hoping" had best learn from this. What they have been doing is against the law but killing one of them is going way too far.

This guy is a jerk and needs to spend the rest of his life in the pen. We shall see.

Looks like murder to me.




Travis

It is - and that's not right.
Stay the he!! off my place if you have poor intentions!

Weird how Kaarma forced that kid to steal from him.

Break into a home in Montana, you might not make it out alive.

Police doing entrapment that resulted in the death of the subject would simply be self defense or at worst an accident. If there was anything wrong with police engaging in entrapment they would be arrested for kidnapping after it was determined that was what happened.

You really see the need to murder somebody that is trying to steal from you?



Travis

Your ability to cram Bluedreaux's AND ltpowell's dick into your mouth, at the same time, is uncanny.

You should jump out of the unemployment line and look into the porn industry.



Travis

If they break and enter and are stealing, I will defend my home and possessions.

I don't consider it murder. In any form or fashion.

I won't bait a lawbreaker into committing a crime so I can shoot him though. If they get shot at my place, it will be of their own volition, and due to their poor choices.

I don't know what happened in the case exactly. But I don't know what baiting has to do with it.

Shooting for theft is either justifiable or not. The circumstances of the thefted property are irrelevant to me.

You break into someone else's property with the intent to rob them you should be ready to pay the reaper.

Pretty simple, don't be break into other people's property and try to steal their schit or you might get shot for being a POS thief.

I think the baiting had to do with a deliberate intent to lure one of these burglars into his garage, so he could kill the burglar, and it would be justified.

If it wasn't for the deliberate baiting, and a homeowner encountered a burglar inside his home or garage and killed him, it wouldn't be a crime.

It's all about intent in this case.

I don't care if he left a million dollar pile of gold coins on the garage floor and lit it up with a glass of milk and a plate of cookies.

A thief is a thief is a thief. People lament the lack of unlocked doors and cars and the need for security measures for hearth and home, because of the lack of common decency not to steal someone elses schit. Were this more common practice them sticky fingers might stay put.

The justice is: there are no repeat offenders...

Hopefully the appeal will take place in Montana, not Missoula.

Kind of figured that's how it would go. Now the appeals begin.

Jason,

I don't disagree with your sentiment.

My observations/opinions on the outcome of the trial were based more on my limited understanding of the law.

Understood Shane by letter of the law dude may very well be phouced.

But damn, hard to swallow. I can tell you I'll not shed a tear for the departed.

Why do you hate the 2 officers?


Why do you keep bringing up the gay sex crap with me? I told you I have no issue with your homosexuality, but have no interest in engaging in the practice myself.

If I was pissin' about in someone else's garage, and they showed up, I'd expect there a good chance I'd get shot. I had no business being there, in another persons castle.

On a personal level, for me this situation falls into the old category of...play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

I don't know all the fine points either but supposedly there had been a number of these garage thefts in the area and the police took a ho hum approach to the whole theft thing. So Kaarma set a trap for the kids by putting stuff inside the garage and leaving the garage door open to entice the kids to walk in and steal stuff usually beer. When he heard somebody in the garage he opened fire without identifying his target. According to the news reports and what has come out of the trial he supposedly bragged to his neighbors he was going to do this and allegedly was on pot at the time of the shooting.

If the papers are even 1/32 right Kaarma set himself up for his own fall. The only good thing I can see with this is that with a Republican House and Senate in Montana and now a conviction it will be harder to overturn Montana's castle doctrine.

Tragedy all the way around, but anyone who is concerned about preserving legitimate 2nd. amendment rights should turn their back on the shooter.

Most likely the appeal will go all the way to the State Supreme Court where Kaarma will lose. He's going to jail it's just a matter for how long.

There is nothing illegitimate about shooting someone stealing your schit.

Illegal? Apparently so.

This is a perfect example of emotions overriding reason.

The shooting should stand or fall on its legality....Not on how immature, spiteful or stupid the shooter was.

Two wrongs involved in this one. Both are getting what they deserve.

I think if Kaarma had not bragged about what he intended to do, if he had not deliberately left the garage open and unattended, had not just blindly fired into the garage without identifying his target he might not have been in trouble.

Like it or not only the State can lie and entrap people with immunity NOT the citizen. And therein lies the rub.

I agree but in a liberal mecca like Missoula, home of the University of Montana, that ain't going to happen.

I agree with this (don't faint Derb ). What sets this case apart is that there was evidence that Khaarma (sp?) sought an opportunity for a confrontation in which he was fully armed and ready to rock. The evidence of possible baiting (deliberately leaving the garage door open and a purse inside with statements to neighbors of the plan---if in fact that was the evidence) really took the legs out from under his claim that he was in fear of his safety or that of his family. (You don't "set-up" and invite a confrontation while simultaneously claiming you're in fear of your life from that confrontation).

The leftists in Montana (which is what, about half the state now? ) want badly to do away with the Castle Doctrine, but in reality this case showed that the Castle Doctrine worked, i.e., the jury did not buy the defense argument made in reliance on the Castle Doctrine. Of course, this assumes the jury got it right, but on the facts I've been able to ferret out of the very one-sided media coverage, it appears the jury did get it right. Frankly, though, I'd have preferred a Voluntary Manslaughter conviction over deliberate murder.

My .02 worth.


Jordan

P.S. What the &*^*&(*% you Montana boys doing letting all those libs take over your state. You boys seriously ^&%&%^'d up.

my understanding is that in MT. lethal force can only be used to defend human life.

two different dumbasses ran into each other, one is dead, and one is toast.

I hope all the high schoolers that taught the german kid to steal beer feel good about themselves.

the shooter apparently had a few run-ins with the law previous, including in Seattle.

I think the high schoolers had stolen some of his pot.

IF I had pot in my house, I'd damn sure lock up the house.

Sycamore

Point well taken. The homeowner may have been rightfully convicted, but on the other hand, little hard to argue the dumb [bleep] (burglar) didn't have it coming. You burg people's homes and you assume one helluva lot of risk---including the risk that one of those homes might be armed by somebody looking for an excuse to kill your punk burglar, dope-smoking ass.

This is wisdom.

One of the often repeated statements of 2nd Amendment advocates is "We don't need more gun laws--just better enforcement of the ones we already have."

Kaarma was pissed off because somebody broke into his garage and committed a petty crime. He was also pissed because the police didn't do what he wanted them to do. He made a plan and carried it out, and a young kid lost his life due to Kaarma's (over re-) actions.

I hope he spends the rest of his life in jail, and I hope lawful, responsible gun owners applaud the courts for sending him there.

...and I hope the non- gun owning public sees us (the responsible gun owners) practicing what we preach, that is, appreciating the enforcement of the gun laws we already have.

Murder?! Don't steel!

You are a moron!

Was there any evidence or claim that when the home-owner confronted the burglar, the burglar attacked or threatened the home-owner?

not that I am aware of, but this is just from the news, bias and all.

No.

To the contrary, four shots were fired, three in rapid succession at belt height, then a pause before the 4th was fired at head height. The movement was from right to left as the kid was trying to run out of the garage.

To the point, Kaarma took time to adjust for the final, lethal shot.

I believe that most responsible gun owners recognize if you want to set a trap and shoot, it better be at an animal. Shooting an intruder that you have gone to the trouble of making it possible for entry, with "bait" in plain sight, is not going to stand up with any jury anywhere in this country. Stand your ground has nothing to do with entrapment. Two lives have been lost or destroyed here and that is truly sad.

^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Sounds like this dumb a$$ planned this. Pretty hard to justify. You just can't shoot kids because they are stealing your stuff. The confront you, scare you, threaten you- maybe but this moron deserve this judgement.

Montana has always been a somewhat liberal state at least in the western part of the state. It goes all the way back to unions, miners and the copper kings. However, like every state we have a university system and like every state the system turns out liberals by the train load.

That's how I understand it too.

I should be able to leave my doors open but I can not due to the people who would steal everything.

Apparently not. According to reports the home owner just open fire without identifying his target or receiving any threats from the target.

That's true. Doors have to locked at all times. I've had people just walk into my house before. I lock all doors at all times unless I'm going in or out. That's just the way it is.

Truth be told, I got no room to preach, bein' in Kalifornia and all. Thankfully I'm not from this communist hell hole. Counting the days till we're out. 4-8 more years depending.


Jordan

Montana law
45-3-103. Use of force in defense of occupied structure. (1) A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the use of force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry into or attack upon an occupied structure.
(2) A person justified in the use of force pursuant to subsection (1) is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if:
(a) the entry is made or attempted and the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent an assault upon the person or another then in the occupied structure; or
(b) the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony in the occupied structure.

Comes down to reasonably believes.

That's the Castle Doctrine and it certainly doesn't apply to Kaarma.

Quick Reply Used:

For those pro shooting; do you have a kid? Could you imagine when they're young they do something really stupid? You never know when the shoe's going to be on the other foot.

I'm not pro or anti. It's a messed up case for sure. I did my share of stupid schit as a kid, but it didn't involve going into other peoples houses (or garages) and stealing anything. If my kid were to pull a stunt like that then I will have failed them miserably as a father.

If my kid did something stupid and was killed in the process for whatever reason I would be broken up but accept the judgement be it from God or man.

These kids thought it was a game and didn't realize they were breaking the law against burglary. Pure stupid and one of them paid for it with his life.

Personally, if we treated burglary like the old timers used to treat horse thieves there be a lot less burglary.

But you don't have kids (at least you've stated as much on here before) so what you would or wouldn't do in regards to anything your kid would do is just blather.

Stick to faeries and pixies.

Well, actually, it does apply. Unfortunately, it applies to convict, not exonerate him.

The way I read the story, again this assumes there is any truth to the media reports, is he set up the whole thing as a trap to entice and someone into an open garage so he could kill them.

Mind you the dead kid did enter the garage and thus was trespassing but I still don't see self defence or castle doctrine in this case. Looks like the jury didn't see it either.

That was my thought as well, DD couldn't have a kid and say that. Billy G, for the record, I've never stolen anything, but like you, did some dumb chit when young.

Not just MT but the US of A.

Not in Texas. Not in Washington.

Kaarma's downfall is that he told several people what he was going to do before he actually did it.

And threatening to shoot the Trugreen guy didn't help his case.

Any wonder why he was immediately charged with deliberate homicide?

It was his mouth (and character) that led to his conviction more so than the actual act.

You have 48 to go.

Fair Chase:

What was the Trugreen guy? What was that about? I heard Kaarma had a criminal record in WA, but it was kept from the jury (to the Missoulian made it first page news a week before jury selection). Figures


Jordan

I do not know the laws of the other 48. I do know the laws of the two states I regularly carry.

However in my book finding someone in a shed, I don't have a garage, would not automatic be a death sentence. A threat to the well being of my family or friends would be. If you are in a state that has broader laws on the use of deadly force then it is a decision you have to make. I have thought about and made my decisions.

About 3 years ago I defended a murder case (successfully) in which the trespasser was found on a third story balcony in the middle of the night. He then climbed down to a second story porch and stood on the railing. The female homeowner was freaked, had two little twin girls in bed on the third floor and called her ex-husband to come over ASAP. Th ex lived a few doors down. He had the trespasser at gunpoint and told him he was armed and don't move. So the stupid trespasser (later determined to be drunk) jumped down from the railing to the floor of the 2nd story porch (he had been on the third story window peeking) onto the same level as the homeowner. The ex-husband was inside the house, pointing a .357 mag out the window maybe 6 feet away from where the trespasser was standing (on the railing) and when the trespasser jumped, he drilled him.

Turned out the trespasser was an intoxicated 25 year old kid looking for a piece or ass (which he'd gotten once a month or two earlier) from the ex-husband's wife. Course, the ex-husband didn't know that and didn't have a clue who the trespasser was at the time of the shoot.

The argument that worked was, 2:00 in the morning, on the third and second floor of a house in a remote part of the county, a stranger peeking in the third story windows where your little girls are sleeping. What'sa reasonable parent to do? Trespasser could have been armed and could have been anyone, a rapist, a gang-banger, chi mo, who knows. Ex-husband gave him a firm order not to move and warned him he had a gun on him and would shoot and the kid jumped anyway.

Jury acquitted. Said it was a perfectly reasonable response from the ex-husband. We could not use California's Castle Doctrine (presumption that deadly force used inside the home against an intruder is lawful) because the trespasser was not inside the home.

Tragic case, actually. Alcohol, marijuana, trespassing and burglary is plain stupid when you don't have a clue whether the homeowner is armed or not.

Jordan

A trial witness (Trugeen employee) stated he was on the property (prior to the shooting) and was confronted with a shotgun in the early am by Kaarma asking who he was. Kaarma's 'partner' (female) as the media stated had to calm Kaarma down and apologize to the Trugreen employee.

Kaarma would have been found guilty in any city USA.

I am all for protecting yourself, your family and your property but this guy committed a crime and was properly found guilty.

Sounds legitimate to me.

But again, Kaarma told more than one person what he was going to do before he actually did it. Kaarma was hot headed and whose character had a large part to his conviction.

I do however have a problem with the community's support of Diede (German exchange student). He did not deserve to die but he was in fact committing criminal activities.

P.S. Kaarma lived in a very upscale community in Missoula.

Kaarma would not have been found not guilty with a million dollar attorney.

It was his 'character' that led to his conviction.

As a counter point as I know a bit about this case.

Guy went out to his driveway (after starting his SUV to warm-up) in the am before heading off to work and witnessed his SUV being stolen. As the SUV was speeding away he fired a single shot, killing the car thief. End result .... not guilty.

It's not necessarily the act but rather your character that is on trial.

http://www.examiner.com/article/spokane-jury-acquits-man-who-shot-car-theft-suspect

The Grand Prairie police (TX) placed a flatbed trailer (with a flat tire) loaded with brand new tires on the shoulder of Interstate 20. That night, they made 18 arrest for theft. A judge dismissed all 18 cases calling the endeavor; "entrapment".

The Fort Worth police placed a bicycle on a sidewalk next to a parking meter along a commercial (retail) street. (University Drive), however the bicycle had a tracking device hidden in it. The police followed the signal to a garage and made an arrest. This conviction stood.

The difference in these 2 cases is the Grand Prairie Police had "eyes on" even filming the thefts, while the Fort Worth police followed a tracking signal. Entrapment laws are confusing to me and I won't pretend to understand them, but in my opinion all of the arrests should have stood!

When I was a teen, MANY years ago, another case involved a store-owner who was burglarized multiple times. He set up a booby trap that killed the next intruder. He too, was convicted of murder. Doesn't make sense to me..., either you can protect your property or you can't.


DMc

The problem with that is the booby trap that killed the burglar.

You can't do that. In any state I know of. That's not considered "protecting your property" in the eyes of the law.

A guy in Mason Texas owned a fur buying business in the mid 80's, when fur prices were very strong. He kept getting burglarized and had lost thousands.

He got his 12 ga. and started sleeping at his warehouse. Sure enough the burglar came back for more. The owner shot and killed him. Grand Jury No-Billed him for legitimately protecting his business.

Is having 2-3 pit bulls in your fence a "booby trap"?
Common practice around here for dealing with metal theft on commercial sites.

This^

This too^

Fugg yeah!

Next stranger I see walk into my detached garage is gonna fugging die!

I'm gonna scream "PAY THE REAPER [bleep]!" as I send him to hell.



Travis

Here's Gruff standing over a 30 pack of warm High Life.

Yeah........ GFY wouldn't be appropriate under those circumstances.

"DON'T FEAR THE REAPER!!!!!!"

There is another thing to consider in this case. The US has laws that permit extradition of people that murder US citizens in a foreign nation (under certain circumstances). Germany does also and Markus Kaarma might be charged in Germany and the German government could request extradition. Probably unlikely, but possible.

CBS report: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/markus-kaarma-montana-man-convicted-in-german-exchange-students-death/

I am privvy to the amount of money Kaarma's family spent on this case. They have serious coin and you would not believe the amount spent. They had four lawyers!! Frankly, the lawyers treated Kaarma's family like a cash cow. Believe it or not, the amount spent was not far from a mil. That's all I'm gonna say on it.

Jordan

This a case of when a$$holes collide. I think Karma was nuts, and he did some really stupid things to hang himself. The kid deserved a good ass whippen, but I don't think he deserved to be shot (well, maybe with a load of salt rock).


What if that was a neighbor kid chasing his pet cat into Karma's garage? I believe in the castle doctrine and the right to self defense, but I think this was a case of neither.

The best lawyers in the world can't save you from your own stupid statements.

Two things: 1) Only a fool would set a trap like that for someone he knew wasn't a threat; and 2) Only a bigger fool would tell ANYONE about it beforehand if he did and give any kind of statement afterwards.

Whatever the facts of what the man actually did, given that the kid was clearly an intruder in another's home, there would never/could never have been a conviction without statements from the accused before and after the event. Ninety percent of the people in prison today would not be there if they could master one simple skill, shut up.

In that case the defense articulated that there was a perceived threat.

Not sure Kaarma's people could provide such an argument.



Travis

I don't think that's what caused the jury to reach the decision that they did.

The man that was shot did not enter an occupied building. I don't think the defense could provide any sort of proof that the garage was an occupied building.



Travis

Shortly after college dad and I were driven off Sam Rayburn by a thunderstorm on a July holiday weekend. I motored dads little bass rig up a long winding willow lined branch, tied up and we walked the trail through the woods to camp where we fried some fish. After eating we headed down to the boat where we found no rods or battery. I had two fenwick glass rods I made up with 5000 Cs and tackle box stolen.

How I wished I had returned a little earlier with my model 94.

The case hinged on this:

"Montana Shooting Sports Association President Gary Marbut said those laws were not in question during the Kaarma trial. Neither, he added, was the "Castle Doctrine" concept that a person is entitled to use lethal force in self-defense.

But a legal change that Marbut supported in the 2009 Legislature did get tested and come through with a good result, he said. That was a new law that required the prosecution to prove someone claiming self-defense was in fact guilty, instead of making the defendant prove innocence.

�That�s the standard that applied to the Kaarma trial, and the prosecution was able to meet that burden,� Marbut said."

http://missoulian.com/news/local/gu...85cb983-cbbc-5986-b336-8f4f5b401513.html

It's a fairly well known fact a lot of Missoula HS students go into garages in hopes of finding booze, which was apparently the German kids motivation.

Teenage kids do stupid and irresponsible things that don't deserve what is essentially an execution. If that's not true, we'd all have been executed by age 17...

I call BS on that. It would have been much younger...

except for all the stupid chit i and my friends did, two things we did not do were steal and go into strangers houses....yeah we destroyed chit but it belonged to one of us....we damn near killed each other in our stupidity but we werent stealing chit from people......

I don't have any biological children but I do have foster daughters and plenty of nieces and nephews. I'm one cold hearted bastard. If any of the kids I love and care about are going to go around and do stupid stuff like break into or walk into a garage with the purpose of stealing stuff and they get shot tough luck. Yes, I'll grieve for them but you will never ever hear me say they were the pillars of the community and didn't deserve to die. I don't buy into kids will be kids and kids shouldn't have to pay for doing stupid stuff. Stupid hurts. And no I was never ever a stupid kid. Beatings hurt but it helps prevent stupid.

That's true. I stand corrected.

That appears to be what happened.

I answered Billy Goat. I don't live in a bubble.

That also appears to be the case.

No.

You saved all your stupidity for adulthood.




Travis

We have all come across reports where game wardens use deer decoys to catch poachers committing all kinds of illegal acts similar to the GP police with their flat bed bait. How is it that the wildlife police are successful at getting convictions whereas the GP police could not? Is there more to the story with the GP police?

That has nothing to do with the case.

I don't know why people keep bringing it up.



Travis

DITTOS and in this situation based on your information I would have done the same thing.

Mostly because people don't contest wildlife convictions as that it is an administrative fine. In many places, it isn't even a violation of criminal law but an administrative fine.

TRUE!

The German kid did something stupid and it cost him his life.

Karma did something stupid and it cost him his life.

Lesson of the day: Let's not do stupid stuff. More than just two lives were ruined here.

Perhaps if more stupid and irresponsible teenage kids were "execution" before age 17 this country would be in better shape and the prisons would not be quite so full.

DITTOS!

The only convictions the Game Wardens got were from shooting off the road, and damage to the deer. No game laws were broken.

IIRC, a Judge in S.Texas ruled it entrapment and they stopped doing it.

I skipped straight to the end.

Is the guy with the most ironic last name ever still wrongfully convicted?

Most aren't sure.

Lots of posts about how nobody stole when they were kids though.

And if you want some friendly advice, don't go in Gruff's garage without some very explicit permission. He'll jump on his pale horse and ruin your day.



Travis

The real mistake here was failure to execute the latter of the 3 S's.

I once baited some kids that were stealing our mail. Didn't shoot anyone, but I got the issue taken care of.

I honestly don't think it would have changed the outcome.

From what I read of the defense, it was pretty weak. Outside of a state like TX, you're gonna hang.


Travis

That sucks some serious ass. In the early seventies, the 5000C was the best you could get, before the 5500C came out. I've still got my 5000 and my Dad's 5000C. I've also still got my Fenwick. In the mid-seventies I bought a Quick rod and reel, made in California, IIRC. It was a sweet rig. I was only in Jr. High, so buying it was not a small thing. Somebody ripped it off out of a Houston parking lot out of the back of my '69 Chevy C20 when I was working on the MKT railroad down there. That sucked too.

A friend of mine in North Idaho had a problem with some neighbors breaking into his garage and stealing stuff. He finally got fed up with it when his chain saw went missing so he took 5 gallons of gas and poured it all over the front of the neighbors house. He then stood there with a lighter in his hand and yelled bring out my stuff or I'm burning you out.

He told me stuff started coming out of that house that he had forgot he ever owned. He pretty much filled the bed of his Tacoma with his tools, power equipment and other stuff. He said the theft stopped after that.

He's a pretty well known hunting guide and runs a lot of hound hunts for cats and bear. His wife confirmed every bit of the story as he told it to me.

Bb

Lots of Oilfield Pumpers augmented their wages by making and selling "drip" gasoline, and kids were always stealing it. Cops couldn't be called because it was illegal to sell or use in cars or pickups.

Ol' Bill Jackson over at Squaw Mountain in Jack County knew that whoever was stealing his drip wasn't a kid, so he laced a barrel of it with Treatolite, a chemical used to treat crude oil to lower the B.S. level in the tank.

Next morning the offender's car was parked about 200 yards, pointed away from Bill's drip stash.

heheheh

I'm not advocating killing a kid, but some of the folks here going on about this whole affair sound a lot like Trayvon defenders...I mean, you know, if Trayvon had been like, white or whatnot.

I mean, isn't that always what the old baby-mama's always say, "he was a good boy, he wouldn't never hurt nobody or do nuffin' wrong,".

The cops set folks up all the time, but it was wrong for this dude to and wronger for him to tell people he was going to...kinda like a warning, "don't [bleep] with my [bleep],"?

If Billy Goat Gruff asks me to go into his garage, I ain't gonna.

What if it were a little different situation, like a little four year girl was lookimg for her little kitten and made a noise knocking over a pail or something? About a mid-level shotgun blast would take her head off with a shotgun blast. Would that be justified?
Jus ask'n

W. Bill

Is your avatar a pic of you?

My Dad, on his 18th birthday after coming home from a threshing
job on a farm in Malta, Montana about 1922.
My grandma promptly shaved the rest off.

Your dad was pointing a gun at the photographer?

Not even close. Trayvon was bashing a dude's head into the sidewalk, not taking stuff out of someone's garage.

I am not one to kill anyone I don't have to, especially over stuff.

YMMV

Probably not based on Kaarma's statements.

So that means you've killed a lot of folks not over stuff?

That appears to be a major problem with Kaarma he did not identify his target he just started shooting. He could have hit or killed anybody or anything in that garage.

You always have to identify your target.

Some little girl poking around in my garage for her kitchen in the middle of the night?

This whole affair from both sides could be placed in the,
Play stupid games column.

I don't know how a person can compare a case that involved the use of force within the confines of the law, to a case that involved the use of force outside the confines of the law.


Travis

I can tell you being burglarized does things to one's psyche.

Here's another idiotic statement that has nothing to do with the case.



Travis

Ummm.... no. Dumbfugg.

You have to do a little more than identify your target in order to justify the use of deadly force.



Travis

I hope no one here ever has to justify the use of deadly force.

Half would be ripe for a conviction based solely on their posts in this forum.

TIME TO PAY THE REAPER!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Travis

Lots?

Nice try though.

Edit: oil is "stuff" right? My bad....

This has to be one of the greatest legal minds of the 21st century.



Travis

I think you missed my point there Bludrou. Identify your target IS ONE OF THE BASIC hunting rules.I might be from Montana, but even I can see this was a big time [bleep] up on the part of the shooter.

This reads somewhat like the MN case, 'cept that guy had tarps ready, and needed a "finishing shot" based on his knowledge of ballistics.

http://www.startribune.com/255975891.html

I wonder how many posting here have done things as bad or worse than the kid that was shot to death in the garage? Or, have kids that have done similar things-

Make it simple for yourselves everyone.

Limit your people shooting to defense of innocent human beings from death or substantial bodily injury.

You will be less likely to end up wearing lipstick and braiding your cellmates hair.

mike r

NO, you don't. You have to reasonably believe in the need to use deadly force and in hindsight, a jury has to agree with you. Not identifying your target might undermine your defense, but then again (depending on the facts) it might be totally irrelevant.


Jordan

No you don't have to do a little more than identify your target?

Or no you don't have to identify there is a threat?




Travis

Basically, if you are concerned about the consequences of shooting, you haven't met the threshold for self-defense.

Pretty simple, huh?

I'm pretty sure you'll be concerned as fugg either way.



Travis

I thought you were gonna start sucking up to Texans due to your upcoming visit.

Okay, but if we're gonna steal BGG's suitcase of brew, YOU'RE going in first. I'll grab the beers and run whilst you pull down your pants and wiggle your ass at him. I'll save you a half dozen or so brewskis.

I know I would much rather have Billy goat as a neighbor than a bunch of German college kids, both of us can afford to buy our own beer, bullets and garages.

And I appreciate that in a man!

BGG for President or at least local Sheriff. Seriously, the dude can move in down here by me anytime.

I got another 45 days before I have to worry about that.



Travis

I avoid him like the plague.

And he doesn't buy actual beer. Just piss in a can.


Travis

He really can't afford any of that.

But if you want to vote for him, have at it.



Travis

Thank you gentlemen, but I'm afraid public office is unlikely in my future. Clark is the politician, I'm just the guy in the shadowed corner nursing his pitcher of draft. I'd be glad to have a rather large number of guys on here as neighbors. Of course neighbors for me are measured in miles away.

But.......
(and I see your point here Gruff)


If people think you might shoot their ass(if they be fuucking around....), they probably won't be fuucking around.

Those are the best kind of neighbors.

Most kids these days are too 'retarded' to know any better though.

Sam.

Don't make things complicated.

In my garage? MEET THE REAPER!



Travis

Thank God you left the E in there.

Bud Light just hit the screen.


I blame you both.....laughing

That's funny.

When I was a teen we never went into anyone's place to steal booze, or anything else.

Us younger teens pooled our money (that we earned) and gave it to an older teen (legal age was 18 then) to buy us some beer and wine.

We actually paid for our drink.

Same here Shane, we always knew a 'buyer'.

Get a 21 year old party buddy to get beer.

Or whoever else was dumb enough to help us out.



Fairly easy given our locale....grin

I hear ya....we had some 18 year-olds who were still in 10th grade.....grin

I've stolen beer from bunches of people.




Travis

Gruff's reading my last post and slowing loading the mag....




Travis

The guys who already had drivers licenses in junior high and didn't need to ride the bus...lol

It all averages out, or at least it should.

I bought a 6 pack of Red Lodge Jack's 90 last Sunday.

Still have one left.

Obvious indication of a workaholic.

Seek help.



Travis

Note to self, never buy Red Lodge Jack's 90

Way back in the olden days (70's) I heard about "this guy" who stole wine from the Circle K that was right behind his house just a half block away.

He'd go into the store with four or five friends wearing a ski coat (winter time) and everyone would disperse throughout the store. "This guy" would walk down the wine isle, grab a bottle of Boone's Farm, stuff it down the front of his pants (neck first), and put both hands in his pockets. Then he'd walk up to cash register when another guy actually bought something and walk out with the crew.

It worked every time but "this guy" only did it a couple of times before realizing just how stoopid this was. When "this guy" turned eighteen all of that kind of stoopid criminal BS came to an end ... forever.

Dude it's too dark to work half the time. PLENTY of time for beer.

I still have one left because it was Bud Light ever since!


Jack's 90 is like an alcoholic steak dinner.


Sorry for the hijack.




Rustlers back in the Day used to swing from a rope and they still tried to pull chit.

Luring someone into your open garage to "catch them" is a very bad premise from the start.
When we had thefts from autos in public parking lots, we set out the VARDA car.
We had one empty electronics box in plain view with one of three car doors left unlocked by "mistake". There were a number of ways to trigger the alarm - usually we alarmed the open door. When the perp opened the door, a radio broadcast was made to the area cars. Usually though there was one unmarked watching from a distance away. If a foot chase ensued, which was usual, the perp would drop the box and claim he was innocent. Except we had invisible powder on the box and everywhere the perp touched himself would turn purple. We had some odd looking mugshots of purple faced dudes. It was all pretty humorous and the thefts would subside for awhile.

But trying this at home is not good business.

It is all fine right up until you use lethal force. If he had captured the twerp and called the law he would have been cheered, instead he is going to spend a long time in jail.

there will never be a shortage of folks that want to steal your chit. There never will be a time when the police can/will deal with them all.
Keep your doors and windows locked, and your magazines full.

Brings back an old memory.

Once back in high-school,being a foolish teenager, my best friends dad worked for A.Busch. He got cases of beer, free allotments, and his basement had cases of beer stacked up. We foolishly thought he would never miss one case out of all those. We were wrong. We didn't get shot, but we did get our asseskicked by that old man.

Sure wasn't going to tell my pop, because he would kick my butt again. LOL

Agreed.