The unfortunate fact of the matter is that with today's so-called "justice" system, many people feel this is the only course to take when someone invades their property, because society has given the invader more rights than the homeowner--in all likelihood, this man would've been successfully sued for damages had the burglars lived. No, I'm not condoning his actions, but our legal system has become so compromised and fickle, people feel they can't take the risk of going to court with living witnesses. In this particular case, if the homeowner wasn't such a moron, waiting a day to report, then basically bragging about every last detail, the outcome would've probably gone differently. This situation could've been avoided if there was more logic, reason, and honor in today's courtrooms.
I'm sorry, but our admittedly too-often inept justice system in absolutely no way justifies murdering teenagers.
Try again.
That guy is gonna fry!! Now I do agree that the kids needed to be taught a lesson but they did not need to be executed. I don't have too much sympathy for those kids because after all they were breaking into another mans house for no good reason. But I cannot see how the homeowner sees it fit to shoot them multiple times, up close to the chin at that and then claim "I shot them more times then I needed". Not to mention that he wrapped their bodies up in a tarp and waited a day to notify the police.
They still have families, who will sue just as quickly.
A home invasion is a no-win situation for all involved. You're almost always better off trying to avoid a confrontation, if you can.
Never say that you were shooting "only to injure" the person. The laws are that you are only allowed to shoot out of fear for your life, and if you really felt your life was in danger, you would not simply "shoot to injure" - you would shoot to stop the threat. Your attorney will be able to further explain this to you
well the latter will never work, might as well just ask criminals to quit committing crimes, i think sitting at home on your couch watching tv is about the best you can do when it comes to avoiding confrontation, after that point anything that happens is upon the intruder.....
yeah that happens, and shouldn't, but with that said, the families have a much much harder time trying to sue if the intruder is dead unless is was extremely negligent or something like this guy did like waiting days and executing them .... most of the law suits that actually win in court in these cases, is where the robber/burglar or what have you is alive to testify on their own behalf, unless the shooter was way over the top or over reacted the surviving member hardly ever win in court if the intruder is dead, most of the time when they win these cases the intruder is on life support or paralyzed..rarely do they win if the guy is dead....
that said
6 Tips on How to React After Shooting a Home Intruder - wikiHow
if you have the time and the tactical advantage like this guy did, there are always options to simply killing them outright (and his post-shooting actions speak volumes about how 'justified' he thought he was).
I won't put my safety at risk by "sitting on the couch" and doing nothing, but I likewise won't just shoot first and ask questions later.
Leaving an invader alive is asking for them to come back better LAWYERED and with a JUDGE.
His tactical advantage is that he is in the basement when the invaders came in and they don't know that he is down there