# Not My Idea of Self or Home Defense



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

Minn. man says he &#39;fired more shots than I needed&#39;



> Wetzel said that while the shootings happened on Thursday, Smith waited until Friday to report the deaths, explaining that "he didn't want to trouble us on a holiday."
> 
> In the complaint, Smith said he was in his basement when he heard a window breaking upstairs, followed by footsteps that eventually approached the basement stairwell. Smith said he fired when Brady came into view from the waist down.
> 
> ...


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

The simple fact is that these 2 teens invaded his home, it was well within his right to shoot them.
His only lapse was to not call 911 immediately.

If you don't want to get hurt or even possibly die than don't break into someone else's house.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

If the cops got them alive, the poor homeowner would be charged with something. So if you got to shoot.....


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

If this is not self/home defense... what would you have done instead?


----------



## wanda1950 (Jan 18, 2009)

I hope I would have held my fire as soon as they were down & disarmed.


----------



## wanda1950 (Jan 18, 2009)

TheMartianChick said:


> Minn. man says he 'fired more shots than I needed'


Coldblooded!! He put himself even lower than their level. Should have stopped when they were stopped.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

Apparently, the homeowner stopped the threat....

....and, then he murdered them.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Should use 12Ga. OO Buck much better.

big rockpile


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> His only lapse was to not call 911 immediately


No that was NOT his "ONLY lapse"

He'll be convicted of murder, and rightly so


----------



## flewism (Apr 2, 2007)

Cabin Fever said:


> Apparently, the homeowner stopped the threat....
> 
> ....and, then he murdered them.



That is what he did if the article is accurate.


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

It says he asked his neighbor about a lawyer, then asked him to call 911. It's hard to believe he spoke with lawyer before he gave THAT statement to the police.

He'll be convicted based on his own words. He did just about everything wrong.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

Well his first mistake was;

not using 1 shot kills.. At the suggested ranges they should have been one shot kills

2nd mistake, murdering them after disabling them.. 

But I'm torn on this.. Because if he had left them live, they would have sued him and he would have lost everything including his home.. I've seen it before where the criminal isn't held accountable for their actions.

But that is part of a larger problem , since we don't make criminals pay the price for their crimes anymore..


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

This is too serious an issue to be making wholesale decsions in any direction. The only thing that is clear from that article quote is it was a tragedy. Way not enough info.I've thought about the idea that a person who has strangers in his home is expected to put himself in danger to protect their lives. I know that at my age and condition, running away from an attacker is not a realistic option. 
And if I did shoot someone and not kill them, would it be reasonable to think thay could no longer hurt me? If they had a gun or were not a "damaged" as I thought, they could still kill. It depends on who you are- an 80 year old woman faced with a young male has a whole lot less options to defend herself than a 30 year old male athlete. 
Expecting someone to make totally rational decisions in that situation is unrealistic. 
It is hard in a jury room with much more information to make a decision about someone, much less to do it based on a news report where the reporter's goal is to pick and choose the most sensational parts that suits his own biases.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

The Minnesota law states that one can use lethal force in a home invasion if the intruder is in the process of committing a felony. (I don't agree with this law, btw)

Don't ask me how one determines whether or not a felony is being committed before one takes action. :shrug:


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

beowoulf90 said:


> Well his first mistake was;
> 
> not using 1 shot kills.. At the suggested ranges they should have been one shot kills
> 
> ...


I agree with this, in theory. My brother is a veteran PO (10 days til he retires), and he tells me it isn't uncommon for an untrained person in this kind of situation to empty his weapon. They take that into account, and it is considered reasonable, if done as one action.

The idea of a kill shot after they were disabled is troubling. You even used the word "murdering" and that is the problem. That's how most reasonable people will see this, in my opinion.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> His only lapse was to not call 911 immediately.


Did you miss this part? I see three more HUGE lapses in this short snippet alone.



> Smith said he dragged Brady's body into his basement workshop, then sat down on his chair. After a few minutes, Kifer began coming down the stairs and he shot her as soon as her hips appeared, he said.
> 
> After shooting her with both the Mini 14 and the .22-caliber revolver, he dragged her next to Brady. With her still gasping for air, he fired a shot under her chin "up into the cranium," the complaint says.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

Home Harvest said:


> I agree with this, in theory. My brother is a veteran PO (10 days til he retires), and he tells me it isn't uncommon for an untrained person in this kind of situation to empty his weapon. They take that into account, and it is considered reasonable, if done as one action.
> 
> The idea of a kill shot after they were disabled is troubling. You even used the word "murdering" and that is the problem. That's how most reasonable people will see this, in my opinion.


I don't think I'm quite following what you are saying, but will try to explain what I meant..

He by his own words (according to the article) killed them after dragging them to another location, thus murdering them. If he could drag them he had time to search for a weapon or to disarm them.. 

As to the one shot kill, that is meant on the first shot that didn't kill them, but only wounded /disabled them.. Any shot after that is not what I was talking about.. I'm referring to the shot from the bottom of the stairs to the intruder. 
Does that clarify what I meant?


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

I can only imagine his state of mind after having his home invaded multiple times (I've heard family say 6 times). The last time they stole $10,000 worth of stuff. And then there is the psychological impact of having the security of your home destroyed. You wake at every strange sound as you wait for it to happen again.

Here's an old guy who only wanted to be left alone to enjoy his retirement and that was taken from him by the people who repeatedly broke into his house and stole his belongings. They also stole his peace of mind.

And on the other hand you have 2 young people who chose to break into his house to steal. They were young enough to turn their lives around but now they're dead.

Everyone lost that day. The young thieves lost their lives and chances are this man will spend some of his remaining time in prison.

To the people who say that once they were down they were no longer a threat how can you say for sure that a person on the ground doesn't have a handgun on them and won't pop you in the back when you turn away from them?


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Theres more to the story than meets the eye, why after all those shots did the second teen keep coming?...If they were hopped up on drugs he might have been reasonable.
just kids in the wrong house? WAAAAAY different.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

beowoulf90 said:


> He by his own words (according to the article) killed them after dragging them to another location, thus murdering them. If he could drag them he had time to search for a weapon or to disarm them..


:umno:
There is no way to better disarm a threat than kill it.
OBVIOUSLY he had to deal with a second threat(intruder) perhaps he didnt feel like he had time to run out and buy a set of cuffs? After the second was down did he hear other sounds making him think he might have to deal with a third?


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

beowoulf90 said:


> I don't think I'm quite following what you are saying, but will try to explain what I meant..
> 
> He by his own words (according to the article) killed them after dragging them to another location, thus murdering them. If he could drag them he had time to search for a weapon or to disarm them..
> 
> ...


Yes, I understand. I thought you meant "one shot, one kill" like the old sniper motto. My point was simply that multiple shots don't necessarily lead to murder charge. The delay, or lapse in this case is a serious problem. I think we both agree.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

fantasymaker said:


> :umno:
> There is no way to better disarm a threat than kill it.
> OBVIOUSLY he had to deal with a second threat(intruder) perhaps he didnt feel like he had time to run out and buy a set of cuffs? After the second was down did he hear other sounds making him think he might have to deal with a third?


I won't argue that. 

I also wasn't there.. This is only suppositions/hypothetical.. So don't take my responses as concrete.. Because they aren't ...

Like I said in my first post, I'm torn.. Because I know what the article says that he killed them after wounding and disabling them. I know had they lived, they would have sued him.. I've seen it before... I also think that at 10 to 15 foot estimated range from the bottom of the stairs to the top of the stairs, he should have had kill shots, one on each of the intruders..


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

Home Harvest said:


> Yes, I understand. I thought you meant "one shot, one kill" like the old sniper motto. My point was simply that multiple shots don't necessarily lead to murder charge. The delay, or lapse in this case is a serious problem. I think we both agree.


I agree I don't know if murder charges should be brought.. But I would have to think real hard before I said they shouldn't be brought.. 
How much time between the first intruder to the second?
From the article it seems like he had enough time to drag the first one away and kill him..

Then he wounded the girl.. He then stuck the barrel under her chin to fire the killing shot..
So either she is wounded severely or is bound and unable to fight or something, if he could get that close to fire the shot...

No I'm not siding with the intruders, personally they should be dead for their violation of this mans castle... But the law is different from my beliefs..


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

fantasymaker said:


> :umno:
> There is no way to better disarm a threat than kill it.
> OBVIOUSLY he had to deal with a second threat(intruder) perhaps he didnt feel like he had time to run out and buy a set of cuffs? After the second was down did he hear other sounds making him think he might have to deal with a third?


Very good points, except that isn't what he said (according to the article). Until we see something different we only have his statement (or the portions published) to judge by.

After the teen fell down the stairs, Smith said he shot him in the face as he lay on the floor.

"I want him dead," the complaint quoted Smith telling an investigator

"Smith described it as 'a good clean finishing shot,'" according to the complaint

"If you're trying to shoot somebody and they laugh at you, you go again," Smith told investigators, according to a criminal complaint filed Monday

If he just said one strange thing, that would be one thing. Unfortunately, this guy ignored everything ever written about what not to do after shooting someone in your home. I hope there is more to the story, but who knows...


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

fantasymaker said:


> Theres more to the story than meets the eye, why after all those shots did the second teen keep coming?


I wondered that too. Doesn't make sense. But the shooter pretty much convicted himself with his own statements, regardless of any other circumstances we don't know about.


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

He is in a lot of trouble.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

fishhead said:


> I can only imagine his state of mind after having his home invaded multiple times (I've heard family say 6 times). The last time they stole $10,000 worth of stuff. And then there is the psychological impact of having the security of your home destroyed. You wake at every strange sound as you wait for it to happen again.
> 
> Here's an old guy who only wanted to be left alone to enjoy his retirement and that was taken from him by the people who repeatedly broke into his house and stole his belongings. They also stole his peace of mind.
> 
> ...


Some good points, FH.
This is a great test case for an uncompromised jury of twelve of the man's peers.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Don't ask me how one determines whether or not a felony is being committed before one takes action.


The home invasion IS a felony. 
Here, we can shoot *through a door* to stop an "invasion"


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The home invasion IS a felony.
> Here, we can shoot *through a door* to stop an "invasion"


Same thing here.
There have been several people shot through a closed door or window.
No charges against the shooter.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The home invasion IS a felony.
> Here, we can shoot *through a door* to stop an "invasion"


Just being the devil's advocate here. Say, a half frozen elderly person leaves her stalled vehicle in the middle of nowhere on a subzero night. She enters an unlocked home to keep herself from freezing to death - is this a felony? I don't believe it is a felony even though the started homeowners may assume what is happening is a home invasion and may take lethal action.


----------



## scooter (Mar 31, 2008)

fishhead said:


> I can only imagine his state of mind after having his home invaded multiple times (I've heard family say 6 times). The last time they stole $10,000 worth of stuff. And then there is the psychological impact of having the security of your home destroyed. You wake at every strange sound as you wait for it to happen again.
> 
> Here's an old guy who only wanted to be left alone to enjoy his retirement and that was taken from him by the people who repeatedly broke into his house and stole his belongings. They also stole his peace of mind.
> 
> ...


I've been mulling these same things over in my mind ever since I heard this on the news.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

FWIW, the following is the relative MN State statute:

*609.065 JUSTIFIABLE TAKING OF LIFE.*
The intentional taking of the life of another is not authorized by section 609.06, except when necessary in resisting or preventing an offense which the actor reasonably believes exposes the actor or another to great bodily harm or death, or preventing the commission of a felony in the actor's place of abode.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=609.065


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

The whole thing is disturbing. The worst case scenario for everybody. I can't agree with the home owner "finishing them off" after they seemed to be down and disabled. And waiting to call the police is highly suspicious. But I sure can't agree with those kids breaking in the man's house, either. And why didn't the second kid run away after they heard the gunshots? Unless the first kid also had a gun so they came to see who shot who?? The story isn't told very well in the article.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> And why didn't the second kid run away *after they heard the gunshots*?


There's no evidence they DID hear any gunshots.
It says he shot the first one, sat down in his chair and *"in a few minutes"* heard the other one coming.

It's very possible they weren't IN the house when he fired the first shots, and COULDN'T have heard the shots.


----------



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

I think that I interpreted the fact that the second thief came in to find out what had happened to the first one that got shot. There is nothing in the article to indicate that, but that was just my first impression.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

TheMartianChick said:


> I think that I interpreted the fact that the second thief came in to find out what had happened to the first one that got shot. There is nothing in the article to indicate that, but that was just my first impression.


I doubt that. I've known some lowlifes in my day, and when they hear shots, they RUN! They don't go toward the shots to make sure their friends are OK. Probably more likely that the second invader didn't hear the shots or thought it was the first invader doing the shooting.


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

We don't know the whole story, only what the liberal press is telling us. If what's been reported so far is true then he broke the law when he applied the coup de grace. He should have been using a caliber that will stop an intruder with more certainty than a 22. 

I do understand the feeling of violation when your home is invaded. In his case it happened 6 times. I am sure he just wanted it to stop. 

I want to know what was going on when two kids, that the friends and neighbors describe as wonderful people, walked into someone elses home, possibly to rob it. Are there other friends of the kids that got shot, that have also broken into the house? Was the word out in the school that this house was easy pickings? The kids were certainly at fault too.

CF, If a frozen little old lady came to my door she would probably knock and ring the doorbell. If I were home the dog would let me know there was someone at the door and I would let her in. If somehow I wasn't awakened until after she broke in I still would be unlikely to shoot a frozen little old lady because she probably wouldn't be percieved as a threat. The dog would be going nuts trying to get some attention from her.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Home Harvest said:


> Very good points, except that isn't what he said (according to the article). Until we see something different we only have his statement (or the portions published) to judge by.
> 
> After the teen fell down the stairs, Smith said he shot him in the face as he lay on the floor.
> 
> ...





ryanthomas said:


> I wondered that too. Doesn't make sense. But the shooter pretty much convicted himself with his own statements, regardless of any other circumstances we don't know about.


Depends on his and your frame of mind.
If I am feeling pressed by the next intruder I might reasonably feel I had to eliminate One threat to be free to deal with the next....and Saying it was a good clean kill shot was just a matter of wanting to be Humane


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

The man is in deep trouble. He murdered.

However, don't ask me to feel sorry for those 'wonderful kids'. You sneak into a house not your own, for whatever reason, you better darn well be aware of the consequences.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *If I am feeling pressed by the next intruder* I might reasonably feel I had to eliminate One threat to be free to deal with the next....and Saying it was a good clean kill shot was just a matter of wanting to be Humane


But he wasn't "pressed"
He shot and wounded him, then shot him again, drug him into the workshop, *sat down A FEW MINUTES* and THEN heard the second one coming.

If you'd just *pay attention* you'd have known all that



> In the complaint, Smith said he was in his basement when he heard a window breaking upstairs, followed by footsteps that eventually approached the basement stairwell. Smith said he fired when Brady came into view from the waist down.
> 
> After the teen fell down the stairs, Smith said he shot him in the face as he lay on the floor.
> 
> ...


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Had he attempted the Mozambique Drill double/optimally on target triple tap on them and called the police immediately he would have countered the invasion, likely achieved his confessed goal more legitimately and this would not even be news worthy. 

As is he will be charged with murder however his legal counsel will probably use the events that transpired to work up an insanity defense.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Cabin Fever said:


> Just being the devil's advocate here. Say, a half frozen elderly person leaves her stalled vehicle in the middle of nowhere on a subzero night. She enters an unlocked home to keep herself from freezing to death - is this a felony? I don't believe it is a felony even though the started homeowners may assume what is happening is a home invasion and may take lethal action.


There is a proper way to enter an unlocked home in an emergency. Knock first. If no one answers, open the door a bit and holler LOUDLY to ask if anyone is home. Give your name and say what you are there for. People around here have no problem with that. I've done it several times when being sent to inspect homes. I've had people to yell for me to come on in because they are sick in bed. That way, the resident does not walk in and get startled.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

> As is he will be charged with murder however his legal counsel will probably use the events that transpired to work up an insanity defense.


Maybe rightly so...from the little bit I know about him, I doubt his sanity.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

fishhead said:


> I can only imagine his state of mind after having his home invaded multiple times (I've heard family say 6 times). The last time they stole $10,000 worth of stuff. And then there is the psychological impact of having the security of your home destroyed. You wake at every strange sound as you wait for it to happen again.
> 
> Here's an old guy who only wanted to be left alone to enjoy his retirement and that was taken from him by the people who repeatedly broke into his house and stole his belongings. They also stole his peace of mind.
> 
> ...


Excellent points, FH.

I will add this: Do not all police get put on administrative duty after a shooting? There may be multiple reasons for this, but one must be that shooting another human screws up your head for a least a while.

As strange as what this fellow did sounds to us, we have to consider the stress of the situation. 

We also must remember that he did not go out looking for them....they broke into his house. He is the victim.


Tim


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> We also must remember that he did not go out looking for them....they broke into his house. *He is the victim*.


He's the victim of an attempted robbery
He's the *perpetrator* of a double homicide


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Bearfootfarm said:


> He's the victim of an attempted robbery


Why.....BFF....you just made an assumption.

How do you know the intent of the perpetrators ?

I think you're slipping. :nono:


----------



## bjba (Feb 18, 2003)

Brian Smith sounds more than a little round the bend. His comments sound as if
the prior break ins and thefts had pushed him over the edge. 
The pair who broke into his home were not "innocent teenagers". The were at the minimum guilty of home invasion. When "innocent teenagers" break into a home death is a very real consequence. This is a tragedy from so many angles.
A man who had every right to expect peace and security in his home was victimized and it seems terrorized by those who would brutalize him for a few pitiful belongings. Two young lives snuffed out because of their own greed and avarice.
Why does anyone need to be reminded who invaded someones home for criminal purposes?


----------



## scooter (Mar 31, 2008)

Slain teenage cousins linked to an earlier Little Falls break-in? | StarTribune.com

Investigators were working late Tuesday to determine whether the two teenage cousins slain during a home burglary in Little Falls, Minn., on Thanksgiving Day committed a similar crime just hours before the fatal shootings.

Preliminary findings suggest that Nick Brady, 17, and Haile Kifer, 18, were involved in another break-in Wednesday night, 6 miles south of the home where Byron Smith claims he shot them in self-defense, said Morrison County Sheriff Michel Wetzel. Smith, 64, a retired U.S. State Department worker, is charged with second-degree murder in the double shooting, which Wetzel has characterized as "cold-blooded" executions carried out after the teens were disabled by initial shots.

In the latest development, investigators are piecing together evidence recovered from a red Mitsubishi Eclipse that Brady had been driving, and which was discovered Friday parked a block away and around the corner from Smith's property, 3 miles north of Little Falls.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

If my house had been broken into multiple times I would probably do about the same thing. I would wait for them and would make sure they did not leave alive.

If you decide on a life of crime you should learn the dangers. If you continue on a life of crime it shows you accept those work dangers.
Maybe if we had more people doing the same thing as this man the crime rate would not be so high.
One thing for sure, we cannot depend on the law for help.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> But he wasn't "pressed"
> He shot and wounded him, then shot him again, drug him into the workshop, *sat down A FEW MINUTES* and THEN heard the second one coming.
> 
> If you'd just *pay attention* you'd have known all that


Where do you get your ideas? Thats what not your quote said at all!


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

pancho said:


> If my house had been broken into multiple times I would probably do about the same thing. I would wait for them and would make sure they did not leave alive.
> 
> If you decide on a life of crime you should learn the dangers. If you continue on a life of crime it shows you accept those work dangers.
> Maybe if we had more people doing the same thing as this man the crime rate would not be so high.
> One thing for sure, we cannot depend on the law for help.


I don't think anyone is disagreeing with this, but there is the reality of the world we live in. The law dictates when self-defense become murder.

I think it's very clear that he was the victim, he was within his rights to shoot them, pop, pop, pop, down, dead, done, then call 911 immediately.

However, could he have wounded them, held them captive for a few days, tortured them slowly to death, and still be within his rights? Of course not. The law does not permit us to act as judge, jury, & executioner. 

This case will be an interesting one to follow.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Home Harvest said:


> However, could he have wounded them, held them captive for a few days, tortured them slowly to death, and still be within his rights? Of course not. The law does not permit us to act as judge, jury, & executioner.
> 
> This case will be an interesting one to follow.


That is where me and the law sees things different.
If a person enters my house without being invited I have the right to act as judge, jury, and executioner.

If they have the right to enter my house for any reason I should have the right to protect it.
If they do not agree they might find a better way to make a living.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Why.....BFF....you just *made an assumption*.
> 
> How do you know the intent of the perpetrators ?
> 
> I think you're slipping.


They had* evidence* in their car ( prescription drugs and other items) from a nearby recent break in.

http://www.twincities.com/localnews...uthorities-find-precription-drugs-other-items

Don't *ASSUME* I don't know more details about things just because they aren't *posted here*


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *Where do you get your ideas*? Thats not your quote said at all!


I *read *what the articles *say*

Where do you get yours?


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

Another thing that doesn't make a lot of sense. Why did Smith retreat to his basement when he thought someone had broken into his house? This could be construed that he was extremly terrified of an encounter with the burgelers and didn't want to deal with them. It could explain his mental state that he had to kill them.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

where I want to said:


> The only thing that is clear from that article quote is it was a tragedy.


Why is this a tragedy? if you invade my house, you will die - period.

I'm sorry that the kids were criminals, but they got what they deserved.
The kill shot can be explained by his mental state due to multiple home invasions and his shooting both of them.
I understand he will be charged with murder, but IMHO he should be found not guilty.
What should he have done, serve them cookies while telling them that they shouldn't be breaking into houses?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Nimrod said:


> Another thing that doesn't make a lot of sense. *Why did Smith retreat to his basement* when he thought someone had broken into his house?
> This could be construed that he was extremly terrified of an encounter with the burgelers and didn't want to deal with them. It could explain his mental state that he had to kill them.


*Second sentence* of the article:



> In the complaint, Smith said* he was in his basement* when he heard a window breaking upstairs, followed by footsteps that eventually approached the basement stairwell. Smith said he fired when Brady came into view from the waist down.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *What should he have done*, serve them cookies while telling them that they shouldn't be breaking into houses?


He shouldn't have MURDERED them.
It's not rocket science


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I *read *what the articles *say*
> 
> Where do you get yours?


From you. I just read what you quoted.:shrug:


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> He shouldn't have MURDERED them.
> It's not rocket science


Murdered? Hummm I dont see a thing to make me think it was premeditated.
The facts.
he was in the basement.
he shot the intruders.
past that you are trying to see into his head.


TO me it sounds like a terrified old man with VERY Slow mental prosesses trying his best to keep from dieing at the hands of criminals.


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

pancho said:


> That is where me and the law sees things different.
> If a person enters my house without being invited I have the right to act as judge, jury, and executioner.
> 
> If they have the right to enter my house for any reason I should have the right to protect it.
> If they do not agree they might find a better way to make a living.


So, you agree that you and the law see things differently. That's all I was trying to say. The prosecutor won't go by what you should have the right to do.

This guy could have easily defended his home, put the home invaders in the ground, and walked away scott free with a pat on the back by the police. Anyone who carries a firearm, or plans to use one to defend their home, owes it to himself to understand the law a little bit.

I believe stories like this make all of us look bad. All of us are at risk of losing more of our rights when idiots like this try to claim self defense.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Home Harvest said:


> So, you agree that you and the law see things differently. That's all I was trying to say. The prosecutor won't go by what you should have the right to do.
> 
> This guy could have easily defended his home, put the home invaders in the ground, and walked away scott free with a pat on the back by the police. Anyone who carries a firearm, or plans to use one to defend their home, owes it to himself to understand the law a little bit.
> 
> I believe stories like this make all of us look bad. All of us are at risk of losing more of our rights when idiots like this try to claim self defense.


I agree.
There is always more ways of doing the same thing.
The man should have had a better plan.
The results could have been the same but there wouldn't be any questions asked.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Cabin Fever said:


> Just being the devil's advocate here. Say, a half frozen elderly person leaves her stalled vehicle in the middle of nowhere on a subzero night. She enters an unlocked home to keep herself from freezing to death - is this a felony? I don't believe it is a felony even though the started homeowners may assume what is happening is a home invasion and may take lethal action.


As a good example of a little ol' lady, I know i would first yell, pund on the door, then open the door a bit and yell again, then step inside and yell some more. Then turn on the lights and yell some more then look for a phone. All the while saying, hello hello hello- I need help. 
If I ran into an deaf, blind man with a gun, there would be a serious possiblity of mistake but not otherwise.


----------



## silverseeds (Apr 28, 2012)

It wasnt the case here but what if you have just shot someone in a legally legitimate way. They are laying there, your about to call the police and they tell you they WILL be back, youll pay for this, etc etc. Most of us would be in an emotionally troubled state and feeling rather violated, her is the cause of that telling you you can never sleep safely again. You think of your wife or children in the next room. 

So do you take a second shot to finish them off? I think many would, and Id say such a shot was understandable. Youd be in a similar situation as this guy.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Look remember there once was this guy who simply had a driving accident and he freaked out his name was Ted something anyone remember it took him a while to contact the Police.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> Why is this a tragedy? if you invade my house, you will die - period.


I think it's a tragedy when kids make stupid choices that lead to their death at an early age. It doesn't matter if they "deserved" it. It's still very sad for everyone who loved them.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

I am sitting here, thinking about all the things I would have done differently.

Then I slap myself back to reality. We are sitting safe in our homes saying this guy should have done this, and not done that.

Did he screw this up? Yeah, I think so. Not calling the police immediately, the "kill shot". All problems.

Does he deserve prison for this? That is the $64k question, in my mind. 

If this guy had really been broken into this many times (6?), then his state of mind might have been similar to the woman who kills her habitually abusive husband, while he sleeps? You are afraid and you just can't deal with it anymore.


Tim


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *So do you take a second shot to finish them off?* I think many would, and Id say such a shot was understandable. Youd be in a similar situation as this guy.


Only if YOU can live with being the *murderer*


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

I wouldn't fault the guy without knowing more facts. If he has been burglarized several times before, who knows what his state of mind was? I can't imagine the stress of trying to sleep in a house wondering if the next burglar will kill you or just take some more of your stuff. Most people have a breaking point. I see the guy as more of a victim than the teens. It was their actions in committing a crime that set it all in motion. The guy should have been a better shot in the first place but I have no idea how clearly he was thinking as it started to unwind. Perhaps he was wondering how many more were going to come down the stairs and was really in fear of his life.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

The girl should be awarded a Darwin Award considering the article says she was unarmed and walked downstairs into the basement. Surely she had to hear the gunshots on the first target. :shrug:


----------



## MNBobcat (Feb 4, 2011)

The problem with the whole situation is that the law and judges will be getting involved. I look at it analogous to our constitutional right to free speech. We can't have judges deciding what you can or cannot say because they corrupt everything and in the end freedom of speech is lost and becomes nothing more than a sham. 

While I don't necessarily agree with this guys actions, I support his right to kill anyone who breaks into his home irregardless of how he accomplishes it. He shouldn't be charged or the law become involved.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

In my estimation, the _law_ should let him off.

It was his castle. He did not go looking for trouble.

His actions, as reported, do appear a little dark, but again, what has he been through ?

No man will _ever_ escape the moral implications of his actions, so no man need lose any sleep over the details in such a case as this.

50-60 years ago, such details would never have surfaced.
I suspect, in less than a year, such details will again be moot in light of where this world is headed.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Only if YOU can live with being the *murderer*


I can in a case like this. The basic principle here is; don't go into a house that is not yours.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Good Grief he had already retreated to the basement he couldnt go much farther...... un less he was part mole!


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

Obviously the man screwed up. This is a textbook case of what not to do. The question I have is the caliber of the weapons used. I've never been a fan of a .223. I'm not sure it was effective in this case. Apparently it jammed, but I'm not considering that. At that range, a shotgun firing slugs would have been very effective.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

fantasymaker said:


> Good Grief he had already retreated to the basement he couldnt go much farther...... un less he was part mole!


He was in the basement when he heard the window glass breaking.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Not sure Id like to shoot slugs in my own home...... perhaps BB,? #4?


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

silverseeds said:


> It wasnt the case here but what if you have just shot someone in a legally legitimate way. They are laying there, your about to call the police and they tell you they WILL be back, youll pay for this, etc etc. Most of us would be in an emotionally troubled state and feeling rather violated, her is the cause of that telling you you can never sleep safely again. You think of your wife or children in the next room.
> 
> So do you take a second shot to finish them off? I think many would, and Id say such a shot was understandable. Youd be in a similar situation as this guy.


We must all be thinking it, so I'm going to say it...

Given the scenario above I would likely make sure he could never come back, then I would tell the police he lunged at me and I had to defend myself, or I'd say it all happened sooo fast. Whatever made more sense. I'm sure the police didn't WANT to arrest this guy, but his statements to the police are just so incredibly incriminating.

OK, so YES I'd LIE! There, I said it. I would not put myself in a similar legal situation as this guy, even if the events leading up to it were identical. I would hope none of my friends here would get themselves in that situation either.

My brother is a cop, and he doesn't always want to arrest someone, but sometimes they give him no choice.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

The man started with a .223 rifle. He didn't have family in the house. It was just him and an intruder. The other thing that occurred to me is he should have been deafened after firing the rifle in the basement. I imagine the woman surprised him.

Her looking around after hearing rifle shots is more than strange. Even if she called for her accomplice, it's doubtful that the homeowner in the basement heard her.


----------



## InvalidID (Feb 18, 2011)

Cabin Fever said:


> The Minnesota law states that one can use lethal force in a home invasion if the intruder is in the process of committing a felony. (I don't agree with this law, btw)
> 
> Don't ask me how one determines whether or not a felony is being committed before one takes action. :shrug:


 I do believe a home invasion is a felony.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

TheMartianChick said:


> Minn. man says he 'fired more shots than I needed'


Is this what we have become?
Jesus come quickly.


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> Is this what we have become?
> Jesus come quickly.


I welcome Jesus whenever he is ready to return. 

As to your first sentence, I'm not sure that we have "become" anything. It's always been this way. We have always been a violent race (well at least since Cain & Abel). I don't recall learning about any time in history when there was not war and pestilence. There will ALWAYS be those who want to take what you have worked for, and it should ALWAYS be your right to defend yourself.

I see the legal implications of his actions as separate from the moral justification to defend yourself and your home. I hope you can too.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

Unless you've been through similar circumstances, it's not easy to put yourself inside the homeowner's mind. How much did the previous burglaries affect him. How much did his job affect him? As a security expert for embassies, it must have taken a toll to realize he couldn't protect his own home. Add in the muliple burglaries. There wasn't anything in the news to indicate the previous burglars were caught.

I'm not defending the man. I'm trying to look at the known facts and understand. The male intruder probably wasn't in any condition to do anything after being shot and falling down the stairs. The homeowner could have searched him for a weapon.

The really strange thing is the woman looking around after hearing the rifle fire. Maybe she didn't know the shots would have made it very difficult for anyone inside to hear her.

The homeowner apparently was angered by the girls laugh when she was shot and fell down the stairs. Was he already angry at people for breaking in? Did he think he kids were the ones who had broke in previously? I don't think what he heard was really a laugh. I think it was an involuntary gasp as she tried to breathe.

As I said before, there are lessons to be learned from this. Don't discount your inability not to be angry and do something stupid in a similar circumstance. Are you prepared for multiple intruders when the second shows up after you're experiencing diminished hearing loss from the gun shots?

Moving the first body was a real screw up. That makes me think he may have known there was two. He may have been waiting in ambush for the second. His stupid statements make me think otherwise. He seems to have spilled his guts when he should have said absolutely nothing, With the shot under the girl's chin he was going to get arrested anyway. Waiting until after Thanksgiving to call the law was beyond any semblance of a reasonable act.

Like I said, this has real potential for teaching others. The last thing you want after defending yourself, your family and your home is to end up in the prison at the mercy of others like the ones you killed.


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

Entering a home with the intent to commit a crime therein is what makes it a felony. 

By now we all know that reporters have bias. Sources are telling the reporter their version of what they heard was said.... in other words, circumstances could have been very different than what was reported in this story.

At the point the only thing that should have happened but didn't was the calling of 911 to make the report. But even that has a possible explanation - his phone could have been out of order and he might have been unable to get to the neighbors to make the call for some reason until the next day.


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

They have said on another forum that the shooter was high on meth, haven't seen any thing yet to back that up though.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> *I can* in a case like this. The basic principle here is; don't go into a house that is not yours.


Easy to *say* sittng behind a computer.
Not so easy *to handle* sitting in a jail cell


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Her looking around *after hearing rifle shots* is more than strange.


Everyone is *ASSUMING *she heard shots, but there is NO EVIDENCE she was even in the house *when the shots were fired.*

Doesn't ANYONE *read* the articles?


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Everyone is *ASSUMING *she heard shots, but there is NO EVIDENCE she was even in the house *when the shots were fired.*
> 
> Doesn't ANYONE *read* the articles?


That's true. Would someone outside hear a several rifle shots inside a house? I hear rifle shots outside when I'm sitting inside the house. I know when one of the hunters on the other parcel shoots. They're up on the ridge about an 1/8 of a mile away. I still hear the shot.

Are houses in Minnesota that well insulated? Remember the window was broken before the homeowner shot the male. A case could be made that the woman was still in the car.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I hear rifle shots outside when I'm sitting* inside the house*


Would you hear them in a* basement*?

I think she was* probably* waiting outside *in the car*, and when he didn't return she went looking for him


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

I don't know if you would hear a rifle shot from inside a basement. We'll never know what she heard. I'm surprised they broke into a strange house during the day. If the homeowner was there, the car should have been there too. Would it be normal for her to call for her companion? Would the basement have been the last place she looked? Seems odd the homeowner was sitting in a chair where he could look up the stairs.

That's why I think it may have been an ambush. 

If one of us hears a break in, should we wait in ambush? If so does it make anything later less defensive and more premeditated?


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

Darren said:


> I don't know if you would hear a rifle shot from inside a basement. We'll never know what she heard. I'm surprised they broke into a strange house during the day. If the homeowner was there, the car should have been there too. Would it be normal for her to call for her companion? Would the basement have been the last place she looked? Seems odd the homeowner was sitting in a chair where he could look up the stairs.
> 
> That's why I think it may have been an ambush.
> 
> If one of us hears a break in, should we wait in ambush? If so does it make anything later less defensive and more premeditated?


Assuming that it was an ambush, and that it was premeditated, would you expect him to have a better story for the police?


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Darren said:


> I don't know if you would hear a rifle shot from inside a basement. We'll never know what she heard. I'm surprised they broke into a strange house during the day. If the homeowner was there, the car should have been there too. Would it be normal for her to call for her companion? Would the basement have been the last place she looked? Seems odd the homeowner was sitting in a chair where he could look up the stairs.
> 
> That's why I think it may have been an ambush.
> 
> If one of us hears a break in, should we wait in ambush? If so does it make anything later less defensive and more premeditated?


If you hear someone breaking in do you want to run out in the open making yourself a easy target?
Of course you should hide. I wouldn't call that an ambush.
Remember the people came into another person's home.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

Several things the homeowner did made no sense. For the life of me I can't put myself in his shoes.

I've been involved in a couple of instances where I was prepared to shoot. One was on public property. Others weren't. In all cases everyone walked away. Only one involved the police. I remember my thought processes each time. One involved three young men/teenagers at a rest stop. They never knew I had my hand on a .45. They chose not to confront me. I never said a word to them. When I heard their conversation which involved me, I turned out the dome light and waited. They chose to walk way. I don't know what would have happened if they had chosen to walk up to the truck. I don't know if they were armed or not.

Another incident involved gas company workers at the house located in a remote location at 2:00 am. They were suitably impressed looking down the barrel of a 12 gauge. and rapidly gave their explanation for trespassing. It was acceptable. I found out from several souces later they didn't appreciate the experience. I didn't either.

Others also involved tresspassing. Everyone walked away. So things worked out. In each case the trespasser learned something.

What happened in Minnesota could happen to us. What would you do before and after?


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Darren said:


> What happened in Minnesota could happen to us. What would you do before and after?


You can't make the decisions for anyone else.
If the people would not have broken into the man's house it would not have happened.
The only thing that might make a difference is if it happens so many times it becomes common.
People should have a plan long before anything happens but most don't.
After it happens is too late.

To answer your question.
Before it happened I would do nothing more than I do all of the time.
When it happened I would make sure I was the only one that had a story to tell and it would be a believable one.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

I think the fact that he waited until after the holiday shows some messed up thinking. Almost like he was in shock at what had just happened. What caused that we'll probably never know.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Home Harvest said:


> I welcome Jesus whenever he is ready to return.
> 
> As to your first sentence, I'm not sure that we have "become" anything. It's always been this way. We have always been a violent race (well at least since Cain & Abel). I don't recall learning about any time in history when there was not war and pestilence. There will ALWAYS be those who want to take what you have worked for, and it should ALWAYS be your right to defend yourself.
> 
> I see the legal implications of his actions as separate from the moral justification to defend yourself and your home.* I hope you can too*.


I do. 
Would I defend myself in my own home, yes.
The way this article was worded makes it seem so "video gameish".
Like 'humans', albeit they were invaders of the home, are some how 'less human' than they were 50 years ago.

I feel like I need a Spiritual tooth brush to clean my soul.
Stories like this make my heart, so heavy


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> If one of us hears a break in, should we wait in ambush? If so does it make anything later less defensive and *more premeditated*?


"Waiting" wouldn't be an "ambush"
It didn't become murder until he shot them AFTER they were no longer an imminent threat.



> What would you do before and after?


I wouldn't have *fired* until* I decided* they were a real threat, and I wouldn't have "finished them off" if they were severely wounded.
I WOULD have called 911 ASAP


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

I agree with BFF. He executed them. I still feel there's a lot more to this story. The perps where local thieves from whats been on the news. But never the less if things went down like he says, he deserves no less than life behind bars. He's a sick puppy.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

Just to add a little more information that has recently come out in Minnesota news. Stolen goods were found in the car of the two cousins who were shot. Evidently, the stolen items were from other burglaries the two conducted while people were away from home during Thanksgiving Day.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> "Waiting" wouldn't be an "ambush"
> It didn't become murder until he shot them AFTER they were no longer an imminent threat.
> 
> 
> ...


When exactly were they no longer a imminent threat?...after he "finished them off"


Why did they hang horse theives? Because being left without the tools of your life puts you at risk of death. Thats what these kids wanted to do , deprive the man of the tools of his life.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *When exactly were they no longer a imminent threat*?...after he "finishe them off"
> 
> 
> Why did they hang horse theives? Because being left without the tools of your life puts you at risk of death. Thats what these kids wanted to do , deprive the man of the tools of his life.


Once he shot them the first time they were no longer a threat, according to his own words. He was in control of the situation them

All your *rhetoric* is pointless and is possibly the same attitude that will cause this man to go to prison, as he deserves


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

So, two people decide to do some high risk thievery... and they separate... one gets shot, and the other person doesn't get out of Dodge? Obviously not very bright, or either high on drugs...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> one gets shot, and the other person doesn't get out of Dodge?
> Obviously not very bright, or either high on drugs...


Or not in the house when the shots were fired.
It's been brought up three times now


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Once he shot them the first time they were no longer a threat, according to his own words. He was in control of the situation them
> 
> All your *rhetoric* is pointless and is possibly the same attitude that will cause this man to go to prison, as he deserves


LOl and why is your* rhetoric* so much better than mine? 
Why are you making up things? I have seen no evidence that he said they were not a threat.

I think most people here have at least a tiny amount of common scence and realize as long as these two were alive they were a threat....HECK they are DEAD and still seem to be a threat.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> LOl and why is your* rhetoric* so much better than mine?
> Why are you making up things? *I have seen no evidence* that he said they were not a threat.


"Unarmed" and "wounded, laying on the floor" were all EVIDENCE given in the story.
The shooter was armed and in total control



> I think *most people* here have at least a tiny amount of common scence


Those are the ones who know he's guilty of murder, as *evidenced* by him being charged, based on his own story


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Once he shot them the first time they were no longer a threat, *according to his own words. * He was in control of the situation them





Bearfootfarm said:


> "Unarmed" and "wounded, laying on the floor" were all EVIDENCE given in the story.


:umno:

You Fabricated something and then said it was his own words.....:nono:

Unarmed wounded and laying on the floor can be a LOOOOOONG ways from "no longer a threat"


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> You Fabricated something and then said it was his own words.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Obviously not , since he's charged with* murder*


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

Just looking at this story objectively...this man had been robbed several times? Mentally, he was being terrorized in his own home. He could not have felt safe and probably had some sleep deprivation going on as well. How well could you sleep knowing your home had been broken into repeatedly, add to that, he was afraid! Afraid of what? Well what can two young teenagers do to an older man and he had been reporting these break ins? The police had not been able to stop this so....what were the ultimate consequences going to be for him? Did he want to find out? He probably just snapped after the many times he had dealt with his own rights being violated by the burglars! Yes, he did say some rather incriminating things but was he in full mental faculties at the time? Could he have been in shock? My Dad was very insistent that if posed with an imminent threat such as a home invasion, if you pick up a weapon you must use it. If you do not, those criminals will take it away and perhaps just use it on you? He should have called 911 immediately but what state of mind was he in? The things he said were awful but this is one of those, if you walked in his shoes you would know what really happened. It will be interesting to see what happens and what part of this might have been taken out of context? A full accounting will shed some light here. Breaking into a home is a threat to your safety, I can see it no other way.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Obviously not , since he's charged with* murder*


"Charged" is not convicted. Charged simply means the local Law enforcment has no...........um oh I cant say that here!


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

> and he had been reporting these break ins?


One of the stories I read said he only reported one of the six break-ins. Not sure if that was accurate, but if true, it suggests to me that maybe he was fed up with the police after they did nothing for him the first time so he took matters into his own hands. His "didn't want to bother you on a holiday" comment may have been a reference to a previous incident where the police acted like he was wasting their time. All speculation, and none of it excuses his own description of what happened.


----------



## Pearl B (Sep 27, 2008)

romysbaskets said:


> Just looking at this story objectively...this man had been robbed several times? Mentally, he was being terrorized in his own home. He could not have felt safe and probably had some sleep deprivation going on as well. How well could you sleep knowing your home had been broken into repeatedly, add to that, he was afraid! Afraid of what? Well what can two young teenagers do to an older man and he had been reporting these break ins? The police had not been able to stop this so....what were the ultimate consequences going to be for him? Did he want to find out? He probably just snapped after the many times he had dealt with his own rights being violated by the burglars! Yes, he did say some rather incriminating things but was he in full mental faculties at the time? Could he have been in shock? My Dad was very insistent that if posed with an imminent threat such as a home invasion, if you pick up a weapon you must use it. If you do not, those criminals will take it away and perhaps just use it on you? He should have called 911 immediately but what state of mind was he in? The things he said were awful but this is one of those, if you walked in his shoes you would know what really happened. It will be interesting to see what happens and what part of this might have been taken out of context? A full accounting will shed some light here. Breaking into a home is a threat to your safety, I can see it no other way.


Excellent post/points. Add to that, after he shot the girl she laughed


> Though Kifer was "already hurting," she let out a short laugh, Smith told investigators. He then pulled out his .22-caliber revolver and shot her several times in the chest, according to the complaint.


 I would wonder what kind of drugs she is on to do that myself. Users of pcp have been noted to act many times with beyond human strength. Then theres the oh so popular bath salts. Ive heard what some of the users are capable of.

I would also have qualms about not fatally shooting someone. I can only imagine what someone who is fatally wounded, yet aint dead right then, is gonna try to do in their last few minutes.

Im really surprised their isnt more support for this guy from his local community. These arent sweet, innocent, little teens that made a dumb mistake.They were 2 teens on a chosen career pathway.


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

Charged doesn't equal convicted. Given the alleged strangeness of his report on what occurred law enforcement simply referred it up the chain. Let the DA's office sort out whether or not there is enough to even take it to trial.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

In the heat of the moment I can see perciving "a short laugh" as "Dummy Im not really hurt and now YOU have ticked me off!"


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Or not in the house when the shots were fired.
> It's been brought up three times now


You can hear a gunshot from quite a ways off, and I'd think a gunshot in a basement would be very loud.
I don't fault the man for shooting the dirty little thieves at all.
I do have a problem with him shooting before he could see who it was, and I have a problem with the finishing shots.
I think the thieves got what they deserved (I think thieves are the lowest form of life) but without having been present, I think the shooter probably went too far.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> You can hear a gunshot from quite a ways off, and I'd think a gunshot* in a basement* would be very loud.


It would be loud *in the basement.*
Not so loud outside the house, and there's nothing to show how long there was between the shots, and her entrance


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

fantasymaker said:


> "Charged" is not convicted. Charged simply means the local Law enforcment has no...........um oh I cant say that here!


 I'll finish that sentence.

"Charged simply means the local Law enforcment has no choice but to act on the statements given at the scene."

In my opinion, this gentleman could have easily avoided being arrested and possibly prosecuted by simply choosing his words more carefully.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

Rumor mill has it that he was on meth also.


----------



## fantasymaker (Aug 28, 2005)

Home Harvest said:


> In my opinion, this gentleman could have easily avoided being arrested and possibly prosecuted by simply choosing his words more carefully.


Thats the scary part to many people, its not what was done its how things were said .


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Thats the scary part to many people, its not what was done its *how things were said .*


Supposedly he told them the truth about how he did it, which is why he's charged with murder.

Man who killed 2 teens in break-in: 'I fired more shots than I needed' | Nation & World | The Seattle Times



> "Mr. Smith intentionally killed two teenagers in his home in a matter that goes well beyond self-defense," Morrison County Attorney Brian Middendorf said after Smith appeared in court Monday morning. Bail was set at $2 million.


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

You step across the line, you takes your chances... don't care if one's a 'virgin' or an old hand at it. Shame that some have to die... hopefully, the other thugs will get the point.

I do feel for their families, I feel they are a sorry lot, raising monsters without any sense of right and wrong.

I've got thugs in my family... most of them have went to thug school (penitentiary)... they'll always be on 'probation' as far as I'm concerned. Had a few 'conversations' about life in general, and some pontificating upon physics (ballistics)... and we've all agreed to avoid each other like the plague.

Thinking 'this' scenario falls into the realm of politics... liberal leaning members will always see the sainted thieves just wanting to feed their families and conservative leaning members seeing the thieves as thugs too blame lazy to work for a living, and got their earthly reward.

Wonder if this state has a Castle Law? In Tx, if one enters someone else's home, and the owner feels threatened, deadly force is authorized. If I (or more'n likely, one of our dogs were eating on someone...) found someone breaking into (or again, likely > out of) the house, I'd not think twice. Knock on my door, and I'm a big ol ***** cat. Break in my door, and I'm Bigfoot hurling lead. Viva la difference...


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Texican, I feel the same.
I also have family members that either went to the same thug school or should have.
The way I see it they are the same as some unknown thug and will be treated the same.
When a relative asks me why their dear children are not allowed on my property I tell them the truth.


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

Wonder if this will be turn out to be another Martin/Zimmerman case where evidence eventually makes its way to the surface long after we have debated it here.


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

Wags said:


> Wonder if this will be turn out to be another Martin/Zimmerman case where evidence eventually makes its way to the surface long after we have debated it here.


You could be right, but it seems to me that we should be debating only the "alledged" facts presented. I'm not discussing some potential information that might come out in the future. That's for a jury to hear. This is just discussion and education based on the articles provided.


----------

