Student kills apparent burglar with sword

[mike_v_s]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/15/...ing/index.html

Thoughts?

Mike

[southernrocker]

Good for him! One more maggot off of the streets!

[Tama]

Did he do an Arnie "one-liner" like:
Stick around or did you get my point?

[Thunderscreech]

Whoa.

[Stigs]

Burglarizing the home of the Highlander was a terrible idea.

[TrooperFarva]

Well, in fairness to the student, there can be only one.

[Armbruster]

He shouldn't face criminal charges; it's their property, and legally, they're allowed to defend themselves.

[JohnnyNacho]

Ah! 'Tis but a scratch!

[rr5025]

Originally Posted by Stigs

Burglarizing the home of the Highlander was a terrible idea.

Originally Posted by TrooperFarva

Well, in fairness to the student, there can be only one.

Sigged!

I feel bad someone died but what the hell this was pretty bad***. I know how much those swords hurt too cut my wrist open on one once (no Fall Out Boy was not playing).

[Tama]

Originally Posted by Armbruster

He shouldn't face criminal charges; it's their property, and legally, they're allowed to defend themselves.

I agree...aint hard to prove I'm in fear for my life. If someone breaks in, there is every reason to believe your life could be in danger.


I'd never convict the kid for anything.

I have little sympathy for those who break into peoples houses and cause fear & havoc of all kinds. .
Dave

[Steveaux]

Justice.

[L-A]

Originally Posted by Armbruster

He shouldn't face criminal charges; it's their property, and legally, they're allowed to defend themselves.

From a moral standpoint, I can't understand the frequently heard idea that most illegal actions can be a legitimate reason for killing. Burglary is a crime against property, and to "defend" oneself is a strange concept, considering the "attacker" could very well be a TV stealer running away from you empty-handed.

I understand that there must be punitive measures taken, but killing does not sound like legitimate defence.

[Stigs]

Originally Posted by L-A

From a moral standpoint, I can't understand the frequently heard idea that most illegal actions can be a legitimate reason for killing. Burglary is a crime against property, and to "defend" oneself is a strange concept, considering the "attacker" could very well be a TV stealer running away from you empty-handed.

I understand that there must be punitive measures taken, but killing does not sound like legitimate defence.

Going by their story that the burglar lunged at them prior to them attacking him, they should be clear.

Also considering he was alive when the police arrived it sounds like they didn't do anything too severe, I'm sure the students would be in more trouble if they went to great lengths to harm the burglar or maimed his body.

[mike_v_s]

Originally Posted by L-A

From a moral standpoint, I can't understand the frequently heard idea that most illegal actions can be a legitimate reason for killing. Burglary is a crime against property, and to "defend" oneself is a strange concept, considering the "attacker" could very well be a TV stealer running away from you empty-handed.

I understand that there must be punitive measures taken, but killing does not sound like legitimate defence.

This is an interesting point (and one I might agree with when the facts come clear). I'll chime in with the probable response in this thread, however: the story claims that the man "lunged" at the students. Of course, a 20 year old with a dying man on his property has significant reason to say he was attacked.

Mike

[Ben Lesser]

Originally Posted by Stigs

Going by their story that the burglar lunged at them prior to them attacking him, they should be clear.

Also considering he was alive when the police arrived it sounds like they didn't do anything too severe, I'm sure the students would be in more trouble if they went to great lengths to harm the burglar or maimed his body.

He got his hand severed. I'd say that counts as a maiming.

And I'd argue that it was severe, since he died as a result of it.

[Stigs]

Originally Posted by Ben Lesser

He got his hand severed. I'd say that counts as a maiming.

And I'd argue that it was severe, since he died as a result of it.

I meant it more as excessive damaging after the burglar had stopped being a threat to them rather than what was described in the article

[Steveaux]

Originally Posted by L-A

From a moral standpoint, I can't understand the frequently heard idea that most illegal actions can be a legitimate reason for killing. Burglary is a crime against property, and to "defend" oneself is a strange concept, considering the "attacker" could very well be a TV stealer running away from you empty-handed.

I understand that there must be punitive measures taken, but killing does not sound like legitimate defence.

If someone breaks into my home, they need to be prepared to take some lead.

[iamlowsound]

Originally Posted by Ben Lesser

He got his hand severed. I'd say that counts as a maiming.

And I'd argue that it was severe, since he died as a result of it.

If the sword was sharp, it wouldn't take much to take the guys hand off. Those things are incredibly dangerous.

lowsound

[Sterling_Bass]

This is going to be a really interesting case. I doubt the student planned to kill the burglar; that is why he attacked his hand, rather than his head or chest.

[kingpin2512]

Not happy that the guy died but if he did try to lunge at them I can understand him taking a swing with the sword. The burglur was living on the edge for sure.