Ace:
I guess “deserving” is the theme of the day.
The two dead teenagers were aged 16 and 14.
As regards “deserving:” I don’t know if a 14 year old “deserves” to die for a burglary which doesn’t seem to include violence, but the homeowner was well within his rights to shoot the bastards.
I think these two ideas get conflated by people who can’t, or won’t, keep them separate.
Do I think a 14 year old “deserved” to die so young?
No, but that doesn’t mean the homeowner was at fault, either. The 14 year old put himself in an extraordinarily dangerous position, and made life hell for his victims. He also, surely, scared the crap out of his victims.
And the reason that burglary (and especially home invasion) is historically a major crime is because a burglar, if happened upon by a homeowner, is likely to respond with violence, even if he had never planned violence as part of his intended crime.
The homeowner had the right to shoot the burglars. (Actually it seems like it was the homeowner’s brother who shot, as she’d invited her brother to stay with her after being burglarized just one week ago.)
It’s an outcome that isn’t optimal, but the homeowner isn’t charged with making sure those burlgarizing her home get precisely what they “deserve.” She is permitted to exercise a defense of her person and her home, and she did so. She is not a court of law dealing with questions like “deserving” at the safe remove of reading about a crime on paper.
Act like a thug, die like a thug. Case closed.
Worth repeating….
More importantly…
Did the Homeowner “deserve” to get invaded?
Posted by: wheatie at May 06, 2014 05:43 PM (l/M30)
Precisely how, in the event that one’s home is invaded, is it proposed that the occupant of said home determine the level of risk to themselves from the invader? Should one just hope that they will steal what they want and go away? Or should one fear that further atrocities will be next? How does one determine the age of the invader?
Asking what justifies the shooting of a 14 year old is a dodge to avoid the obvious. What was the 14 year old doing in a house not his own? Had the 14 year old never been told that stealing had consequences?
What is one supposed to do–turn on the lights and ask for ID? Oops. Can’t do that, ID is racist.
Turn on the lights and inquire as to the purpose of the invasion? Sure.
Okay. Don’t teach your children the difference between right and wrong. Let them bear the consequences.
D’oh.
There are consequences to actions.
It is both a law of physics as well as a law of nature.
The 14-year old was living on the streets instead of with a parent?
Why?
The 14-year old threw in its’ lot with an older sibling and the CHOSE to burglarize homes.
They CHOSE whatever consequences came with that.
The thing is, these punks pick on the targets they think will be easy and intimidated; note that this is a repeat target. There should be NO sympathy for those killed by the assaulted in the line of thuggery.
Well… yes, yes they deserved to die! That’s the risk they took for so little reward.
Burglary, let alone home invasion, robs the victims of more than just belongings. The feeling of being secure in your own home takes years to replace and sometimes it never returns.
To quote a pair of my favorite authors Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle: “Think of it as evolution in action.”