What do you think of this Minnesota mans claim of self-defense?????

Gun nut here, and I think the guy is a murdering scumbag. Using a gun to kill an intruder is a matter of last recourse. This guy set a trap with intent to kill. It seems he even encouraged the act by setting a scene like no one was home. He certainly had options besides taking two teenager's lives. I have a hard time buying his assertion that he lived in fear of his life in Little Falls, Minnesota. Give me a break. Violent intruders deserve to be dealt with violently, but this doesn't seem to be a case of that. He treated two humans, one a teenage girl, with less humanity than most decent men would treat an animal.

If someone breaks into your house and you feel like your life or someone else's life is in danger (which is probably almost always the case), I'm fine with shooting someone. If they die, then that's valid self-defense.

Once you have shot them and they lie bleeding on the ground, a "clean finishing shot" is not self-defense. It's murder.

Even in the Wild West of gun-loving Oklahoma, you can't shoot someone bleeding on the ground with a "finishing shot" and call it self-defense-

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/oklahoma-city-pharmacist-jerome-ersland-found-guilty-of-murder-in-killing-of-suspect/

Also, there are lots of other facts that make the guy sound like a loon: the fact that the guy parked his car 3 blocks away, had his house full of surveillance cameras and a cell phone jammer, was trying to hide the 1st body, and then waited until the next day to call the police. That's not the normal behavior of someone acting in self-defense.

It's kind of like when idiots run out into traffic. It's hard to be sympathetic to idiots when they get run over, but at the same time there's no open season for car drivers to run idiots over.

It depends. Were the intruders sons of Obama? If so, this should be a national outrage and be put on the cable channels for the next week. If they were hillbilly, white rednecks looking for cash to buy meth than no big deal. They deserved to die.

may be libtarded wrote:

It depends. Were the intruders sons of Obama? If so, this should be a national outrage and be put on the cable channels for the next week. If they were hillbilly, white rednecks looking for cash to buy meth than no big deal. They deserved to die.

They were whites, with a history of stealing prescription drugs. But they did not deserve to die.

OK. I'll have Media Matters call off the cable news onslaught then. If they were white, nobody cares.

Look at the guy's pictures. He's Michael Douglas in Falling Down...also note that this was on Thanksgiving Day.

Apparently he installed recording equipment in his home. Why he did that rather than beef up security, who knows. The recordings were presented to the jury. He mocks the teens after shooting them. I guess the girl was a neighbor's daughter, and he knew. What a nut job.

Jkj wrote:

He treated two humans, one a teenage girl, with less humanity than most decent men would treat an animal.

You hit the nail on the head here. He referred to them as "vermin, not human" and said he was doing his civic duty. The kids were wrong, but this guy certainly was as well.

The whole thing is bizarre. He sets up in the basement on Thanksgiving Day on the off chance he gets robbed, and lo and behold, two thieves show up that night? It's as if he knew when they were coming over and where they were going to go once they entered his house. Do thieves even go in the basement? That's where people usually keep their junk.

Bush-y wrote:

Jkj wrote:

He treated two humans, one a teenage girl, with less humanity than most decent men would treat an animal.

You hit the nail on the head here. He referred to them as "vermin, not human" and said he was doing his civic duty. The kids were wrong, but this guy certainly was as well.

http://www.startribune.com/local/256463611.html

Agreed

As noted, he parked his car blocks away to help create the illusion that no one was home. None of his behavior seems to indicate he was ever in fear of anything. A sociopathic old nut job sitting home alone on Thanksgiving, eagerly awaiting the chance to kill a couple wayward teenagers. The whole story is sad on many levels. It is rare for a homeowner to be charged with first-degree murder in cases of home intrusion, but this whole thing was obviously premeditated. They'll probably get a conviction.

umm wrote:

I would probably kill them in the heat of the moment if it felt like my life or my family's lives were in danger. I would not actively confront and shoot a burglar under any other circumstance.

To me it sounds like this guy wanted to kill the burglars rather than defend himself. Is his property worth more than someone's life? I would rather criminals were brought to justice through the courts than trigger happy vigilantes.

I'm with you on this.

To be clear, I am not saying this man is not a murderer. He is a murderer and a gross one at that. My point, and others' on the thread, apparently, is that you risk your life in a real way when you break into someone's home. I am weary of defending these two kids.

The obvious argument by the defense is that he had been burgled numerous times and was simply "prepared" for it to happen again. Personally, I would have called the cops and alerted them to the situation prior to murdering the kids, but that is me. I think he has a right to "set a trap" if they have been breaking in to his house, but the murders were just disgusting. I agree with an above poster: both sides were wrong, but his is (and should be) more legally protected.

Bush-y wrote:

Or the teen's hands were up in a "no, don't shoot" defensive position.

This doesn't matter.

You cannot shake the Devil's hand and say your were only kidding.

Okay, the more information that I am getting, the more I am in agreement that this guy SHOULD do serious jail time.

george oscar bluth wrote:

Okay, the more information that I am getting, the more I am in agreement that this guy SHOULD do serious jail time.

What information has changed your mind exactly? Hopefully you are getting it from other sources because there has been some wrongs facts stated in this thread.

(though I will say this thread has been very civil and 'un-letsrun' like)

joho wrote:

george oscar bluth wrote:

Okay, the more information that I am getting, the more I am in agreement that this guy SHOULD do serious jail time.

What information has changed your mind exactly? Hopefully you are getting it from other sources because there has been some wrongs facts stated in this thread.

(though I will say this thread has been very civil and 'un-letsrun' like)

...there has been some wrongs facts...

Good Engrish

My elderly parents had their house burglarized last year. Luckily they weren't home, but they had a lot of valuables and family heirlooms stolen and property destroyed. But the worst part is that they had to live in fear afterward of a repeat.

Neighbors identified the car, but the police were too lazy and/or incompetent to catch the guys. I would gladly camp out in my parents living room if I knew they were coming back, and I wouldn't feel an ounce of guilt if I disposed of all of them.

The guy should go down for first degree murder assuming the state has the statute and the facts of premeditation are true.

Not sure even Florida would look upon this as a stand your ground case particularly with the second intruder combined with the audio of the guy as he carried out the acts.

If everyone had guns and blew away burglars on sight, the burglars would quickly learn that the first thing they needed to do when hitting a house was to make sure they killed everyone inside. This is actually how it goes down in desperate parts of the world, like the worst of the Favelas in Brazil.

This guy is clearly a murderer. He laid in wait for the intruders. He wanted to kill them, planned to kill them and never had any fear for his safety.

Yeah. What most of you are saying is that they were wrong AND he was wrong. Cowards. Take a stand for once in your pathetic life. Who was wrong first? The intruders, be they drugee teenagers, hardened violent felons, or first time burglars, took the first step. Once that threshold is passed, all bets are off. It's over. Once the intruders made their decision to illegally enter, fate would be their final judge. They might have been lucky and gotten away with their violation, but they might not. Why is the outrage/sympathy so much more when they didn't get away with it. It was always a gamble, they lost. Life for the non-violators goes on.