14 year old defends home, shoots 17 year old in the face

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by kckndrgn, Jan 4, 2011.


  1. kckndrgn

    kckndrgn Moderator Moderator Founding Member

    Police: Boy, 14, ends burglary by shooting suspect - WREG

    HOT SPRINGS, Ark. (AP) — Hot Springs police say a 14-year-old boy home alone shot a 17-year-old boy in the face, ending an attempted burglary.

    Police say they responded to a call about 7:30 a.m. Monday concerning a shooting and learned about the attempted home invasion.

    Police Cpl. McCrary Means tells the Hot Springs Sentinel-Record that an 18-year-old and two 17-year-olds tried to burglarize the home before the 14-year-old fired at them, hitting one of the 17-year-olds.

    Means says the two uninjured suspects dragged their wounded colleague down the street, left him in a car and tried to flee, but police apprehended the pair moments later.

    Means says the injured suspect is in critical condition at a Little Rock hospital.

    He says the two other suspects face felony burglary charges.

    ***
    Kudos to this young man for defending his home!![applaud]
     
  2. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    IN THE FACE!

    Oh man. That brings back memories of the guys at jump school. For the longest time we had a silly thing going where we would say that we would swoop down and shoot the enemy in the face. It's stupid, I know. Had to be there I guess. Eventually our jokes went something like, "I am gonna treat you like a red-headed step child if you don't-", and to wit the reply would be, "Yeah? Well, I'm gonna shoot you IN THE FACE!"

    Good story. I like stories like this because the good guys didn't get harmed. Plus, the bad guy got shot IN THE FACE.
     
  3. Disciple

    Disciple Monkey+

    I hate to rain on your parade. I just wonder how the 14 yr old will be treated by the socialist media and then by the aclu........I feel what the kid did is deserving of a medal, but I know they will drag this poor kid through thr proverbial mud.
     
  4. Clyde

    Clyde Jet Set Tourer Administrator Founding Member

    The kid had access to a gun? under the age? someone is going to get sued or put in jail. This is stupid since the kid did the right thing, but laws are laws and, unfortunately, the other side is going to say their hands are tied.

    It is better than a 14 year old being killed by two 18 year olds and a 17 year old, but that will be left out of the discussion.
     
  5. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    Shot him in the FACE!!? Oh, the horror! We must rid the world of such bad people!!

    That said, I hope the kid is spared the libtard's annoyances. He's going to be plagued enough with his own memories without help from the media and whispered innuendo in the home town. I hope he successfully deals with it and comes out stronger.
     
  6. Clyde

    Clyde Jet Set Tourer Administrator Founding Member

    I am not worried about the local media, its the national.
     
  7. Equilibrium

    Equilibrium Monkey++

    Homes can be replaced.... his life can't. He's 14. He did what I would hope all of our sons would do who are a lot older yet.... he's only 14 and my heart bleeds for him that someone so young was placed in this situation to begin with. I hope his parents have the skill set to talk him through the aftermath of emotions he will have while providing him with the support to ward off those who will most certainly drag him through the "proverbial mud".
     
  8. limpingbear

    limpingbear future cancer survivor....

    doesn't Arkansas have castle doctrine? or something like it? if so the kid and his parents shouldnt have to worry about lawsuites
     
  9. Clyde

    Clyde Jet Set Tourer Administrator Founding Member

    Arkansas does not have it because it is already written in the law.

    Arkansas Castle Doctrine

    The legal issues is was the 14 year old in possession and did he have access to a firearm when the laws require 18 year olds to be able to possess. The question is will they go after the parents for letting a 14 year old possess the gun if they were not at home? This is what I think an attorney would use when they sue the family for violating the law and the perpetrators civil rights when the perp was in the process of violating laws in the commission of a crime.

    5-2-607. Use of deadly physical force in defense of a person.

    (a) A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

    (1) Committing or about to commit a felony involving force or violence

    is a "person" by the arkansas legal precedence a 14 year old?
     
  10. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    A "person" is legalese for the fictional corporate version of all citizens who are indebted to the banks and whose birth certificates are traded as collateral. So, yes. He is a "person", unless he was home birthed and doesn't have a SSN.

    And, whenever we must ask "who is in the right", we must first assess "who owns the land". The property ownership (under common law) dictates the extent of the "legal" aspects. For instance, I had a gun in my hands since I was a small child, around 7 or 9 or something. On my father's land, he is king, he is sovereign. There is no authority higher than the land owner. Of course, we are not dealing with common law, we are dealing with UCC and the USCA. However, if I were the parents, I wouldn't go signing any legal paperwork, and if I had to I would affix "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE", and include "UNDER DURESS" if I had to as well. But, that opens a new book and we all stand in the jurisdiction of the courts, and if one does not know what it all means...well, it's not worth the time.

    So yes, under the UCC and USCA we "can" reserve our constitutionally protected rights (UCC 1-103, 1-207) but exercising them in court requires some tact and a bit of knowledge. Additionally, it would help to be in a court of record, and that's just not going to happen if one does not know how to make that work either. It might be best not to worry about "statutory" jurisdiction and its circular self defining state, as is defined by Black's Law.

    What could the parents do if they are being pestered by the "legal" system when their 14 year old son was only defending himself? Well, I would start by notifying the media, and repeating the importance of the fact that it is only humans who question the validity of the natural instinct to survive, and it is only humans who punish self defense and "fight or flight" response. In nature, there isn't a single creature that will purposefully kill itself or even worse -kill their own kind for protecting its herd. Therefore, questioning the validity of what transpired is not only illogical, it is unreasonable, especially since the 14 year old young man did not harm anybody besides the intruder -who was trespassing.

    Finally, the only additional problem I see is the question of "who owns" the 14 year old. Is it his parents? Does he own himself, or can he only be self aware at the age of 18? Maybe the State owns him since they willfully trade his birth certificate and number as collateral on the national debt?

    Tough times indeed.
     
  11. Maxflax

    Maxflax Lightning in a bottle

    Some States have an exception for under age firearms use in self defense in the home.. not sure about Arkansas. It will come down to who the DA is

    I'm glad the boy is alright, it's obvious the raiders were gang bangers. Hot Springs has gone to hell in a handbasket since I was there in the 1990s. Both my parents were from there and are buried there
     
  12. Clyde

    Clyde Jet Set Tourer Administrator Founding Member

    less concerned about the DA, more concerned about the Civil Courts
     
  13. Falcon15

    Falcon15 Falco Peregrinus

    The boy's parents, at the very least, will face a civil suit. Happens here in TX all the time. 2 guys break in, one gets shot & killed. The shooter gets free and clear of any criminal charges because of Castle Doctrine. The shooter gets sued for millions in civil court by the dead criminal's family, and the courts decide in favor of the criminal's family.
     
  14. Maxflax

    Maxflax Lightning in a bottle


    Seeing as they were felony housebreakers I think the defender and family will be OK, although court costs can kill you

    Anyone can sue anyone, but unless the jury is racially motivated in some way it should be a no-go
     
  15. Maxflax

    Maxflax Lightning in a bottle


    Hard to believe that could happen in Texas
     
  16. Clyde

    Clyde Jet Set Tourer Administrator Founding Member

    Max,

    There "reality" and reality. What we think is commonsense, a judge or jury of 12 of the biggest idiots in the world, will do the opposite because of their sense of justice.

    Clyde
     
  17. jungatheart

    jungatheart Beginner's Mind

    I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure the Castle Doctrine in Texas protects from this very thing meaning they can't be sued.
     
  18. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    "Jury of peers" should be just that, not the lowest common denominator of ignorance as the legal beagles will try to find during questioning during selection. More than likely, most of us would be taken out of the pool for cause if we even survived the summary rejections. More's the pity.
     
  19. Witch Doctor 01

    Witch Doctor 01 Mojo Maker

    actually you can be sued for just about anything... in this case excessive force/neglect (hey a 14 yo had a gun)/ posssibly unlawful death and loss of affection... it dosent mean you will win the suit but there are lawyers who will take anything for a chance at a dollar in their pockets... you loose because you have to hire an lawyer to defend against this suit...

    castle doctrine prevents only criminal charges...
     
  20. kckndrgn

    kckndrgn Moderator Moderator Founding Member

    i agree. TN's castle doctrine says that if the DA rules it justified, then there can be no civil suit, unless you shoot a police officer or harm an innocent bystander.
    Tennessee 39-11-622 - Justification for use of force Exceptions Immunity from civil liability. - 2010 Tennessee Code - Tennessee Law - Tennessee Statutes :: Justia -- US Laws, Codes, Statutes & Cases -- Justia
     
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7