search
top

No Billed

Dave Hardy informs us that a 21 year old man in Richmond, who shot a fleeing armed robber, won’t be facing charges.  The grand jury refused to hand down an indictment in the case.  Said the prosecutor:

“When the adrenaline is pumping and you’re scared, you weigh fear differently than when you’re behind your desk,” he added.

Still, the prosecutor said he had no regrets about presenting the case.

“This is an indication that the system works,” he said.

Pennsylvania doesn’t use grand juries, except in cases where the crime spans more than one county.  It bothers me our state is lacking this key check on governmental power.  I agree with the prosecution that this is an indication that the system works; the grand jury did the right thing.

I think it’s worth it for me to put up another post tomorrow discussing the defense of property issue, as it generated some good comments, and I want to clarify a few things.  I do believe crime victims should be given a wide benefit of doubt when it comes to defending themselves from criminal attacks.  I’m glad the jury was understanding.

6 Responses to “No Billed”

  1. Alcibiades McZombie says:

    I can understand the sentiment in not shooting over property crime, but if that property crime involves breaking and entering [into one’s house] I don’t see why deadly force can’t be used.

    It does depend on a lot of factors, though. If the home owner confronts them just as they are breaking in, I would not expect shots to be fired. But if the offender enters a bedroom, a shooting is much more likely.

    When it comes to other issues like grafitti, lethal force probably isn’t necessary. But AirSoft sentry guns are greatly useful.

  2. Sebastian says:

    Entering an occupied home is a different matter. For practical purposes you’re not defending property, you’re protecting yourself. Someone willing to break into an occupied home, knowing the dangers involved, is likely an inherent danger to you and your family.

  3. Alcibiades McZombie says:

    Well, that was my point. The old saw of anti-self-defense advocates is that “a person shouldn’t be killed over a television”, but the burglar would have to break and enter into a person’s home to get the television, thus threatening the occupant.

  4. Alcibiades McZombie says:

    To clarify, I’m against the concept of “duty to retreat” laws. If it is legal to taser and hit/restrain someone stealing a television, that is an acceptable alternative.

  5. Sebastian says:

    You typically wouldn’t want to taser someone stealing your television. He’d probably drop it and it would break. Not to mention the electrostatic shock ;)

  6. Alcibiades McZombie says:

    Maybe it’s so big and heavy he has to wheel it out on a dolly.

    Or it’s so old and crappy it doesn’t matter if it breaks.

    God help me if it’s a small plasma screen, though. Or a computer containing my precious, sweet data.

top