Should the 80 year old man be charged in this case?

Damaged Eagle wrote:You make it sound as if the belief that it is wrong to beat the hell out of a old person and/or protecting your property is a conservative idea. In reality, this is simply a concept held by any reasonable person.

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:You make it sound as if the belief that it is wrong to beat the hell out of a old person and/or protecting your property is a conservative idea. In reality, this is simply a concept held by any reasonable person.

Do I?  Well let me clear that up for you since you obviously can't read.  For Damaged and anyone else who struggles with reading:  It is wrong to break into someone's home.  It is wrong to commit battery on the elderly.  And this is not a conservative belief but, rather, a belief held by any reasonable person with an IQ north of 60.

And I can't believe that I even have to state this to an adult.

Damaged Eagle wrote:And yet it offends your liberal sensibilities that an old beaten man who was let down by the society that was supposed to be there to protect him took the law into his own hands.

boards of FL wrote:


He shot a fleeing woman in the back.  Let's be clear on what it is that we are disagreeing about here.  I don't believe it is OK for someone to shoot a fleeing person in the back.  When someone is fleeing and pleading for their life, they clearly do not represent an imminent threat to you.  

Bob wrote:

boards of FL wrote:


He shot a fleeing woman in the back.  Let's be clear on what it is that we are disagreeing about here.  I don't believe it is OK for someone to shoot a fleeing person in the back.  When someone is fleeing and pleading for their life, they clearly do not represent an imminent threat to you.  

Yes,  let's do be clear.  And my clear belief is once they invaded my home and assaulted me,  they became a permanent threat to me until they're dead.  Period.

Joanimaroni wrote:The gun was in his pocket.

SheWrites wrote:

Bob wrote:

boards of FL wrote:


He shot a fleeing woman in the back.  Let's be clear on what it is that we are disagreeing about here.  I don't believe it is OK for someone to shoot a fleeing person in the back.  When someone is fleeing and pleading for their life, they clearly do not represent an imminent threat to you.  

Yes,  let's do be clear.  And my clear belief is once they invaded my home and assaulted me,  they became a permanent threat to me until they're dead.  Period.

Seems back in the day in FL I can remember my uncles saying that you can shoot someone on your property but it better not be in the back.  Think about it...they are leaving...why shoot to kill.

Secondly, I don't think the death penalty fits the crime by the judge and jury being said homeowner.

Thirdly, where does it say we have to become a gun wielding hero on our own property?  We pay taxes for law enforcement.  CALL 911 and get yourself as far away from the problem as possible.

Yes, I know they had already beat him up but he obviously had time to get a gun and shoot so time to call 911?  And yes, he had been a victim before.  

None of those add up to murder of an intruder.  The crime was robbery and assault.  I don't think those add up to a death sentence.

QueenOfHearts wrote:The woman's death was a consequence of her own action.  However, shooting a fleeing felon in the back is not OK.  If you are afraid they're going to turn around and come back, then shoot them when they come back.  Shooting someone in the back as they are running away is not in self-defense; it is cowardly.  The scenario started off with two criminals and ended with three.

If someone breaks into my house, I am going to shoot them.  I don't care why they're breaking into my house, they're going to get shot.  I practice a lot to make sure I'll be able to hit them.  But I'm not going to shoot them when they're running away.

Floridatexan wrote:
I'm reminded of RetiredLeo and the story he told about some would-be robbers.  Does anyone else remember?

SheWrites wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:The gun was in his pocket.

Still could have called 911.  I tell my elderly to keep their cell phone in their pockets.

Markle wrote:

We have virtually children here saying what an 80 year old man should have done after several previous break ins and getting the crap kicked out of him.  Others here who have never had the crap kicked out of them much less what they would do in the same circumstances.

Bob wrote:

Markle wrote:

We have virtually children here saying what an 80 year old man should have done after several previous break ins and getting the crap kicked out of him.  Others here who have never had the crap kicked out of them much less what they would do in the same circumstances.

nicely put.  

Floridatexan wrote:

Bob wrote:

Markle wrote:

We have virtually children here saying what an 80 year old man should have done after several previous break ins and getting the crap kicked out of him.  Others here who have never had the crap kicked out of them much less what they would do in the same circumstances.

nicely put.  

BS.  The DA will struggle with it, but he will have to charge the 80-year-old, who will then have to go before a judge, if not a jury.  I hope he's hired a lawyer.  

boards of FL wrote:  Breaking and entering is wrong.  Battery on the elderly is wrong.    

Bob wrote:

boards of FL wrote:  Breaking and entering is wrong.  Battery on the elderly is wrong.    

At least we got that part established,  snyderfish.  I guess we'll have to settle for that at this juncture.  lol

San Diego (CNN) -- Tom Greer is an 80-year-old crime victim who had the absolute right to use deadly force to defend himself when a pair of burglars -- a man and a woman -- broke into his home in Long Beach, California, and began assaulting him. And yet, if there is any justice, the 80-year-old should spend the remainder of his golden years in prison.

That's because he killed 28-year-old Andrea Miller, who begged for her life, telling Greer: "Don't shoot me, I'm pregnant! I'm going to have a baby!"

Not true, according to the L.A. County Coroner's Office. Miller was not pregnant. But Greer didn't know when he pulled the trigger -- for a second time.

The homeowner, who has been robbed before, told police that he returned home one night and found Miller and her accomplice, who has been identified as 26-year-old Gus Adams, trying to open his safe. Greer said they immediately attacked him and threw him to the ground, breaking his collarbone. While the intruders were distracted, Greer got up and retrieved his .22 caliber Smith & Wesson revolver. When Miller and Adams saw he was armed, he said they ran out of the house.

Greer told a Los Angeles television station that he pursued the intruders outside and into a nearby alley, gun in hand.

First mistake. He told KNBC: "When the time comes to defend yourself, you best do something." But, at this point, Greer was no longer defending himself because he wasn't in imminent danger. And he was not protecting his home. Instead, he was stalking his prey.

Then, Greer told the television station, he fired on the burglars, hitting Miller in the back.

Second mistake. If Greer shot Miller in the back, it makes it hard for him to argue that he wasn't in control of the situation and that somehow he felt threatened by Miller.

Finally, Greer said with no remorse, as Adams ran off, Miller pleaded for her life and claimed to be pregnant. But Greer fired off another shot anyway, killing her.

Third mistake. Since Miller wasn't really pregnant, we can assume that she was just trying to save her own skin. Maybe Greer believed her, or maybe he didn't. What matters is this: With the suspect already wounded and bleeding, Greer should have called police and waited for them to arrive. He didn't do that.

Instead, he meted out his own punishment. Was that because Greer was angry and frustrated at being victimized and wanted retribution? If so, that's not a good excuse for taking a life.

Adams has been found and arrested on suspicion of murder for taking part in a crime that led to Miller's death. His arraignment is scheduled for August 11.
Given that we're talking about an 80-year-old crime victim who grabbed a gun with the intent to defend himself, there are clearly extenuating circumstances. But they are not enough to let Greer avoid taking some responsibility for killing Miller.

He's a victim, but not a completely innocent one. The fact that he was robbed and beaten doesn't excuse everything that happened next. Greer pursued Miller out of his house and into the alley. He shot her in the back. And then, with her lying wounded on the ground and pleading for her life -- and still not clear on whether or not she was really pregnant -- he fired the fatal shot.

This wasn't premeditated, but neither was it a spontaneous crime of passion. During this entire ordeal, Greer had plenty of time to think about what was happening and how to react. He chose to react by shooting down someone who was no longer fleeing and no longer a threat to him.

By firing the fatal shot at someone who was alone, unarmed, wounded, defenseless and pleading for her life, Greer committed a cold-blooded act.

Let's be clear. If you confront a burglar in your home, and you feel your life is in danger, and you grab a gun to defend yourself and kill that person, most reasonable people could consider that to be a justified use of deadly force. This is not that. And it cheapens the right to self-defense to apply that label to what happened here.

Because his crime wasn't premeditated, Greer shouldn't be charged with first-degree murder. Second-degree will suffice. And if it is proved in court that he punitively and needlessly took a life, then he should be locked up for the rest of his.

boards of FL wrote:Greer shouldn't be charged with first-degree murder. Second-degree will suffice. And if it is proved in court that he punitively and needlessly took a life, then he should be locked up for the rest of his life.

Bob wrote:

boards of FL wrote:Greer shouldn't be charged with first-degree murder. Second-degree will suffice. And if it is proved in court that he punitively and needlessly took a life, then he should be locked up for the rest of his life.

We need to get that old racist right-winger off the streets before he kills us all.
He's a menace to civilized society.
How do you know it wasn't premeditated.  I bet when those young people jumped on his back he wanted to see them dead.  Because those old geezers are just like that.  They're bloodthirtsy and want to murder young people.
Give him the electric chair because that's what he deserves.
And the estate of that innocent young woman he killed needs to file a lawsuit against him and take everything he's got.  That'll teach him and everyone like him what happens to you when you vote for bush and watch fox news.

boards of FL wrote:


When you can't argue against the facts of the case, make up some absurd shit and argue against that.

Nice to see someone filling the void of stupid that was left here after the mass exodus of GOP supporters.