Georgia Man Shoots and Kills Three Masked Armed Teenage Attackers Outside His Home

Georgia Rockdale County Shooting 3 dead

Courtesy WSB TV

Rockdale County, Georgia is southeast of Atlanta. That was the location of an attempted home invasion or robbery early Monday morning.

Three masked yoots, two 15-year-olds and a 16-year-old, at least one of them armed, approached a home and were confronted by the owner on the front lawn. The homeowner was also armed. It didn’t go well for the would-be robbers.

From wsbtv.com:

The shooting happened around 4 a.m. at a house off White Oak Court in Conyers. One of the boys died at the scene. The other two later died at the hospital.

Investigators said one of the teens pulled out a gun and fired at the neighbors before the homeowner returned fire.

The homeowner apparently had more firepower at his disposal than the attackers.

“It was five shots and then it sounded like a handgun. Then I heard somebody have an assault rifle. And it was a slew of shots that came out,” neighbor Carlos Watson said.

Deputies say they still don’t know who owned the two guns they found.

Investigators say three people were at the home, including a woman, when the shooting happened.

The homeowner who shot the masked intruder is a man. Neighbors say he’s a truck driver who owns a semi-automatic rifle and is highly protective of his mother.

No one has been charged yet. Investigators may be trying to determine why the homeowner was awake at 4:00am and prepared to intercept the three outside his home. Here’s a statement from Rockdale County Sheriff Eric Levett:

Neighbors interviewed in the report above didn’t seem to sympathize with a homeowner defending himself against three attackers.

 

comments

  1. avatar JoeWay says:

    Can’t wait to see them in their graduation outfits! Always my favorite thug pic. Then they scroll through social media and see the real deal! Good for this guy. Bus A Cap!

    1. avatar Cuteandfuzzybunnies says:

      They where sophomores or maybe juniors in high school. So no grad pics even possible.

      I mean this seams pretty cut and dry , three masked men with guns didn’t stop by the house at 4 am to sell the dude Girl Scout cookies. Even if the HO shot first he was likely justified.

      Unless they can show he planted the guns and masks , the self defense is likely going to stick.

      I think the cops are being prudent in not speculating before they even ID the dead crooks however.

      1. avatar Felix says:

        The possible fly in the ointment is that the yuts were there by ore-arrangement with the home owner for some illicit drug deal; they couldn’t come to terms and the homeowner won.

        I think that is what the news report is hinting at, but of course they don’t dare speculate openly. But … I mean … why else would a homeowner be up and about at 4am? Come on, work with me here.

        1. avatar Chris Morton says:

          Maybe he works nights.
          Maybe he works for a crooked IT company that coerces employees to work hours of unwaged overtime.

          Been there, done that.

        2. avatar He says:

          NEWSFLASH! MANY people who work for a living are up at 4AM! Including Truck Drivers. Or, maybe he was just up taking a leak and heard something. Or, maybe he had recently returned from work. Bottom line, HE should NOT HAVE to explain anything. HIS home. HIS property. The others did NOT belong THERE.

        3. avatar Ashok Cheveyo says:

          as a person that wakes up every day at 3:30 to get ready for work why is this even a question? really stupid comments

        4. avatar VicRattlehead says:

          Not unreasonable at all for someone working 1st shift to be up by 4. Truckers have to take 10hrs off after their ‘shift’ (DOT rules are a bit more complicated than that but we’ll simplify) so if he got home at 6pm the previous day he could be ready to hit the road by 4.

        5. avatar Felix says:

          Sorry for not writing my devil’s advocate piece more clearly.

          Sometimes it pays to wonder what the enemy is thinking.

        6. avatar Jim from LI says:

          You don’t wear masks to meet with a known associate.

        7. avatar Merle 0 says:

          You KNOW someone’s lived a Cush life when they say shit like “who’s up at 4am”? “Who gets up for work that early?” Must be nice you fuckwits. Try working a real mans job you sissy pants liberals.

        8. avatar Paul says:

          Truck driver? Drivers keep weird hours. They deliver your Mickey D buns long before you climb out of bed in the morning. The clock on my computer says 19:32:50 right this second. I’m gearing myself up to pull my boots on, to go to work. I’ll return home about 08:30 tomorrow. On my off days, I’m up all night long. I’m one of those people who would greet a burglar with a weapon in my hands at 04:00.

        9. avatar Garrison Hall says:

          Just check out the restaurants around bus stations and freight terminals at 5AM that are filled with people who regularly get up at 4AM to go to work. Scheech.

        10. avatar Voldamort says:

          Plus, there’s always these guys:

      2. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

        Possibly 8th grade “graduation” ceremony. “They keep inventing new ways to celebrate mediocrity!”

      3. avatar Hans says:

        Cute, anytime I see the profile with a disproportion
        of females, I know what kind of a hood it is.

    2. avatar Thixotropic says:

      Wonder what color…

      AR or AK to the rescue!

      Again…

    3. avatar TungstenBill says:

      To the top of comments… JoeWay.

      Graduation Pictures, garbage in a coffin, all dressed up in finest rags, ready for the land fill.

  2. avatar WI Patriot says:

    And this, is exactly why we carry…

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Speaking of carrying and the right thereof:

      Happy Constitution Day, everyone! This is the day we get to remind those around us of the very document that outlines our rights and tells the Fed Gov to honor them.

      (note that I said “outlines”, not “grants us”)

      1. avatar LifeSavor says:

        Thank you for the reminder, Haz!
        “Grants”…an important distinction.

        If only the people operating our government respected the constitution. Instead we get:

        “If it is illegal, we do it right away. If it is unconstitutional, it takes a little longer”.
        Henry Kissinger (attributed).

        1. “HAPPY RED FLAG LAW /Extreme Risk Protection Order Day!” (Re: Constitutional Infringements anniversary) Maybe the Sheriffs in this article will file one in favor of the three dead teenagers (YOOTS)…Sure Po-PO sounds like THEY do….For the Children!
          Sure sounds like Law Enforcement from Massachusetts…

  3. avatar jwm says:

    My sisters lived in Conyers at one time. It was a quiet little town that was right off the interstate. A lot of folks lived there and worked in Atlanta.

    I had some good times in the Lake Jackson area and considered retiring there for a while.

    What happened in Conyers is just further proof, as if we needed it, that there really is no such thing as a safe place. Always have a plan and tools for an emergency.

  4. avatar enuf says:

    Read about this one overnight and watched videos this morning. It is tragic, three 15 to 16 year old teens dead, that’s a horror.

    But what is a homeowner to do? Confronted at his home in the dark by three masked assailants with a gun? There is no choice here, and no way to know the attackers were children, not that it would change the equation. Masked attackers assault your home at night, you shoot them if you can and hope you and your family survive it.

    Hell yes that homeowner and his wife were in fear for their lives. You would have to be very stupid or mentally challenged not to be.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Good post, enuf, and appropriately mature. I appreciate that you didn’t spew the “well, that’s three less thugs we have to worry about, haha” nonsense we sometimes see from commenters. The loss of human life through violent action is always a horror, and especially so when those killed are so young.

      But you are also correct that this appears to be a justified act in which the homeowner(s) were in fear for their lives. Imagine the mixed feelings they must be going through right now, knowing that they exercised their right to defend themselves and their property from attackers, but also that three young lives are now gone as a result. Can’t be easy to process.

      If I never have to open fire on anyone in my life, it will be a good life.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        “Imagine the mixed feelings they must be going through right now, knowing that they exercised their right to defend themselves and their property from attackers, but also that three young lives are now gone as a result.”

        Did you hear what some of the neighbors, who were *related* to the robbers, had to say?

        “He didn’t have to do that!”

        WTF? He’s gonna have to live looking over his shoulder for as long as he continues to live there…

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Yeah, I caught that at the end of the article. This is *exactly* why I attempt to be on good terms with all my neighbors, and offer to look after their yards when they’re away on vacation, or trim one of their trees, or help with a repair, etc. If they see me as one of the good guys, they’d be less likely to question my motive if I ever find myself in a home defense event.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “If they see me as one of the good guys…”

          Can you be certain that if you are required to display your firearm, the neighbors will keep you in the “good guy” column? Many people would be glad to have someone “watch” their house, and call police. But, bring out the gun, and the world turns.

        3. avatar LifeSavor says:

          This is where faith, ministers, peacemakers should be stepping in. You can be certain lawyers will be stepping in.

          The family that defended itself, the families of those who died are all experiencing tragedy and trauma. Community and faith leaders are needed to facilitate healing bring people together.

        4. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “This is where faith, ministers, peacemakers should be stepping in. You can be certain lawyers will be stepping in.”

          I hope that cooler heads can prevail…

      2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        Well, there’s 3 less thugs we have to worry about !

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Every room has to have its 5-yr-old who knows nothing about the real world and doesn’t get the privilege of eating at the adult dining table. Thanks for outing yourself so quickly.

        2. avatar LifeSavor says:

          No. Too many people suffer from this event. It is just not that simple.

        3. avatar enuf says:

          No, that’s not it. Three children at the edge of adulthood tried crime and died for it. That is a terrible awful tragedy.

          Good news the homeowner survived. Bad news that stupid kids got themselves killed.

          I feel for their families and the pain they must be in.

          And for the homeowner who only did what he had to do and must now be dealing with some very tough stuff.

        4. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          “…terrible awful tragedy.” ?!?!

          Personal responsibility starts early on. Children raised in the concept typically don’t exhibit the behaviors shown in the article. These young men made bad choices and paid dearly for their poor choice. They chose to engage in anti-social acts and the neighbors, media, etc are aghast at the results.

          I hold the adult(s) in their lives mostly responsible.

          The one I feel for is the homeowner who was assaulted on his property, responded within the Law and is now receiving flak from a horde of armchair amateur QB’s with no knowledge of the pertinent facts in this case.

          Let the posturing and bravado continue…

        5. avatar rosignol says:

          The tragedy is that these teenagers’ parents didn’t do a better job of raising them.

          A group, masks, weapons, strikes me that they were well-prepared and had put some thought into what they were doing. This was not a moment of weakness in the face of temptation.

          Anyone want to bet on if this was their first time?

        6. avatar Dave Huff says:

          Regardless of what haz says, yours is a true statement….

        7. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I can understand a question about why he was up and ready at 4 AM, but I can also understand if the answer was “That’s when they showed up the past 3 times.” or something similar. If he was prepared, the cops should have complaints on the subject, perhaps there is video. Byt if 3 masked and armed yoots showed up, it is just that simple, and if I’m on the jury it will remain just that simple.

      3. avatar Jim from LI says:

        Sorry, but I fail to see the horror here. If they were doing armed home invasion at 16, the horror is imagining what they would be doing at 19 or 21.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Easy to say from a keyboard. Not so easy when you’re the one looking at a 15-yr-old and pulling the trigger, even if justified. I’m not at all saying the homeowners weren’t correct to do what they did. I would likely have done the same. I just saying that it’s so easy to type in the words “well, three idiots gone” without thinking about the full story. Would’ve been a lot easier (emotionally) for the homeowners to cope if the perps were 35-yr-old thugs with long criminal histories, but 15 and dumb? That would have me very somber afterward. Maybe you’re comfortable with the thought of snuffing out three young lives, but I sure wouldn’t be.

        2. avatar No One Special says:

          Some of us have seen a hell of a lot worse and yet still feel the same way, good guys 3 bad guys 0. There is a flip side on how to look at this, stop feeling sorry for knucklehead scum. If they wasn’t being knuckleheads they would still be alive. Mommy and Daddy should have raised them better or kept them locked in the basement playing video games. “Oh the horror, oh the outcry!” Wahboofuckemhoo! People aren’t required to forfeit property or life because of entitled scum, atleast not yet. I feel nothing for the dead except that they will no longer be able to be a threat to anyone else. For that I’m glad.

        3. avatar Si Vis Pacem says:

          @Jim,

          Your use of the word “imagine” shows that we simply don’t know these now-dead young men, and too many people here are playing self-appointed Nostradamus.

          @No One Special,

          I’m usually on the fence with your comments, agreeing with some but not with others. But with your words above, my respect for you just fell a big notch. POTG are supposed to be mature and responsible – at least, that’s what we all hope Leftists would perceive us as – yet you are showing that you’re neither.

        4. avatar No One Special says:

          Maybe this is another good example of what rights really are? You don’t agree with what I said, which your right. I still have the right to say it. I don’t agree with what you said, which is my right. Yet you still have the right to say it. If you say anything anywhere to be agreed with all the time that tells me one of two things. One you don’t say much or two you are really good at pandering to the masses. I personally don’t care if I’m agreed with or not. I have my own experiences for why and how I look at things. As do you. Clearly our experiences are not the same. That’s ok everyone is different. How immature and irresponsible can I be if I’m at home taking care of my family living my life in such a way that impacts other’s lives as little as possible? I’m not going out masked with a gun with clear intent on do harm to others. I won’t apologize for not having a bleeding heart liberal view on this. Instead I’ll call it what it is. Criminals or would be criminals regardless of age wouldn’t have to worry about losing their lives if they weren’t criminals, plain and simple.

        5. avatar LifeSavor says:

          Jim from LI,

          Well, sure, we all want the bad guys to experience the consequences of their decisions, AND, I would have pulled the trigger also, BUT…

          When we kill, we should feel pain. It is natural, normal, healthy. We should feel remorse; I do NOT mean regret. It was self-defense. No regrets. Remorse that such an action was necessary. Anger, absolutely! Maybe even rage. But being cold makes us closed to our own emotions and those of the people around us.

          We cannot heal when cold; we cannot heal others when cold.

          I can be fierce; I’ve been told I can be very scary. I’ve never lost a fist-fight (although the last one was more than 35 years ago while I was training in the clergy!) Compassion is not weakness.

          I watched Palestinian women dancing when the World Trade Centers came down. I thought, I do not want to be like them. (That statement is about me; NOT about you).

          Please, accept my apology if this seems too preachy or is in any way offensive.

        6. avatar Voldamort says:

          No One Special: Hard to see how anyone could disagree with the above. Growing up on a working ranch in NE Montana, even as kid, when it was chicken for dinner I got handed the hatchet. I learned early that death is a normal part of life, but the bleeding hearts simply don’t understand that. In their unicorn dream world everything lives forever. No wonder the real world shocks them so.
          Personally, I do without the “boo-de-fuckin-hoo”, but no matter how it gets worded, predators know they take a risk when attacking others. Even the lion knows he might get that antelope’s horn right through the chest instead of for dinner. I don’t view such things as tragedies, but just as life.
          If three predators attack me on my own property, they died of their own errors, not because of me. If I did the same to them at their home, I would expect no different. I treat them as I would want to be treated. If I turned mad dog I would WANT to be put down.

        7. avatar No One Special says:

          You absolutely understand where I am coming from and I agree.

        8. avatar Voldamort says:

          Lifesaver:
          But regret and remorse are both words tied to guilt. And one should never feel guilt (even though many do…) for doing the proper thing.
          Perhaps you meant more like “sorrow” or “sadness”? That I can understand. I felt sorry for the chicken when I chopped its head off (see my post above). But I also wanted dinner. Sadness and sorrow, yes. But I never felt guilty.
          Everything lives off of everything else. Us too. After we pass, we’re food for the worms and/or buzzards. Even if we stupidly insist on treating our bodies with chemicals to keep that from happening, we still decay and become fertilizer for the plants. Its just the circle of life.
          Much mischief comes from feeling guilt over it. To feel guilt over living off of other life is to feel guilt over one’s own existence. What a sorry state that must be. Little wonder that the SJWs are so insane…

        9. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          Special and Voldamort,

          Both of you are running off on a tangent and attempting to champion it. Sort of like taking the football and running off the side into the locker room to claim you scored a goal. I get what you’re saying, Voldamort, but Special skewed off of the original point of this thread, so follow him into the locker room at your own discretion.

          If you’re both fine disregarding the sobriety of the situation and eager to dance over bodies, while proclaiming the other conservatives here who don’t wish to join in the dance as “liberal bleeding hearts”, even as they agree the use of force was justified and the young men got what they deserved, then there’s not much more that can be said. You’re showing yourselves as people who are disturbingly eager to “shoot to kill”, and not someone I’d want in my group, or around me in a bad situation.

          But you guys do what you want. Let us know how it goes when it’s your turn to face the Sheriff, DA, news media, lawyers, neighbors, etc. See how far your exuberance over dead youths gets you.

        10. avatar No One Special says:

          “You’re showing yourselves as people who are disturbingly eager to “shoot to kill”, and not someone I’d want in my group, or around me in a bad situation.”

          You’re assuming that I/we would have no reflection on what we were made to do. That we wouldn’t wish there was another way. That our own actions would bear no weight. Well to that end you are absolutely dead wrong. I already have demons that I wrestle with and sure as hell don’t want anymore. I feel horrible for the man that had to shoot these would be criminals. Especially because of the current state of affairs regarding people protecting themselves. However I still have no feeling for someone/anyone that goes out with the intention of harming others in any way. I absolutely have a live and let live attitude. We both go about our own lives as we see fit and should our paths cross may we encroach on each other as little as possible. If that isn’t clear or still doesn’t sit well with you than maybe you are right. There’s not much more to say.

        11. avatar LifeSavor says:

          Voldamort,

          I can go with ‘sorrow’. Exactly, no guilt for doing that which must be done.

        12. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Jim, I agree. I mean, these asswipes were shooting at his NEIGHBORS? I would put them down like rabid dogs.

        13. avatar Voldamort says:

          LifeSavor(sorry about the previous misspelling):
          That’s all I was trying to say. That what must be done, must be done. Whether its ugly or beautiful, or fun/sad doesn’t enter into it.
          OFC, certain ones will always insist on taking that as “dancing over bodies”, but that’s their error, not mine. They’re entitled to their opinions, just as I’m entitled to my opinion of them, which I will not share.

        14. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          “I Haz A Question”, Maybe you should look at the neighborhood, and the “neighbors” that are making stupid statements on the video, it definitely isn’t Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood, and the armed thugs were NOT well parented “white” kids! Guarantee this wasn’t the first crime these three young douchebags were involved in. Everyone who is whining that they this was a tragedy because they were so young needs to get their heads out of their backsides, age makes no difference when it comes to ARMED ROBBERY! We should be glad that there will be no more victims of these three CRIMINALS!

        15. avatar No One Special says:

          “We should be glad that there will be no more victims of these three CRIMINALS!”

          I can’t speak for others and therefore I won’t. I, that’s right I, am glad no one else will be terrorized by these criminals. I am also glad that the tax payers will not have to pay for a trial, house, clothe and feed these criminals as they rot in a cell somewhere.

        16. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

          There is no terrible traumatic horror here. At sixteen i never would have done this crime. I knew better. I wouldn’t lose one wink of sleep if I was forced to shoot someone in this circumstance.

        17. avatar Jamie in North Dakota says:

          Jim, No One and Vold. I Agree with you, not one bit sorry three criminals are gone.

      4. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        Mentioning that we now three fewer thugs to worry about and adding “haha” may be trite and a tad cold, but it’s hardly “nonsense.” These three were monsters who by any remotely sensible standard of anticipation were within what would be a years long career of criminal violence.

        The tragedy here, if any, is the decision they made to forfeit their lives in the pursuit of ruining others’ lives. Nevertheless, that decision predates both this homeowner’s act of self-defense and their demise. Now that events have run their course, the foreseeable benefit here is a net subtraction of pain, suffering, and loss criminally inflicted by these thugs upon others for years to come.

        P.S.

        Haha!

        1. avatar Si Vis Pacem says:

          I think I have to fall on the other side and agree with Haz. You (Jonathon) can’t admit it’s cold, then think it’s cool to add “haha” at the end of your comment. That just says you’re cold yourself, and rather immature.

          Were these kids dumb? Absolutely. Thugs? I think they were too young for that designation, but we didn’t know them when they were still alive, so perhaps yes. Three stains removed from society? Hmmm.

          I agree that – from the scant info this article provides – the homeowner’s actions were justified. But I think both enuf and Haz were saying the horror is in regards to how young the now-deceased were. And I agree with them.

        2. avatar jwm says:

          Si. I can’t think of any more thuggish behavior than an armed home invasion. These kids were bolder and more dangerous than a lot of older, more experienced crooks.

          They earned their death. Whether some anonymous person on a blog mourns or celebrates is not important.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Si. I can’t think of any more thuggish behavior.”

          People !, boys, girls and those who ain’t too sure…listen-up.

          “Thug”, and derivatives, is a racist slur. Read about it in all the papers. Term only applies to a single demographic. Can’t even say, “the T word”. The First Amendment only protects legitimate speech, and “thug” isn’t legitimate because….well…just because.

          Can’t we all just get along?

        4. avatar rosignol says:

          The only people who get to declare words off-limits around here are the owners of the website.

        5. avatar LarryinTX says:

          The term “thug” relates to behavior only, has zero to do with race. I assume you forgot the “sarc” tag.

        6. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The term “thug” relates to behavior only, has zero to do with race.”

          I read it on the internet. The term is indicative of white supremacy. Even Congress things had said it. And they can’t lie because of their oath, right?

          “Normals” have to use the preferred vocabulary of the oppressed because the oppressed feel physically assaulted by words, even to the point of saying that offensive words violate their human rights.

          R I D I C U L E

        7. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          Sam, “Thug” has no color, it is strictly demonstrated behavior and I refuse to allow anyone to hijack its definition.

          A thug is as a thug ‘does’. Nothing more, nothing less. Don’t like being referred to as a thug?

          Don’t act like one… 🙂

        8. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sam, “Thug” has no color, it is strictly demonstrated behavior and I refuse to allow anyone to hijack its definition.”

          Just reporting what I read. (That last word works either way in this sentence) How can gun owners gain acceptance of the “good people” if we continue to use words they don’t like? If we show them we are just like them, no different as people, we are sure to gain credibility and favor. Out niceing gun grabbers will lull them into unawareness, make them be less strident about guns. How can they oppose us if we are pleasant to work with? We jes been doin’ it all wrong. A gentle answer turneth away wrath….

          Doesn’t it?

        9. avatar No One Special says:

          “A gentle answer turneth away wrath….”

          I’m not disagreeing because your statement is true. However what do you call a duck if not a duck, or maybe pig rather than duck fits the conversation at hand a little more closely?

        10. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “However what do you call a duck if not a duck, or maybe pig rather than duck fits the conversation at hand a little more closely?”

          Well, you have a point there. Need to be more sensitive to how the PC crowd refers to particular animals in the future. The latest substitute wording* seems to be about as bad as it can get, so PC may never get around to euphemisms for animals.

          *Convicted felons can no longer be referred to as criminals, or felons, but as “justice-involved persons”.

        11. avatar No One Special says:

          “*Convicted felons can no longer be referred to as criminals, or felons, but as “justice-involved persons”.”

          Jeezlus, I may have heard it all now. The Justice department should most likely get rid of the term felon/felony all together than would be my surmise. What pandering classification for the purpose of crime committed do you think they might come up with to replace the already commonly known and atleast accepted in the past classification of felon? To me it stands to reason if the person that committed the crime can’t be call a felon than the crime committed can’t be called a felony. One hand washes the other as it were.

        12. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “To me it stands to reason if the person that committed the crime can’t be call a felon than the crime committed can’t be called a felony. One hand washes the other as it were.”

          Ever read 1984″? Here we are.

          Here’s a link you might like:
          https://www.mrctv.org/blog/doj-using-term-justice-involved-individual-instead-criminal

          https://www.newswars.com/san-fran-changes-felon-to-justice-involved-person/

        13. avatar No One Special says:

          That first article is just completely off the chain, although the last part was mildly amusing in a tongue in cheek kind of way.

          The second article does have a mild point but that point can only be found in true rehabilitation. That requires first knowing that the action was a crime and by that nature was wrong. Next is serving the time and getting out and working hard to reintegrate into society.

          What’s that saying? One mistake can ruin a hundred that a boy’s.

        14. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “What’s that saying? One mistake can ruin a hundred that a boy’s.”

          Yep.

        15. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          The way my Drill Instructor explained it to me was..

          100 atta’boys + 1 aw’shit = 0 f’ing balance

        16. avatar No One Special says:

          As good as any way to look at it. Drill Sargeants have that ability in my experience.

        17. avatar Sam I Am says:

          ” The way my Drill Instructor explained it to me was..

          100 atta’boys + 1 aw’shit = 0 f’ing balance”

          You got a zero? In my leadership class, we were told the equation resulted in a negative, and we could never dig ourselves out. You had it easy, you feather merchant, rear echelon commando.

        18. avatar No One Special says:

          “the equation resulted in a negative, and we could never dig ourselves out”

          That is the way it was for some people but I’m not sure that I agree with it though. If a person truely shows that they want to make amends for that Aw shit than that person’s superiors should reciprocate in kind. It is those that have have no interest in bettering themselves that should never be able to dig themselves out. Somehow I think I’m preaching to the choir though.

        19. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “That is the way it was for some people but I’m not sure that I agree with it though.”

          It was a reminder of the seriousness of our position. That one could never exceed expectations, only maintain stasis. Failure was irretrievable. We used to counter that if minimum acceptable accomplishment wasn’t good enough, it wouldn’t be the minimum. “Management” retorted that they could always raise the minimum to 100%. And so it went.

        20. avatar No One Special says:

          There are instances where failure is not recoverable. Such as failure resulting in loss of life or mission as two examples. Granted there are others but recognizing those instances in advance can mitigate those aw shit moments before they happen. Aside from that no one is perfect and aw shits happen to everyone. I’ve had experience where 100% was minimum and even giving 100% only required 110% afterwards. As you said “and so it went”. Setting the example by making examples was never a good sign of good leadership to me. Like punishing the masses for the actions of a few. I always believed in giving someone enough rope to hang themselves with and lead by example. Doing those two things usually garnered respect regardless of what was on your collar. Respect because of who I am and my character was always more important to me.

        21. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Doing those two things usually garnered respect regardless of what was on your collar.”

          What was on our collars was irrelevant, and no respect granted. We were humans in a dangerous, technical environment, where human failure was the proximate cause of every misadventure visited on the command. We were there to respect the mission, the required activities, and the chain of command.

          Regardless of our rank, we were essentially “suspects”, liable to contribute to the next misadventure, unless carefully watched and controlled on and off duty – and even that was not considered sufficient to preclude disaster. A traffic ticket issued to a family member could end your career. We had a divorce rate exceeding “the norm” for military.

        22. avatar No One Special says:

          Yep and so it went. More like prison than a profession. No egg on your face because those above you may get some of it because of vicarious liability. As if no action is your own. I only half buy into the thinking. The attempt of total control and micromanagement can induce the circumstances most feared.

        23. avatar No One Special says:

          No I haven’t read the book 1984 but having searched it out I’m going to.

        24. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “No I haven’t read the book 1984 but having searched it out I’m going to.”
          Conventional wisdom among the enlightened is that Orwell wrote the book about the oppressive right-wing/conservative government. Don’t fall for it.

          Oh, yeah. The narrative is English english. Some differentials that can be off-putting. Just muddle through, and it will be rewarding.

        25. avatar No One Special says:

          I read an article describing the book and just from that I believe your surmise that the books content is where we are now is pretty much spot on. Where we are now sure isn’t because of the right.

        26. avatar RCC says:

          Sam
          Thug comes from Thuggee an Indian (Asian) murder / robbery gang and cult combination who specialty was strangling travellers in their sleep. Actions not race got you membership

        27. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Thug comes from Thuggee an Indian (Asian) murder / robbery”

          Excellent piece of knowledge. Thanks.

        28. avatar Miner49er says:

          It is incredibly sad three American use or lead down the wrong path, a path of violence and crime that led to their early death.

          Under the right conditions, these young men could’ve been doctors lawyers soldiers, they could have cured cancer, taking us to Mars, or served honorably in the military.

          It is always a tragedy when miss guided use, lacking the proper influence in upbringing, head down the wrong path into a life of crime.

          Yes, perhaps the homeowner had no other choice than to terminate them. Perhaps he was acting completely within the law and protecting his home and family.

          But I can assure you, 10 years from now when he’s laying awake at 3 AM thinking about those three young men he shot the rightness of his actions will be cold comfort.

          Only Psychopaths find joy or humor in killing.

      5. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        Well, everyone, I see that many of you disregarded the multiple times I clearly stated that the homeowner was in the right, and the perps got what they deserved. The tragedy isn’t that justice was served, or any “liberal bleeding heart” emotional nonsense, but that the harsh lesson had to be learned by three people who were so very young and could have otherwise led productive lives if they had exercised better discretion and decisions.

        THAT’S the tragedy. Not the straightforward righteous outcome (which I’m sure we all agree was necessary), but the fact that three dumb youths made dumb decisions that led to a tragic end to their lives. I’m really perplexed as to how so few of you understand this. So nobody else here (other than enuf, Guesty, LifeSavor) considers the loss of young human life as a sober event?

        If three youths who live nearby my home came to my yard and threatened me with a gun, and I had to defend myself, and they ended up dead, I wouldn’t regret it if it were necessary for me to stay alive. But I certainly would be lamenting the fact that those youths put me in such a bad situation that resulted in them forfeiting their lives, plus the emotional toll that would undoubtedly follow. Ask any cop or soldier if they had to go through a personal introspection after killing someone in defense.

        This conversation has been very enlightening as to everyone’s mindsets over the topic of life and death.

        1. avatar No One Special says:

          Like I said I have my own demons I wrestle with, I don’t want anymore. I thank the good lord above every day my family and I get through having not gone through something like this. For that I am truely blessed. I also pray for the homeowner to get past this and go on with his life as best he can. I extend the same to the families of the criminals although I do believe that they have fault in it. All I can offer the criminals themselves is God will sort them out. Let me ask this now. What would be the response if the criminals had shot and killed the homeowner? Would it still be if the criminals had only made better choices the homeowner would still be alive? Better still what would the response be had they been older, poor fellers should have made better choices in life, they might still be living it? What’s done is done and at no fault of the homeowner currently. Everything else is just details as it has already been said.

        2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          “I also pray for the homeowner to get past this and go on with his life as best he can. I extend the same to the families of the criminals although I do believe that they have fault in it.”

          ****
          Thank you, thank you, thank you. THAT’S the sobriety I was attempting to convey, and I’m glad to read this from you. Perhaps somewhere along the line one of my statements was misunderstood, which led to all the confusion. If so, then I’ll try to proofread my comments better in the future before posting.

          No hard feelings. May be tomorrow will be a better day, lol.

        3. avatar No One Special says:

          “No hard feelings. May be tomorrow will be a better day”

          Never was any and I always pray for that very thing regardless of how good or bad the current one is.

        4. avatar LifeSavor says:

          Haz,

          Exactly. I’ve said it before: you seem to be someone who does much good in this world.

          We must do that which we must to protect our families safety and lives.
          If we are justified, we should not regret it.
          But we MUST recognize it is tragic.
          It is tragic that all involved got to this point.
          It is tragic for those who died.
          It is tragic for those who remain.
          Recognizing the tragedy makes us stronger.
          It will make us better advisers to those who are younger.
          It will signal that we can be trusted.
          It is not weakness.
          It is our statement that we are determined and confident.
          Beyond this line, you shall not cross.

        5. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Yes, Life. Very well said. Maybe even enough to print and frame on the wall.

        6. avatar Si Vis Pacem says:

          Two people argue extensively (Haz and Special) and later reconcile on friendly terms, with a former priest (LifeSavor) to oversee and approve. A good day on TTAG.

          Special, you just went back up a notch in my opinion of you.

          LifeSavor, well done. You, too, are a point of stability and reason here.

        7. avatar LifeSavor says:

          SVP,

          Thank you for your kind words!
          Another reason this is a good day.

        8. avatar Wyantry says:

          Personally, I have no problems concerning the actions (reactions) of the attacked homeowner.

          It seems the ‘moral question’ articulated by those bemoaning the demise of the three “masked youths” (thugs, or thugs-in-training) is not the lawful protection of personal property and life, but the fact that death resulted by a firearm.

          Another case of improperly demonizing a tool, as is the common practice of the socialist-democrats and liberal leftists.

          The question of personal property and self-protection is being subverted, and the concept of ‘productive citizenship’ is continually ignored.

          What can we (as a society) do to eliminate the culture that promotes people to attempt things like masked-armed-robbery?

          I am more concerned with the psychological trauma perpetrated upon the homeowner / defender by the three youths — I wish him well.

        9. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          +1

          Well said.

      6. avatar George Washington says:

        Well, at least there’s three less THUGS to rape and pillage….
        Whoops, sorry if I offended you….. Problem is, I DON’T CARE…… I’M GLAD THESE PUNKS ARE DEAD AND WILL NEVER THREATEN ANYONE WITH VIOLENCE EVER AGAIN!!!!

        Some people, I swear….. Feeling sorry for A FKN CRIMINAL…. TAKE THAT SHITE SOMEWHERE ELSE

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          “Some people, I swear….. Feeling sorry for A FKN CRIMINAL”

          ****
          The entire conversation apparently went right over your head. We’re not sorry for the criminals themselves, but rather that the situation had to happen in the first place. The perps got what they deserved, period. Everyone here has said that, and nobody has said otherwise.

          Maybe you should slow down and actually read the conversation before jumping in.

    2. avatar Jon Ford says:

      I live on a dead-end where I have frequent “visitors” who have even pulled into my driveway. In the country, it will be at least 10-15 min for the Sheriff’s Office to respond unless a car is nearby. I’m always up at 4 am, and I’m not a truck driver, just a simple project manager so the nonsense about asking why someone is up at 4 is nonsense. I’m always armed (LTC) and have a long gun available. If these criminals were masked at 4 am, how could the homeowner know they were 15 or 50? It’s tragic that nowadays a group of 15-16-year-olds think it’s prudent to pull a home invasion. If his mother (elderly?) was normally alone in the home what would the outcome have been without her son on the scene? Unsolved homicide/sexual assault? Were the perpetrators on drugs? I’ve had an individual attempt to enter my home while I was away and my family was awakened by the dogs. That attempted entrance didn’t stop even with three dogs barking like crazy! When the deputies came on the scene, their arrival scared off the attempted intruder, but that’s it. If it wasn’t for a stout door could he/she have entered? The victim, in this case, was not the three dead “children”, but the man who was forced to defend himself and his mother. The three dead young men are victims of their upbringing, but not of the actions of self-defence.

  5. avatar S R says:

    Maybe the homeowner was awakened by a barking dog or the attackers themselves. Maybe the homeowner was involved in criminal activities with the attackers or had some altercation with them and was therefore excepting them. Either way good job. It should be understood if you threaten someone at his home you should expect to get shot.

    1. avatar enuf says:

      If the homeowner was involved in a crime with those teens and it went bad, then it is not Stand Your Ground. SYG/Castle laws are only for the innocent, not for people engaged in a crime. If the police come out with such a report, well now that would change things completely.

      Right now the only info out to the public is this was an innocent homeowner protecting himself and his wife against three masked and armed robbers at his home in the dark of night.

      Pleased the good people are uninjured. Sad for the families of the dead. Criminals always hurt those who love them, at least indirectly. Even criminals as young as 15, which is a tragedy, to be a gun thug at 15.

  6. avatar Sam I Am says:

    If police are asking why the defender was on the lawn at 0400, then something else is going on.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Why? I hear noises in my yard in the middle of the night every few weeks and go out to investigate. It’s usually a coyote or raccoons, but I once thought it was a burglar and found evidence of tampering at one of my back windows (torn screen, bent frame) the next morning. Believe me, the Sheriff deputies where I live will NOT respond unless you mention violence or shots fired, so if I think someone *might* be on my property, sitting inside with the phone in my hand won’t do anything to prevent a break-in. I once called the Sheriff station to say I was in the very act of witnessing (and video recording the individuals, their faces, their vehicle license plates, everything) an illegal drug deal going down right in front of me at my property by trespassers, and they STILL didn’t care and never showed up.

      Just last week, I had to chase off a hooded thug who drove up to my property in the middle of the night and actually argued with me as I approached with a flashlight and an authoritative voice. Happens several times per year.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Why?”

        “Why”, indeed. Why are cops asking about a perfectly legal act of being present on owned property, regardless of time of day?

    2. avatar jwm says:

      During my working life I had quite a few jobs that required me to leave home at 4ish in the morning. My son is doing that now. Also, since I’m retired and hunting season is upon us it is not at all uncommon for me to be out the door even a little earlier.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Also, since I’m retired and hunting season is upon us it is not at all uncommon for me to be out the door even a little earlier.”

        Quite common, I’m sure. Just noting that when cops/authorities are making a comment about determining why a homeowner is armed, outdoors at 0400, then suspicion is prudent. Why should anyone acting legally need to explain their legal action? One possibility is cops have information that the confrontation was not random. Another possibility is cops/authorities are trying to build a case where the legal homeowner becomes the offender.

        1. avatar Curmudgeon says:

          Exactly. Last I checked it’s not illegal to be awake at 4am.

        2. avatar jwm says:

          3 people were killed. There will be an investigation. Questions of all types will be asked. Multiple times. I do not ever want to see a time when the cops role up and the shooter tells them’ it’s ok. It was self defense”. And then the cops just leave it at that and role off.

        3. avatar No One Special says:

          “I do not ever want to see a time when the cops role up and the shooter tells them’ it’s ok. It was self defense”. And then the cops just leave it at that and role off.”

          Don’t get me wrong because I understand what you mean. However speaking to how things can go in the opposite direction. If the initial investigation bares fruit that it was indeed self defense, why keep beating a dead horse? Why try to ruin a person’s life because they chose to continue living it? After all law enforcement doesn’t like it when the same thing is done to them. Law enforcement might get a little less harsh dealing if they would act in kind.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “I do not ever want to see a time when the cops role up and the shooter tells them’ it’s ok. It was self defense”. And then the cops just leave it at that and role off.”

          Not advocating anything like that. Point was, the defender was legally standing in the yard, regardless of the time. Even if the defender was awaiting a delivery of plutonium, standing in the yard was perfectly legal. Next, completely unrelated to the expected plutonium delivery, the defender was approached by armed perps. Their reason for being there was irrelevant, until they committed an illegal action. The perps attacked the legally acting homeowner. A fight ensued, the perps were killed.

          All that is necessary for cops to know is a citizen was standing on his private property, was attacked, and shots were fired. The defender was doing nothing illegal. That should be the starting point of the investigation. But, as the cops apparently are curious about the reason for the defender to be in his yard at 0400, “Breathing” definitely is an appropriate response, and one not to be pursued…because that is a legal action. The idea that questioning legal actions is somehow a proper investigative technique offends the right of individuals to be let alone, unless they are officially suspected of committing a crime – which should require something other than admitting the legal act of breathing.

    3. avatar Reason says:

      Why? He is a truck driver. Not unusual for a truck driver to be leaving for work at that hour. Not unusual for a truck driver to be armed too.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Why? He is a truck driver.”

        Well, to repeat myself (which I dearly love to do)…

        “Why?” are the cops curious about a legal homeowner, legally on his front lawn, regardless of the time? The reason is irrelevant…unless it isn’t. Which is why I originally note that if cops are asking for a justification for a legal act, something else must be going on. Have no idea what the “something else” is, but cops don’t question a legal action just to kill time waiting for trash pickup.

        1. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          Of course they do. Most LEOs I’ve encountered ask “fishing” questions, even in benign consensual conversation (non-detainment) conversations. This is why so many attorneys advise that you state only facts as required by your region’s laws, and shut up to avoid saying anything else unless you have your attorney present.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Of course they do. Most LEOs I’ve encountered ask “fishing” questions,…”

          Which is precisely the reason I noted, “…something else is going on.”

          A person standing on their property, regardless of time is acting legally. The reason that person is standing on their property is irrelevant. Same for a person legally armed standing on their property. The “why” is irrelevant. A legally armed person standing on their property, facing armed intruders, is acting legally. The reason for being there is irrelevant.

          When we have come to the place it is acceptable, normal, reasonable for cops to question a person regarding the reason they were standing on their lawn at whatever time we have crossed over into “reasonable gun control” logic, because the implication is that if a person did not choose to act legally (being on their lawn), then the episode wouldn’t have happened the way it did, and countless other outcomes were possible. In essence, “duty to retreat” when faced with an armed threat (in this case, duty to not be outside at 0400). Note: we do not have information as to whether there was a “duty to retreat” law in place.

          So….questioning the homeowner’s reasons means police are not responding simply to a self-defense shooting, there is something else at hand. The entire conversation should have been no more than, “Owner – I was standing here breathing, when three masked individuals arrived, one displaying a firearm. The intruders fired a shot. I shot back, and stopped shooting when the intruders fled.” Period. EOS.

        3. avatar Cloudbuster says:

          Most LEOs I’ve encountered ask “fishing” questions, even in benign consensual conversation (non-detainment) conversations.

          This x 1000. I’ve experienced this. Cops are not your friends. They are *always* trying to get something on you. Always treat every sentence you speak to a cop as if your life depends on it.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “They are *always* trying to get something on you. ”

          Which does qualify as “…something else going on.”

        5. avatar No One Special says:

          Because three knucklehead teenagers are dead and it’s so horrible and there should be outcry. Plus the homeowner should be in bed, he had no right being up at that time in the morning. He certainly shouldn’t have a semiautomatic rifle. He also shouldn’t shot those poor innocent boys. Hows that for sarcasm. I bet that’s the thinking here though.

        6. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “I bet that’s the thinking here though.”

          Indeed. Something else going on.

        7. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          Who the heck are you talking to, Special? To which comment above are you replying? You sound like a 15-yr-old yourself, mastering in Fortnite but having no clue as the the real world.

          I was standing only ten feet away from a dead body two weeks ago (and I’m not a First Responder, just a regular guy) on the side of a highway. Have you ever had a periodic reminder of the brevity of life?

          Tell you what. Go ahead and pull the trigger when someone comes to your door at 4am, then dance around the body and tell everyone what a stud you are because the dead guy’s parents obviously are responsible for everything that just happened.

          Geez. Grow up.

        8. avatar No One Special says:

          I’ve seen my share of dead bodies both professionally and in civilian life. That’s not the point. I need to grow up because I don’t have a bleeding heart liberal view of the situation. Yeah that’s rich. If people would stop viewing it like that maybe criminals would get the hint or not. Honestly it really doesn’t matter to me as long as the criminal loses. It’s when the good guy loses that I care about. In this case I’m glad the good guy was victorious in protecting himself and his family. Maybe I’m not the one that needs to grow up. I take care of my family and go about handling my affairs trying to impact those around me as little as possible. I’m not going out with an entitled sense about me intent on doing harm to others. I’m sure you’re right though. I need to grow up, I need to be more responsible and mature.

        9. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          @Special,

          Everyone above all agree that the shooting was justified, and that we’d probably all act the same if in the same situation. That’s not the point enuf, Haz, and now I are making. So stop deflecting and go back to re-read enuf’s and Haz’s original comments.

          Three people are dead. From what we know of the incident, justice was served. The sobriety expressed is over the young ages of the deceased. They weren’t hardened criminals, they were young and stupid. If they shot at someone, then hell yes they deserved what they got.

          What is on display is your eagerness to dance over the bodies and proclaim ‘muh rights’ while bullhorning that you’re not some bleeding heart liberal. Well, nobody else here is, either. If you want to celebrate the deaths of three young men, you go ahead. Some of us, however, will take a deep breath, and while agreeing that they their actions deserved the response they got, it’s still a shame that they had to die so young.

          As you dance, the mature adults in the room will take care of things so you can go back to your Fortnite and Call of Duty.

        10. avatar No One Special says:

          The assumption that I play video games is laughable. I don’t play video games at all. My daughter plays the video games in my house. That might be note worthy here. I have a kid of my own who isn’t much younger than these three in the article that isn’t out terrorizing other people with a profound sense of entitlement. I find that quite interesting. Why is that I wonder? Maybe my daughter has been raised to have respect for other people’s lives and their property. Maybe she has been taught that if you want something you have to earn it. Maybe she has a good start on a strong faith based life. Yeah, all of those things could be contributing factors.

        11. avatar Cloudbuster says:

          Which does qualify as “…something else going on.”

          Read Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent sometime. Or hearken to the words of Lavrentiy Beria, infamous Soviet Secret Police Chief, “Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.”

        12. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Read Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent” sometime. Or hearken to the words of Lavrentiy Beria, infamous Soviet Secret Police Chief, “Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.” ”

          All of which are great examples of “…something else going on”.

      2. avatar Cloudbuster says:

        They weren’t hardened criminals, they were young and stupid.

        Non sequitur. Being young and stupid doesn’t mean you are not a hardened criminal.

        Showing up with guns at someone’s house at 4 a.m. is a pretty good clue that you *are* a hardened criminal, though.

        1. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          Being so young, it may have been their first time. Hardly “hardened criminals”, so I disagree.

          That being said, even the first time pointing a gun at someone and demanding their possessions at the threat of being shot deserves a response of force, even up to and including deadly force. So the three young men got what they deserved. Let no mistake be made (do you hear this, No One Special?) that everyone here knows and supports it.

        2. avatar No One Special says:

          Oh I can read just fine, with comprehension even believe it or not. I honestly don’t think you understand where I’m coming from and therefore want to make me out to be the monster because of your lack of understanding. I’m not a monster. I am however a grown man with a family that has a profound sense of right and wrong. I absolutely will not try to interject right into a wrong at any point. Three criminals intent on doing harm to others shot and killed, case closed. Age of those criminals not withstanding. Why do you feel more for the dead criminals regardless of age more so than the man that had to kill them. In all honesty that’s where my feelings lie, with the homeowner that was minding his own business trying to go about his life as he saw fit. Only to have that interrupted by would be criminals. Would there be the same outcry if the homeowner was killed instead? I highly doubt it. I also wouldn’t doubt in the least that if these three criminals had killed the homeowner and if they were caught and given the death penalty. That there would be tons of people cry the river that they shouldn’t have gotten life let alone the death penalty. Like it or not that’s the truth of the matter.

        3. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          “Why do you feel more for the dead criminals regardless of age more so than the man that had to kill them.”

          OMG, Special, I’m exhausted. You’re refusing to stick to the original point that started all of this, and keep attempting to skew off to the side. Not only did I never say what you claim I did, but I’ve taken great pains (including my previous comment above) to state that the perps got what they deserved. How is this so difficult to understand? Are you retarded?

          I’m done. On to the next article.

        4. avatar No One Special says:

          “the perps got what they deserved”

          Stick with that because it is the truth. Nothing else needs to play into it.

        5. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          BTW, I find it hard to believe you’re a grown man with older children. You sure don’t write like one. I would’ve pegged you for mid-20s at most. And a gamer.

        6. avatar No One Special says:

          How painful it must be to be wrong.

          Imagine that not knowing someone just by reading a comment or two. Wow, I’m shocked, I really expected you to know everything about me.

    4. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      More important than the police asking questions is the prospect of the defender answering them. Shut up, lawyer up, and stay that way.

      No good can come from speaking directly to detectives.

    5. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

      The article said that the homeowner was a truck driver…maybe, he was leaving on a run

      …or

      his home has motion sensors / cameras that alerted him

      …or

      my spouse is still working and she frequently has to leave around 0400…I walk her to the car each time…I’m usually armed

      …or

      any number of valid reasons for a homeowner to be out on his / her property at any time that they want to

      (the Dibs – Dem Libs have not instituted dusk-to-dawn curfews on Conservatives / lawful gun owners…yet).

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “any number of valid reasons for a homeowner to be out on his / her property at any time that they want to”

        Exactly. My inner Perry Mason would deal with the question by shouting, “Incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial !”

    6. avatar rosignol says:

      I have several friends who work in trades where an hour’s commute and an early start time at the job site mean they are getting up hours before sunrise, even in summertime.

  7. avatar Jim from LI says:

    “That’s not how it’s supposed to go.”
    Well, obviously not if you’re the home invaders. Welcome to the new program..

  8. avatar LifeSavor says:

    Hmmmm….If I woke up and saw 3 people on my lawn, I would not go outside to confront them; I’d turn on the lights and call the police, while staying inside, under cover, armed.

    That being said, I was not there; I don’t know what really happened.

    1. avatar enuf says:

      Yup, same here, on all points.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      LifeSavor,

      You bring up good points.

      Personally, I would probably go outside IF (and that is a huge “if”) I could do it such that they cannot clearly see me or my position. For example if I have flood lights that shine on the suspects’ location and I can shout from behind cover/concealment (in addition to already having de facto concealment from the blinding flood lights), I would go outside and verbally challenge them. Even then, I would only go outside to issue that challenge if I had a shotgun or rifle already in-hand. I would not verbally challenge three suspects when I am armed with only a handgun.

    3. avatar GS650G says:

      I don’t agree. I’d rather not have them come through the door where the rest of my family is and have a shootout in the family room. I’d rather they not enter. Front yard or backyard, armed trespassers are clearly a threat and unless your drivers license says New Jersey you don’t have to flee.
      Sure call the cops and hunker down. But if you have them on the porch and they are trying doors they are too close to engage , at that point. They might spot you through a window and shoot, a cop did that in a video posted here a few weeks ago.

      If home alone and you are able to keep a tactical advantage inside the house then stay inside. Don’t be seen. Keep lights off. Make good decisions.

      Every misguided attempt to rob, rape and pillage a home goes different ways. One constant is there is no shortage of experts weighing in on what he or she should have done better.

      1. avatar LifeSavor says:

        GS650G,

        I see your point and agree that as soon as they attempt entry, that is the time to fire. If they are out in the yard, not on the porch or at the windows, I would protect myself by discouraging the ‘visitors’. Turning on the lights is a hint: “You have been seen: maybe you are being video’d. The police may be on the way. You should leave.”

        In other words, step one: avoid conflict.

        If step one does not work, go to step two.

        Step two, defend. Absolutely.

        1. avatar Dave G. says:

          @ LifeSavor:
          EXACTLY. And the district attorney will be asking if the homeowner could have avoided conflict. If he could have avoided conflict and didn’t, charges may be forthcoming.

  9. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    “Investigators may be trying to determine why the homeowner was awake at 4:00am and prepared to intercept the three outside his home.”

    I am more concerned with determining why three armed criminals, er “boys” were invading property and threatening the lives of residents at 4am, rather than being at home, sleeping so they can be ready to get to school first thing in the morning. Where were their parents? Did they know they snuck out? Did they care what their kids are doing?

    Unless it was a drug deal gone bad the homeowner could be doing any number of things, if he was getting truck ready, cleaning guns, hanging out in the garage, hunting varmints, enjoying the moonlight, whatever…

    1. avatar enuf says:

      I am older and often do not sleep thru the night. Wake up around 03:00 to 04:00, can’t fall back to sleep. Sometimes I get up and walk around, check the news maybe. So yeah I could easily be up at 4AM to hear a noise outside or notice movement outside the window.

      I think I’d turn on outside lights, turn off inside lights and be on the phone with 911 and my shotgun in hand, but that’s just me.

      But hey I get it, some homeowners would go out to see for themselves. Some people are inquisitive, they like to investigate mysteries in the dark.

      Not me, I’ve seen too many Zombie Apocalypse movies.

      1. avatar LifeSavor says:

        Every night, I wake up around 2 AM. Often have difficulty falling asleep. Keep a bottle of melatonin and a bottle of tryptophan on the nightstand. If the melatonin does not work, I reach for the tryptophan. If that does not work, I head downstairs for the bourbon (that does not happen too often).

        I would turn on some inside lights, also. Just not the lights in the room from which I am observing.

        The zombies will head toward the lights making them easy targets.

        1. If you have taken melatonin or tryptophan, and then you head downstairs for bourbon, you wouldn’t be able to properly see your sights, target, or have the mindset to have a gun in your hands. You may not even wake up after all of those drugs. And not hear the thugs break-in. They may be standing over you with that gun. Pointed at your temple as they nudge you to consciousness. Then why?

        2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          One of the main reasons I’m very sparing with my consumption of alcohol (either water for me, or at most a single beer or glass of table wine at a restaurant) is to remain alert. If I’m ever involved in a situation that results in me defending myself through force, I anticipate the D.A. asking if I were on meds or had been drinking at the time of the incident. Having dealt with two D.A.s in the past, I don’t consider them as anyone’s friends, always looking for anything they can use to put anyone away and add another gold start to their resumes.

        3. avatar LifeSavor says:

          Robert Skinner,

          Melatonin and Tryptophan are not drugs. They do not make you feel drugged. They do not impede you when you suddenly wake. Even with them, I wake very easily. So, not a concern.

          As for the bourbon, agree too much is a bad thing.

        4. avatar No One Special says:

          Agreed, tryptophan is an amino acid precursor to melatonin that the body produces. People that take melatonin and have success with it could do the same thing eating foods high in tryptophan.

        5. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I recommend TURKEY! Yea!

        6. avatar LifeSavor says:

          LarryinTX,

          Good suggestion! I think I will keep a drumstick on the nightstand, instead! LOL!!!

          Thanks for making me laugh!

  10. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    It sounds like the kids shot first which was a serious mistake. My mother used to tell us not to mess with somebody in a car because we didn’t know what they had in the car. Didn’t fully understand that until I was was one of those in a car. Although there was the time 2 clowns cut me off and then approached my car with a tire iron and something I didn’t recognize. I booted one of them across the street when a kicked a Cadillac door into him drove at the other one who backed and without intending to caught the edge of their right side door and bent it against the fender. I just caught it with the molding on my door so lightly I couldn’t find the spot.

  11. avatar NORDNEG says:

    Live like a thug , die like a thug.

  12. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    “Investigators may be trying to determine why the homeowner was awake at 4:00am and prepared to intercept the three outside his home.”

    This is why I couldn’t a cop…

    Investigator Me: “Sir, why were you awake, armed, and prepared to meet the intruders outside at 4am? “

    Home owner: “Umm… I dunno…”

    Investigator Me: “Good enough for me. Case closed.” *Begins to Mayberry whistle*

    1. avatar Wiregrass says:

      The way I read it, sounds like there was a bit of commotion before hand, the armed invader fired at a neighbor first, so someone else was also awake and outside.. Maybe dogs started barking or something.

    2. avatar Arc says:

      I was up till 5:00AM sorting through a worthelss 1980s-90s sports card collection and creating listings for it. Sometimes I’m up into the AM E.R.P-ing (NSFW), sometimes I’m painting, sometimes I’m just walking my dog because he has little respect for my sleep. Sometimes if I’m feeling iffy, I just stay up until everyone else wakes up, then I go to sleep like a damn post rotation.

  13. avatar Nanashi says:

    “The consensus is that no more than five to ten people in a hundred who die by gunfire in Los Angeles are any loss to society. These people fight small wars amongst themselves. It would seem a valid social service to keep them well-supplied with ammunition.”

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “It would seem a valid social service to keep them well-supplied with ammunition.”

      And Wal-Mart no longer sells handgun ammo.

      *mutter*… 😉

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I bet that would be 2-3 of 100 in Chicago. Since WalMart is no longer selling ammo, perhaps they could give it away. Yeah, no. That would look too suspicious, just leave it where it can be stolen.

  14. avatar ROBERT Powell says:

    the home-owner and his family have now been regulated to the perp by most of the local law-dogs, the district attorney wants to make his bones with any shooting ,not done by law enforcement ,THEY DO NOT LIKE COMPETING WITH CIVILANS. it makes them look bad,maybe spending too much time in the local coffee shop or sitting with their feet on the desk snoozing. he should lawyer up and be very careful about talking toANYONE about the shooting.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      “Citizens”. We’re citizens.

      “Civilians” is a military term. If a LEO every uses that term with you, reply with the corrective “thank you, office/deputy/agent, but you and I are citizens of this community”.

  15. avatar bob says:

    Whoever wrote this piece seems exceptionally biased against the homeowner defending his self, lots of trigger words and one sided negatives.

    1. avatar Porridgeweasel says:

      I thought the very same thing bob.

      Those who control the words, control the understood meaning and thus, the narrative.

  16. avatar Tracy says:

    If something bad happens to you at 4am, while wearing masks, at a stranger’s home …why is there even a discussion as to justification

    1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      Because they were such good boys,

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I have it on good authority that not only were they just turning their lives around, but they dindunuffin.

    2. avatar Miner49er says:

      Well, I’m glad you have complete knowledge of the situation, perhaps you should contact the news agencies and let them know about your information.

      Because there’s never been an instance where people were doing a drug deal at 4 AM and it turns sour. That never happens, there’s no way any person would be meeting with his dope dealers at 4 AM and end up in a shooting.

      Yessiree, anybody up at 4 AM is a law-abiding citizens going about his legal business.

      No need for LEOs to ask any questions whatsoever, just pick up the bodies, thanks!

      1. avatar tracy says:

        Yes, people wear masks when the come to buy drugs.

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          They do when they’re preparing to rob their dealer.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “That never happens, there’s no way any person would be meeting with his dope dealers at 4 AM and end up in a shooting.”

        This would change the situation, how?

        Is phoning a drug dealer a crime? (I don’t know the local law)
        Is agreeing to commit a crime, yet not actually committing any crime, still a crime? (I don’t know the local law)
        Is standing in your yard, waiting on a drug delivery a crime?
        Is transacting a drug deal in your yard a crime? (yes)
        Was a drug transaction in progress? (unknown)
        Was there any physical evidence of a drug transaction (or attempted transaction)? ( not reported)

        The genesis of the “problem” for us is in the actual reporting. Instead of stating something along the line of, “Police are still trying to determine why the homeowner was on his front lawn at 0400.” A less confusing (and less contentious) report would have been to write, “The entire incident remains under police investigation.” As in most news sources, the intent was to paint the homeowner as a possible suspect, possible instigator, when nothing else reported supports such reporting. Why????

        Guns.

  17. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

    Not enough information and too many unanswered questions for me to form an opinion. Although, it doesn’t look good for the three Signal 7s. All masked, one armed and 4:00 a.m.

    1. avatar Voldamort says:

      A lot more info in this item:
      https://www.11alive.com/article/news/crime/conyers-triple-shooting/85-b939d506-fdb6-4944-b61c-ab6343fe18fd
      Less anti-gun as well. I’ve no idea why TTAG didn’t choose this story for the lead video. I just searched “conyers shooting”, and got way more than TTAG, in six seconds. Perhaps they need some new writers?

    2. avatar Voldamort says:

      There’s this also:
      “The Sheriff’s spokesman said late Monday afternoon that investigators had concluded that “the three now deceased individuals had their faces covered as they approached the residence and attempted to rob three individuals IN THE FRONT YARD (emp. mine, voldamort). One of the attempted robbery suspects brandished a handgun and fired shots at the residents before one of the intended robbery victims returned fire. The victims of the attempted robbery were all uninjured, but the three attempted robbery suspects were all shot during the exchange of gunfire and succumbed to their injuries, one on scene and two at a local hospital after being transported.” -https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/conyers/conyers-attempted-robbery/85-d344d527-7110-4d98-b06e-d655c76c7ab0
      So it sounds more like an armed robbery than a home invasion, not that there’s much difference. It is also mentioned that the yutes live within walking distance down the street, but not in the cul-de-sac where the event occurred.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Look! I got Daddy’s gun, let’s go rob somebody!

  18. avatar Dennis says:

    I’m sure they were all “aspiring rappers”! If they’d succeeded in their plans, you wouldn’t hear a peep about it in the “media”!

    1. avatar Reason says:

      Nope national media will be silent about a “mass” shooting if it is a home owner defending himself and family. Had he been a white dude shooting 3 teens with a semi auto it would be all across the news as the next mass shooting by a deranged right wing white supremacist.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Well, I read about this on both CNN‘s front page and ABC’s front page, long before TTAG ran anything about it.

        So I guess TTAG was trying to conceal the homeowners use of a firearm to protect his home, good thing CNN and ABC ran the story and forced TTAG to acknowledge that the event has actually happened after the fact.

  19. avatar Ed Rogers says:

    There’s obviously much more to the story, if the neighbors are unsympathetic.

    That said, you’d better be prepared to accept the consequences if you invade someone’s property with masks and at least one firearm.

    It seems like a open and shut case of justifiable homicide.

  20. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

    As for why he might be up at 0400, the article mentions he’s a truck driver. He may have been up to get to work. Truckers have odd hours.

  21. avatar Cloudbuster says:

    And that’s why an honest citizen needs an AR-15 and 30-round magazines.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “And that’s why an honest citizen needs an AR-15 and 30-round magazines.”

      Maybe he should have stayed in the living room, forcing the perps to funnel, rather than swarm? Forcing one-at-a-time through the door probably would have ended the attack with a single gunshot into the first perp through the door? Then the defender would have only needed a single-shot firearm, like a flintlock, as the founders intended?

      1. avatar Cloudbuster says:

        *shrug* He’s alive. They’re dead. The outcome suggests his tactics were adequate.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “*shrug* He’s alive.”

          You didn’t like my use of “firearms of the founders” logic regarding which weapons are protected under the Second Amendment.”

          Thought it quite good myself, but that’s tee martoonies talking.

        2. avatar Cloudbuster says:

          Yeah, it was OK. Sorry for no kudos on it.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sorry for no kudos on it.”

          Well, it mighta been a stretch.

    2. avatar Country Boy says:

      No one needs a 30 rd. magazine.

      Not when a 40 rd mag or 60 rd drum is available………

  22. avatar MB says:

    3 taxpayer relief shots. Can you imagine the misery these 3 POS’s were going to cause to citizens over the next 50 years in they lived… Karma baby. Go looking from trouble, you find it, just not the way you planed. Bet their mom’s are proud they raised such fine upstanding thugs. Now they won’t get to send time with their daddies in prison. Also this is why a semi-auto rifle is an excellent home defense weapon.

    1. avatar Cosmo says:

      Maybe their moms are like many nowadays, and the kids raise themselves, as they are kids they don’t do a great job of it, mothers and fathers are a big failure often at parenting. kids that are raised right, are not the ones out messing around at 4: am, kids raised right have limits on how late they can stay up, And don’t bother with there you go , blame the parents, well often they are the very ones to blame.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        If we could just get abortion outlawed, we could have (literally) millions more of these every year. Careful what you wish for.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          So, wait, let me understand what you just said. You prefer the murder of millions of innocents before their lives have even begun, if it means we (who are fortunate enough to not to be among those murdered) can avoid the probability that a few of them becoming armed criminals later on?

          Just…wow.

        2. avatar No One Special says:

          I would prefer that abortion be outlawed and the adoption system in this country fixed. This way children can have a chance at life with good people that can’t otherwise have children. Hopefully mitigating future instances like the one reported here. Call me cynical or just lost faith in humanity but I don’t see that happening unfortunately. Although I agree that killing a defenseless baby isn’t the answer to the problems of society. That baby didn’t get a chance to be a part of society.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “If we could just get abortion outlawed, we could have (literally) millions more of these every year. Careful what you wish for.”

          Very multi-faceted, but succinct. So much wrapped in so few words.

    2. avatar Miner49er says:

      He wasn’t defending his home, he was already outside on the front lawn when approached by the three individuals according to the article.

      1. avatar MB says:

        @Miner49er Home defense includes self defense. Besides, someone shows up at 4:am, dressed in disguise to conceal their identity, firing a weapon at you and you don’t drop them were they stand, then you have a pretty good chance of ending up in a morgue. They are not there for trick or treat. This was Georgia, I assume similar laws as to Texas: The Texas Penal Code designates certain areas under the protection of the Castle Doctrine: your home, vehicle, and workplace. Texas law assumes that you’re justified in using force to defend yourself against intruders, since your yard is considered part of your home, deadly force is justified. How he was alerted to their presence is not germane to the situation. It’s unfortunate that these teenagers chose to end their lives in this manner, but it’s 100% their fault.

  23. avatar No One Special says:

    Should be bag them up and haul them off, make sure everyone else is OK, inform the families of the dead they shouldn’t have raised knuckleheads, and case closed. By the way it reads so far it has the potential of not going that way though.

  24. avatar Rusty - Die Ruthie Die - Chains says:

    Why those young fellers was jest trying out they masks before Haloween at a realistic time of night to spook some folks and the gun was just part of their thug costume. They was just practicing they special trick or bang routine and that man had to go and shootem down, they was all honor roll students too, now who gonna take care they babymommas?

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “..young fellers was jest trying out…”

      “…young fellers was jess trying out…”

      “jest” is the accurate spelling of a word meaning to make a joke, or poke fun.

      “jess”, or “jes” is the correct spelling of the colloquial word for “just”.

      1. avatar Sgt Hulka says:

        Lighten up,, Francis..

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Lighten up,, Francis..”

          It was. Who seriously takes to correcting sarcastic wording? Besides, there is a bit of an educational moment in there.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Well, I thought it was pretty good.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Well, I thought it was pretty good.”

          Glad to provide. Will chalk it up to a success, and open another Bud.

  25. well well well peoplt. it does appear that people are sick and tired of criminal activity. these kids paid a very high cost for their choices.

  26. avatar oldguy says:

    I just read an article on this incident that had a quote, “This appears to have been a home invasion gone wrong.”

    There is certainly not enough facts available yet, but if this is indeed a case where the home owner is a good guy defending himself, “wrong” is not the correct adverb.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Excellent point!!

  27. avatar GS650G says:

    occasionally I am up at 3 am for work. Never thought i’d have to justify being awake at that time.

    perhaps the dearly departed were watching his house and waiting for him to leave.

  28. avatar Dude says:

    Is it possible that the homeowner had cameras outside that detected movement and alerted him to their presence? I see these all over the place now.

  29. avatar MIO says:

    wasn’t doin nuffins

  30. avatar SZ939 says:

    Very noticeable that the race of the teens were not mentioned. Wonder why! Noticed the Sheriff was Black. Maybe the perps were too? Conyers is mostly rural and in a very hilly part of the Atlanta Metroplex. Many hillside homes are widely separated from one another, making them attractive to home burglaries. Also, as always, When Seconds Count, the Police are Minutes Away!

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I appreciate the fact that neither the race of the deceased nor of the shooter was mentioned, it would contribute nothing to the story, and would not change my attitude toward either in any way. It would be wonderful to see more reporting like that. A goblin is a goblin, the color of his skin matters not a whit.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “A goblin is a goblin, the color of his skin matters not a whit.”

        You bring up a point that was contentious (without resolution) some years ago. When broadcasting/reporting a description of a suspect on the loose, is color relevant? The PC answer was that color added nothing to helping the public (or other law enforcement) observe and identify a suspect. Always wondered what happened to that conversation.

  31. avatar Dan W says:

    3 fewer pieces of shit. Even better they were killed so early in their careers.

    This guy should never have to buy a beer for the rest of his life.

  32. avatar M2AP says:

    So what were the split times, transitions, and target sequence like?

    1. avatar Dan W says:

      He came in first on this stage.

      1. avatar CTstooge says:

        In CT, with a 10 round mag limit this is a genuine Hat Trick.

  33. avatar Will says:

    Oh my this one will definitely have several follow up articles.
    Sorry for the families that lost their kids but they should not be out on a school night wearing mask. What made the home owner aware at 4am, noises ? Ok well why would you go outside the home unless you knew who was out there. You dial 911 and say we think we have intruders outside our home. Then you retreat to safer area’s of the home. Were they there to confront him over a deal gone wrong. Where they there to kill him. Well he left few witnesses. If he had chewed them up coming down the hall or entering a door and window this would be pretty much over. I have had 5 attempts to enter my home. 3 of which I was at home. Twice I called the police but there is little they can do. The sirens and lights warn them and they have thousands of acres of forest to disappear in. The last attempt they were there to kill and rob. They almost got in. In a fluke the sliding door jammed tight when they attempted to lift it. They could not get it unjammed because they could not lift it evenly. So it was only open about 4 inches to small to enter. Yes it was pinned but It popped out enough to open. I added a brace at the bottom. I feel the person lives and or works in this area. He’ll be back !

  34. avatar Bob Smith says:

    It is amazing to see how the media bends this in any way they can to make a perfectly justified case of home-defense seem like something else. Have you read all the cut-and-paste news stories on this? Stand your ground? Cool story, bro. How about the fact that this is easily preempted by Castle Doctrine.. which is easily preempted by flat-out self-defense. Assault Rifle? WTFever. This man did what he had to do with the tool that he had to do it with. Please spare me any and all feeble-minded attempts to try to out-flank the truth.

  35. avatar Mo Better 2020 says:

    Wuz dey membas of de usual suspects club?

  36. avatar former water walker says:

    But but but DINDU…how dare you shoot my baby!!! They had an aged white man kill a 14 year old cretin when 5 ruffians armed attackers showed up borth of Chiraq. The thug boys are all charged with capital murder. And a couple “revrunts” howl in protest. Even a child is known by his doings…

  37. avatar Buff cousin Elroy says:

    Homeowner John Wick’d the three little turds.

    1. avatar Voldamort says:

      Not quite. That would be if each one had taken a follow up head shot. If one is being shot at, I can’t see any logical reason to leave a potential cripple behind to shoot me in the back at an opportune moment.
      OFC this one went down too quickly for that, but if the opportunity is there, why wouldn’t a guy make sure of his first kill before moving on to the rest of the attackers?
      That was one of things that made that such a good movie. No holywood dramatic resurrections after the insurance shot. I agree with Peter Capstick on that. With dangerous game (and what is more dangerous than armed teenagers?), shoot until you are certain they’re done, and then shoot them once more, just to be certain.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Let’s be sensible! If they’re dead, it won’t even hurt.

  38. HAPPY RED FLAG DAY/Extreme Risk Protection Order Day ! More fun and exciting infringements AGAINST our Constitutional-Bill of RIGHTS !!!

  39. avatar gp says:

    what a world we live in,where were the parents at 4:00 am hopefully sleeping? You wonder why homeowners need a weapon, and know how to use it. What would you do if someone was breaking into your home??? PROTECT YOUR FAMILY!!!!

  40. avatar William says:

    This crap was caused by the invasion of so called experts back in the 1970’s especially Dr. Spock, if you read his book it’s actually nothing more than a whine fest cause he was spanked as a child.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      My info says he did not participate in the raising of his own children, he’s simply full of shit.

  41. avatar Luke72 says:

    Let me guess… they were Just Starting to Turn Their Lives Around.

    Going to go out on a limb here and predict that this didn’t cost us the cure to cancer, a cheap, clean unlimited energy source or a superluminal spacecraft propulsion system.

  42. avatar Ogre says:

    Did a little internet checking on this incident and there are now LOTS of local news stories out there about the demise of the three teens. From what I can gather, the homeowner and two others were legally gathered outside on his lawn (legal even at 4 am) when they were approached by the three masked teens in an alleged attempt to rob them. The teens reportedly fired a gun at the homeowner’s group, after which he returned fire and effectively called in their chips. Two of the slain were subsequently identified (brothers), and their aunt subsequently said they were “loving boys” and the family didn’t know what they were doing there at that time of morning. Right. The deceased all had masks on. As to the reason the neighbors reportedly didn’t apparently like that the homeowner defended himself and his property with deadly force may have been due to ethnic differences and lack of information on their part. But they were sure talking to those TV crews. The county sheriff and his deputies will be investigating the physical evidence and witness statements in an attempt to determine what happened and whether charges against the homeowner will be preferred. The homeowner said (through neighbors) that he wasn’t ready to make a statement to the media (who were apparently all there and crawling all over this one) and (hopefully) to the sheriff, at least until after he consulted his lawyer. Many more stories undoubtedly to follow. From what’s been presented, it looks to me like a clear-cut self-defense case – the deceased fired at the homeowner’s group first, putting their lifes in deadly danger – possibly with some stand-your-ground thrown in.

    1. avatar A says:

      exactly, this was self defense first and stand your ground next.
      Just because the event happened on his property does not make any difference. to my understanding of the facts he was shooting in self defense.
      Again based on the details I know now.

  43. avatar former water walker says:

    And what’s with ANY retarded “why wuz the homeowner up at 4am” comments?!? I’ll be up at 3:45 tomorrow when I drive my son to work. Years ago I managed a warehouse and got up at 1:30. It’s called WORKING…

    1. avatar arc says:

      Sketching, painting, getting to go somewhere, walking my dog, posting ebay auctions, could be doing any number of things at 3-5AM

  44. avatar A says:

    1. On your property
    2.Dark
    3. 3 unidentified persons approach
    4. all three are wearing masks
    5. One masked person fire weapon (presumably at you)
    6. you return fire and incapacitate all three assailants.

    Im not sure I understand the debate here. What am I missing. who cares that they were teens. He couldn’t tell their age as they were masked. And even if he could, a teen and still kill you, esp with a gun.
    Ive read the news reports. This seems clear cut stand your ground and self defense.
    Unless more info comes out there is very little that makes me think he did anything wrong. I would prob have done the same in his situation.
    Those neighbors are fools.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “who cares that they were teens.”

      OMG! Gasp. Fluttering eyes, “Well, I never…no one should have to die just because they launched an armed attack against a homeowner!! What is this world coming to?”

      1. avatar No One Special says:

        Sam I am, no offense intended here but you are kind of an enigma at times. Not always but sometimes. It’s more likely you just have a more subtle way of saying things than others.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “…you are kind of an enigma at times.”

          A Riddle Wrapped in a Mystery Inside an Enigma ? That would put me in really good company.

          No offense taken.

          I try to pepper responses with entertainment, of one sort or another, usually there is an obvious giveaway. The intent (hope?) is to be wry or entertaining (or both). To break the flow of the obvious.

          In the instance at hand, note that not one radical leftist would insert the clue about fluttering eyelids. Not to mention using an archaic phrase such as “Well, I never…”.

          When in doubt, if you have time and inclination, just ask. Maybe you will even get a straight answer.

          (It’s Miller Time; gotta go.)

        2. avatar No One Special says:

          Maybe your intent is to be wry or entertaining but honestly I hope you want to add perspective. I know reading your comments has influenced my perspective at times. Granted agreement may not always be met but that doesn’t mean there’s no value to be gained.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “….but honestly I hope you want to add perspective.”

          There are many ways to do that, and I try, sometimes more successfully than others. For instance, my original comment was about the motivation of the cops questioning why a lawful home owner was in his front yard at 0400. Nothing entertaining, wry or ironical about the question.

    2. avatar enuf says:

      I care that they were 15 and 16 year olds. That’s awful, that’s a horrible wasteful end to young lives. The tragedy of it is obvious, glaringly obvious.

      The fault of it is also obvious.

      I agree the homeowner is completely in the right. I do not fault him in the slightest, so far as what has been reported. If the available facts change at some point my opinion may change.

      For now, the released facts say this tragedy lands squarely on the heads of the three deceased persons.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Legally, I’m pretty sure you’re right. Morally, I would have to add “and their parents.”

      2. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

        Unfortunately, I think there’s a good chance you’re wrong. I’ve seen this kind of thing (armed robbery, etc) encouraged by parents. I will give you the example of DEMETRIUS A and CHANTAY A Cobb (don’t think they are bother/sister? look at that droopy eye) . Went to elementary, middle, and HS school with both in Ft Walton Beach Fl. Mitch last year got his last (probably – we’re both 58) sentence of 30 years for strong arm robbery. At least 20 convictions prior. I saw him do the same shit in the 5th grade. Shantay got a life sentence for murder in 87 or 88 after luring a man behind a bar and stabbing him to death. For 31 dollars.

        I SAW their MOTHER ask Mitch “how much you get today?” after school for shaking down kids for lunch money. That was after football practice in the 8th grade.

        Think this is some crazy Joe Biden made up story?

        http://www.dc.state.fl.us/OffenderSearch/Search.aspx

  45. avatar bryan1980 says:

    Sounds like the homeowner might have been the only cracker left in that neighborhood; he’s not going to get much support, if that’s the case.

  46. avatar joefoam says:

    Didn’t read all the comments so this may have already been pointed out. Just how exactly was the neighbor able to ascertain that an ‘assault weapon’ was being used by the homeowner just by listening?

  47. avatar David Keith says:

    See Beto, this is why we need AR’s. 3 armed Intruders. I’m not going to try and protect myself with a 5 shot .38 against 3 possible black panthers.
    Anyway, I don’t have to explain myself to you. Big goofy looking dork.

    1. avatar The other Larry in Texas says:

      I remember Jack Ballard, a candidate for US Senate from Montana on GunTalk radio a few weeks ago. He said “In relation to legitimate purposes for using a firearm, recreational shooting, hunting, personal defense, if you can’t gonna get it done in 10, you ain’t gonna get it done in 30,”. After the interview, Tom stated, if I can’t get it done in 10, I deserve to die???. I think Jack Ballard has withdrawn from the race.

      1. avatar The other Larry in Texas says:

        I just saw the Jack Ballard story was posted here back in August. I don’t know how I missed it. Sorry about that.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Hold up there, bro! So, did the jackass withdraw from the race, or not?

        2. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          LarryinTexas:

          Yup. Ballard cancelled his bid for the U.S. Senate around 13 Sep. What a schmazoon!

  48. avatar Retro says:

    No offense to those feeling anguish over something they didn’t do, but if someone is shooting at me, no matter the time of day or night, even outside my house, I am returning fire. If it results in their deaths, too bad, they were shooting at me! All the rest is just details. Like the fact they are all teens. Or that they were wearing masks. Or what time of the day or night it is. The important facts are they shot at him, he returned fire, they didn’t survive and he did.

  49. avatar American Patriot says:

    Just consider it a late abortion….The home owner kept em from a life behind bars.

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Post-natal abortion.

      At least it cut the school-to-prison pipeline.

  50. avatar DJ says:

    What a tragedy! Three youths who had their whole life ahead of them. Cut down by an assault rifle.

    Just because the teens were armed, opened fire, wearing masks and it was 0400 doesn’t mean they had any criminal intent!

    The home owner didn’t have to shoot back and kill them.

    SARCASM

  51. avatar Cool Hand Luke says:

    What we got here is a failure to communicate. Some men you just can’t reach.

    1. avatar James W Crawford says:

      I have actually met Joy Harmon over 3 decades ago . I resisted the temptation to ask her to wash my car windows. She is actually a nice lady.

    2. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

      So you get what we had here last week — which is the way he wants it.

      Well, he gets it.

    3. avatar Miner49er says:

      They weren’t men, they were stupid kids who paid a terrible price for their stupidity.

      1. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

        …what is your age cut-off for “kids” v adults?

      2. avatar No One Special says:

        “They weren’t men, they were stupid kids who paid a terrible price for their stupidity.”

        I like to look at this objectively in the realm of reality. First they were man enough to try to conceal their identity and arm themselves to go out and terrorize other people possibly to injure or kill. Second stupidity knows no bounds so calling them stupid is true. Third nobody gets out of this world alive, meaning we’re all going to die regardless of how. It is in fact inevitable. How terrible can it be if it happens to everyone? And last they absolutely did pay a price for their stupidity.
        Let’s leave it to the media to spin these idiot up as the victims. We should be more concerned for the homeowner, regardless of what time it was and where he was on his property. If I want to go sit in my front yard in a lawn chair at 0300 hrs I absolutely can and I will with no regard for what other people think. It’s my property, I make the payments and pay the taxes and will do as I damn well please. I’m fairly certain that this homeowner had the same line thinking.

  52. avatar Peter says:

    Those were no neighbors, but hoodlum buddies of the three human vermin who got caped. 🙂

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      “capped”. The caped ones were the Crusaders!

  53. avatar strych9 says:

    I’m not seeing the issue with the time of day. Why is that even an issue?

    I’m usually up at that time unless I haven’t been to bed yet. Any day I want to swim or get some time in on weight machines that I don’t want to pay to have in my house for I’m up and at the gym between 430 and 5AM to beat the crowd. Nothing nefarious, just don’t want to spend two or more hours for what should take less than an hour.

    There’s a zillion reasons this guy might have been awake at that time and just as many for why he might have been armed. I see nothing particularly suspicious about either.

    As for the kids… the circumstances, whatever they may be, that led to this sad turn of events might rightly be called a tragedy. They died there but their lives were obviously already going wrong for some reason. This isn’t some sort of terrible accident, they engaged in a pattern of obviously bad behavior.

    Ultimately they decided to bet their own lives on a roll of the dice and they lost. That they would make such a decision is kinda sad but the outcome was relatively predictable. So I’d say we can recognize the tragedy of whatever led them to their bad choices while still acknowledging the hard reality that they were asking for a bad outcome and happened to get it.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “I’m not seeing the issue with the time of day.”

      Cops made it an issue. Question is “why”? Many explanations here that identify numerous reasons to legally be outside your residence at 0430. Some may have misconstrued a comment as asking for legitimate explanation, but the reasons posed are inconsequential because they all are legal actions. Why did the initial report state that police were trying to understand why the defender was in the front yard so early? If the defender was legally present in the yard, that’s it, time is of no investigative purpose…other than to try to turn a valid self-defense into a pseudo-crime, or provocation.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        That’s kind of my point. Are the cops making an issue of the time or are the reporters misconstruing the whole thing/asking leading questions that we didn’t see?

        I just don’t see why the cops would care about the time of day. Either the guy was legally on private property and not engaged in any other criminal activity… or he wasn’t.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “…or are the reporters misconstruing the whole thing/asking leading questions that we didn’t see?”

          We may never know. A full-up after action report on such incidents are rare, unless there is sufficient public clamor.

  54. avatar John in Ohio says:

    One of the neighbors in the included link was interview by another news station. In that broadcasted interview he seemed quite satisfied that the home invaders didn’t win out. He even smiled about it. That single interview not withstanding (I can’t even find it on the internet now), there appears to be an obvious narrative being pushed by media. They don’t want even self-defense to be a reason to own a gun.

    Again, the long game favors tyranny. The indoctrination of generations through public school, “higher” education, mainstream/social media, coordinated social engineering, and broken familial structure cannot be counteracted without major structural change to the system. That change isn’t likely to happen in time. At this point, the short game can favor liberty. As generations continue, liberty weakens.

    Tick-tock.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Solurion; buy another 1000 rounds of ammo, and a shovel.

  55. avatar Sam I Am says:

    We have seen a number of comments about reaction to shooting an attacker. Several of the comments cautioned about not having a heavy heart at taking a life. While not opposing, or disrespecting anyone here, there is something about the remorse/regret/horror/sympathy and such that should be clear to everyone….hesitation can get you killed.

    People who have significant emotions about shooting another human should re-calibrate their understanding of what being armed in defense means. One of the interesting things I learned from my dad’s ministry to prisoners at the state big house, is the lack of connection between many criminals, and the general populace. Most of the “killers” locked up have no more respect for others than they do for themselves. That is, about none. We are objects, chairs if you will, and are due the same consideration we give to walking on weeds in the front lawn.

    One standout conversation that remains is the killer who said people who think we can be talked out of killing them are giving up their lives in advance. The inmate said that the decision to kill a person who interferes with then was made long ago, and requires reflex, not thinking to kill the citizen; no hesitation whatsoever.

    If you plan on being able to defend with a gun, you must have already made the decision that the person on the other side of the front site already forfeited their life, and not hesitate a blink in stopping the threat (if they stop while still breathing, all the better, but thinking in advance you will suffer a big downer afterward sits in the back of your mind, hesitating).

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      “hesitation can get you killed.”

      ****
      Agreed. But that wasn’t the source of the argument further up near the beginning of this comments forum.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Agreed. But that wasn’t the source of the argument further up near the beginning of this comments forum.”

        I called attention to “hesitation” because of the drift of the thread toward encouraging some sort of deep emotional introspection at a life-changing event. People supporting the idea that shooting someone should be reflected upon after, may not understand that such introspection may inhibit a natural, life-saving, self-defense response.

        If a gun owner hasn’t resolved their personal values prior to buying a gun, that owner may have an inflated notion of their response to threats, and hesitate. As noted, the criminal attacker has no reservations about taking a life. Giving the attacker such an advantage could be dangerous to the gun owner, and people depending upon defense.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Hence the key word “after”. You act without emotion DURING, but allow for the normal human emotional response AFTER.

          Maybe Guesty’s assessment of you being a psychopath isn’t so far off the mark. You really are making a concerted effort to demolish anyone’s emotional followup to a real shooting event.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “You really are making a concerted effort to demolish anyone’s emotional followup to a real shooting event.”

          Nope. A person may act/react anyway they like. Not even saying people should not mentally collapse into a complete breakdown. Just pointing out that entertaining thoughts that can inhibit your response to attack should be taken seriously. A response afterward (especially when contemplated in advance) that causes a person to hesitate in the actual event should be approached cautiously. Also observing that a person who has an emotional crisis after a shooting did not fully prepare for consequences of using a firearm.

          Should a person be prepared to successfully engage an attacker? Obviously. Should a person be prepared to successfully endure the aftermath of engaging an attacker. Again, obviously. Must a person “feel” some sort of character failure, or deep emotional trauma afterward? No. Can a person acknowledge intellectually that a defensive shooting is not something a “normal” person takes lightly? Of course. Is deep emotional analysis some sort of morally demanded exercise that separates “normals” from determined survivors? Apparently so in this conversation.

          And we arrive again at the beginning. If a person is not prepared to successfully endure the aftershock of a defensive shooting, then that person should, before facing the situation, re-evaluate if they really understand their full responsibility.

          Anyone who understands the meaning of “psychopath” realizes that such a person would not call for understanding the full responsibility a gun owner bears. Would not give a moment’s notice to after effects of a shooting.

        3. avatar No One Special says:

          Sam I am, have you ever read any of Lt Col Dave Grossman’s books, such as Warrior Mindset or On Killing? Some of the things you have said make me think you have at some point.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sam I am, have you ever read any of Lt Col Dave Grossman’s books, such as Warrior Mindset or On Killing? ”

          Indeed.

          Truth is, though, it is likely the overwhelming majority of DGUs are at the hands of persons untrained, either in firearms use, or dealing with cops, judges, or themselves. Doesn’t make those people lesser persons, but doesn’t elevate then, either. On the plus side, all those successful DGUs mean formal training is not the difference between success and failure. Especially high-speed, low-drag combat commando training.

          And, since the criminal element is also successful at dealing death with no formal training, that means it is possible to prevail based on some other factor. I look at the incidents as a matter of mindset. The criminal determined in advance that your life is worthless, and killing you is of no concern. A criminal can determine in advance that they will win by whatever means necessary. Therefore, the general population (gun owners) can obtain the same mindset in defense (call it “warrior” mindset). Some come by this naturally. I chose to study and learn.

          Some people claim that a person who can control their emotions in life-or-death situations, and after, are mentally deranged. Some point out that being fully prepared is important to being able to sustain the “warrior” mind across the years and the incidents. Focused control of self is not the same as having no caring for self, or others.

        5. avatar No One Special says:

          Reading and listening to those that know/knew better than I has helped me deal with things that I thought I was ready for and in the end hit that very hard wall of truth that I really wasn’t. Looking back now I know I am alive and it wasn’t by shear chance. It was a decision that I made long before to do everything possible to control the outcome. You are correct knowing one’s self isn’t admission of psychopathic tendency. It is preparation for what has already been mentally if only partially decided on. Knowing those things in advance takes the sting out of the aftermath.

        6. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Knowing those things in advance takes the sting out of the aftermath.”

          To borrow, and corrupt, a phrase, “No expectations, or assumptions, survive first contact with combat.”

        7. avatar No One Special says:

          “To borrow, and corrupt, a phrase, “No expectations, or assumptions, survive first contact with combat.””

          “There are some people that just don’t deserve to be here” Major General William F Garrison speaking about Mohammad Farrah Aidid.

          Interestingly enough his words hold true outside of combat.

        8. avatar No One Special says:

          “And, since the criminal element is also successful at dealing death with no formal training, that means it is possible to prevail based on some other factor.”

          Usually but not always this is contributed to the element of surprise or lying in wait. Plus the fact that survival for either side is an act of shear will. Whoever is most willing to part company with morals and ideals in the moment is the one most likely to walk away. This can be mitigated to a certain extent by paying attention to detail of your surroundings and adding your own elements of surprise. Add those two things to someone that can part company with morals and ideals in the situation and that’s someone I wouldn’t mess with lightly.

        9. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Add those two things to someone that can part company with morals and ideals in the situation and that’s someone I wouldn’t mess with lightly.”

          Being able to understand that is an important step in life. If you listen closely, you will hear people saying that we (America), can’t do something because that would make us no better than those who try to destroy/attack us. This is navel-gazing folly. We (America) can temporarily adopt whatever mechanisms are necessary to vanquish enemies, than put those mechanisms down and go back to being Americans. It is entirely what separates us from our enemies; they won’t put down tools of destruction, even if they defeat us.

        10. avatar No One Special says:

          Agreed

        11. avatar Voldamort says:

          IMO, it’s all about motivation. When I was a young man an old timer asked me: “When a fox is chasing a rabbit, which one has the better chance of winning?”
          I said the fox. He said no, because the fox is running to catch his dinner, but the rabbit is running for his life. The rabbit is more highly motivated.
          I think this is why the homeowner virtually always comes out on top over the home invaders, even though both are usually untrained. One defending his life and his loved ones has a whole lot more motivation than ones just hoping to steal enough for a pair of whatever the hot and trendy new shoe is.

        12. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “IMO, it’s all about motivation.”

          In the narrow context of defense of self and home, I can agree. Writ large though, many an enemy was vanquished while fighting a war in the homeland, defending self and home country.

    2. avatar strych9 says:

      There’s a difference between hesitating in the moment and doing what needs to be done but afterwords not feeling good that it happened. Effectively it’s business but it’s not fun business.

      I know from personal experience that I have a pretty “cold” reaction to death. It doesn’t bother me the way some people seem to think it should. Even someone dying in my arms trying to scream through their own blood gets nearly zero emotional reaction from me.

      But the fact that it doesn’t make me go all gooey doesn’t mean I’m going to celebrate someone’s death either.

      You can recognize the tragedy of wasted life without spending time crying about people who made bad choices, dumb decisions or did something remarkably stupid or trying to justify why they shouldnt have died.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        All you just said – yep.

        The drift of the thread seems to imply if a defender does not anguish over the result of shooting someone, something is missing in that person. Someone expecting to anguish may inhibit themselves at the crucial moment.

        Myself? Well, I’m the guy reporting on experience with convicted killers. They don’t experience anguish. They don’t hesitate. My intent is to always be prepared to offer them the same consideration.

        And to bring in another element…people who anguish after the fact may be setting themselves for failure should a second event present itself.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          “…people who anguish after the fact may be setting themselves for failure should a second event present itself.”

          I would say this is entirely dependent on how they ‘anguish’ and whom they turn to in that time. The right advice and they’ll be fine with some time and effort. The wrong advice will just twist them up in knots even worse.

    3. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

      “People who have significant emotions about shooting another human should re-calibrate their understanding of what being armed in defense means.”

      So are you now declaring that anyone who has significant emotions after shooting another person should reconsider themselves? What?? So any cop who survives a shootout with gang members and is shaken up by the encounter and seeing the dead bodies has to reconsider himself? Or a homeowner who unhesitatingly kills an armed intruder in his home to protect his children has to reconsider himself as he later experiences significant emotion over the realization that he was the instrument of death? Are you daft?

      If you AREN’T experiencing significant emotion after you’ve killed someone – even if they definitely deserved it – then you’re a psychopath.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “If you AREN’T experiencing significant emotion after you’ve killed someone – even if they definitely deserved it – then you’re a psychopath.”

        Nope. Purely logical. You (universal “you”) try to kill me, I will, without emotion, kill “you”. Cause and effect. Simple physics. To give myself advantage, I do not acknowledge that a person trying to kill me is anything more than a target. Will there be an adrenaline dump and drop? Absolutely. Will I have trouble sleeping, or being calm for a few days? Most likely. Will I do a deep analysis of myself afterward? Nope. (other than to determine if I made tactical mistakes that may cause failure should another event take place)

        Intellectually, I recognize when the body is no longer animate, a person is not going to enjoy another minute of life, and that many associated will face a trauma they may never overcome. Ending a life is socially an abnormal event, something to be avoided, something to hold as a last resort. As a result, it is incumbent upon a gun owner to work through that in advance, put in place those thoughts and actions designed to suppress “normal” responses….well before a life-threatening instance begins.

        So…to answer your questions, regardless of the occupation (or lack of one) a person who shoots another, then falls into deep emotional trauma likely did not really grasp the responsibility they carried. Could it happen to me? Of course. Which is why I work hard to suppress those emotions that could cost me my life.

        BTW, there is an enormous difference between “celebrating” a death, and being unmoved.

        1. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          “You (universal “you”) try to kill me, I will, without emotion, kill “you”.

          And there you go. Sam’s an admitted psychopath that walks without emotion even after killing someone.

          (I think there’s a Red Flag provision somewhere for this…)

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sam’s an admitted psychopath that walks without emotion even after killing someone.”

          Are you saying that in a life and death struggle between you and an attacker, you value the attacker’s life more than your own, ceding the advantage to the attacker, being inhibited by your emotions?

          Of what value are “emotions” after shooting or killing an attacker? How do they change the event and outcome? How do they prepare you to carry on? In what way do emotions improve you as a person in this regard? If you have never done it, self-examination without suppressing emotions will fail because emotions will always provide excuses for avoiding hard decisions. The strongest emotion to overcome is fear of admitting to being wrong about self image, treasured beliefs, emotions.

          And do note that a psychopath would be completely uninterested in you being human, would not work to suppress the natural aversion to killing another human. A psychopath wouldn’t need any introspection because such a person places no value on others (except that which exploiting others can provide).

          Rule your emotions, for surely they will rule you, otherwise.

          Just for fun: (stuff I learned somewhere along the line)
          “A man without self-control is like a city broken into and left without walls.”

          “A fool gives full vent to his spirit, but a wise man quietly holds it back.”

        3. avatar No One Special says:

          I am now very curious who you have either talked to or what you have read to come to these conclusions. Given what you have already said I imagine some of it has come from your father but I would say not all. There is profound truth in what you have said for anyone that has ever been through such a traumatic event. The struggle is finding that truth for yourself after the fact. Maybe you too have had a similar experience of some kind and have learned and processed afterwards to grow and move on? On the other hand it could be that you are better mentally conditioned for such an occurrence should it ever happen? Either way my hats off to you.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Either way my hats off to you.”

          While I eagerly accept unearned accolades, and I appreciate your words, the central point is that a useful, and selective mindset is possible to develop. Some of it from experience, most of it from observation, reading and integrating (not a weekend effort).

          I may be underestimating experience, as when one is a combat veteran (spotty as it was), after being shot at to no effect, a change of priorities is probably a natural evolution. Being prepared was essential to getting up and doing it again, next day. Boatloads have been written about enduring and surviving combat, so I won’t try to add to that body of work, but….the experience was built upon a framework provided by parents who were upper-lower, and understood endurance, commitment, and self-discipline.

          And, just so you know, if I can learn to set aside self long enough to understand and correct, believe me, anybody can do it. Just don’t expect it to be a one-time practice.

          Cheers,

      2. avatar strych9 says:

        People have enormously varied and sometimes delayed responses to death and killing.

        I think Sam’s point is that the time for introspection is before you pick up a burner and start carrying it around with you. Otherwise you might be in for a rude surprise.

        So, some of that evolutionary biology that I drop from time to time:

        We’re all capable of extreme violence. This is an innate survival mechanism in our species. Part of that survival mechanism is that we get a shot of “feel good” (neurotransmitters) from our brain immediately after surviving a crazy encounter. There’s an obvious evolutionary reason for this. Being sad about killing the lion that tried to eat you means your’re more likely to get eaten. So, we’re programmed to feel good about having survived. Sometimes this ends up turning people into adrenaline junkies.

        That programming runs counter to what we’re taught our entire lives by society about right and wrong. You’re SUPPOSED to feel bad about killing someone. But immediately afterwards you do not. This juxtaposition fucks with people where they feel good about something they’ve been told they should feel bad about. This raises all sorts of questions consciously and subconsciously for them. It is thought to sometimes be the root cause of PTSD.

        The first time I ever dealt with this kind of thing, at 19 years old, it fucked with me a bit. I didn’t feel the way I was “supposed to feel”, did that make me a bad person? No, it turns out. It makes me entirely fucking normal. I’m not wrong and biology isn’t wrong. Society doesn’t teach any nuance to this aspect of right and wrong and so the teaching is… WRONG. But if you get stuck in that circle thinking or *knowing* that you’re wrong when you feel right, some people get torn apart by that.

        If I’m reading what Sam says here correctly, he’s suggesting that you need to make your peace with that juxtaposition before you carry a gun for defense. That is, to mentally steel yourself against what’s coming when you’re happy that you survived but told you should feel the opposite because of what you did to survive.

        This is what I’ve called “gazing into the abyss”. Recognizing what we are and how we work and that these things apply to you as a person is the first step in being disciplined enough to use controlled violence and not end up a headcase from doing so.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “This is what I’ve called “gazing into the abyss”. Recognizing what we are and how we work and that these things apply to you as a person is the first step in being disciplined enough to use controlled violence and not end up a headcase from doing so.”

          Once again, you said what I said, better than I said it. Maybe I should just IM stuff to you, and let you put it out there for me.

    4. avatar LifeSavor says:

      Sam I Am,

      That is wisdom! I regularly train, using scenarios, mental exercises, to prepare myself to act decisively, effectively, and safely. When the threat is real and immediate, we cannot hesitate.

      Of course, threat assessment in fractions of a second is another reason for regular, frequent training.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Of course, threat assessment in fractions of a second is another reason for regular, frequent training.”

        Agree. We are always on the “reaction” end of the “action/re-action” equation. Always at a disadvantage.

  56. avatar Jablome says:

    …another one of Trump’s ‘very fine people’ gets away with murder.

    1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

      Moron. Really. I’ll bet you couldn’t count to seben.

      So fuck you.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Really. I’ll bet you couldn’t count to seben.”

        Is this a typo, or accidental dropping of the “i” in “sieben”?

        1. avatar No One Special says:

          Is this a typo, or accidental dropping of the “i” in “sieben”?

          Had some German classes in high school. Eine zwei drei vier. Don’t remember much of it as it’s been long ago I never really used it. I do remember seven though.

      2. avatar Jablome says:

        And you wonder why you’re alone…

        1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

          Wasn’t a typo Jablome. I’d bet that’s how you count you fucking idiot. You know, between six and ayt. So Heywood…

  57. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

    Dis was ovakill. Dem niggas just wanted to steal his stuff. They didn’ want to have die fo it.

    I axe you – when has you and too of yo friends not showed up at a strangers house at fo in the mornin’ armed and wantin’ they stuff?

    Call me racist. I don’t give a shit. Spend your high school years in Hardeeville SC and get back to me if you survive.

  58. avatar Richard Steven Hack says:

    “fired at the neighbors”

    This is the part I don’t get. Why was one of the teens shooting at the neighbors?

    That sounds to me that considerably more went down than the article states. Like maybe the teens made a row, some neighbors came out as well as the homeowner, things got tense, then one of the teens panicked and drew his gun and fired at someone or maybe in the air to scare people, whereupon the homeowner opened fire.

    Plus the cops talk about *two* guns “found” at the scene, presumably not including the homeowner’s AR.

    So, yeah, there’s more to the story.

    The one thing that’s clear – a six-shot revolver probably is not enough for a home defense gun when you have three assailants, one or more of whom are armed. Home invasions tend to be by more than one thug because by definition of the term the home is occupied by at least one person and one thug isn’t going to risk it unless they know the victim is feeble (a woman or old person). And they tend to be armed because they know a lot of people own guns.

  59. avatar Alan says:

    A number of questions present here, one of them being as follows. What were these 3 teenagers, at least one of whom it seems was armed, illegally???? doing wandering about at approximately 0400 hours.

  60. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I look forward to the self hating white Libertarians Liberals and the Leftists, making excuses for the behavior of the parents, friends, as well as the behavior of the dead criminal children.

    They had a “right” to be out after midnight.
    They had a “right” to be out late on a school night.
    They had a “right” to break curfew.

    And no parent has a “right” to disciple their own child as they see fit. They need permission from the state first.

  61. avatar dpk54 says:

    I salute this homeowner!!! Anyone coming to my home, masked and armed is asking for the inevitable!! I would NOT hesitate to defend my family or my property. These punks weren’t there for milk and cookies!!! They got exactly what they deserved!!!

  62. avatar Angela says:

    What color was the homeowner I wonder? This could of been a hate crime, or a typical black on black crime. Either way, the media doesn’t want to show it!!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email