For all its faults, the US Justice System sometimes gets it right!

https://wgntv.com/2019/08/13/high-sp...rnee-homicide/

"CHICAGO — Five teens have been charged with murder after a 14-year-old boy was shot and killed following an attempted auto theft and high-speed chase from rural Lake County to Chicago.

Authorities said it started around 1 a.m. Tuesday with an attempted auto theft in the small town of Old Mill Creek. A 75-year-old homeowner called police to report the crime in progress. The homeowner also opened fire on the group of individuals — adults and juveniles — who were attempting to steal his vehicle.

The group fled the scene in a black Lexus SUV that was stolen over the weekend, police said. The offenders stopped near Route 132 and Hunt Club Road in Gurnee and dropped off a 14-year-old, who had a gunshot wound to his head area, and another man. A Gurnee police officer, who was in the area investigating an unrelated crash, began first aid on the 14-year-old and called for an ambulance."

Step 1: Try to steal a car.
Step 2: Forget that self-defense is an American right
Step 3: Have one of your accomplices die from the elderly homeowner defending himself
Step 4: YOU get charged with MURDER.

God Bless America. Hopefully these teens get some some life sentences!

Sorry to ruin your mood, but giving a life sentence to a minor is unconstitutional (according to the Supreme Court).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Sorry to ruin your mood, but giving a life sentence to a minor is unconstitutional (according to the Supreme Court).

---

That was a 5-4 ruling, we'll see what happens in the future. In the interim one of the thieves is 18. And I couldn't find a quick answer, is it a life sentence w/o the possibility of parole or all life sentences? It is a minor but important difference.

Lewkowski, you really think that life in prison is the only way to deal with theft?

I'm still baffled that an accomplice dying is felony murder. It is a legal killing after all. If a bystander dies, I understand, but in these cases?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

I'm still baffled that an accomplice dying is felony murder. It is a legal killing after all. If a bystander dies, I understand, but in these cases?

---

It's just more 'deterrent' that doesn't work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

I'm still baffled that an accomplice dying is felony murder. It is a legal killing after all. If a bystander dies, I understand, but in these cases?

---

Its a death caused due to a felony. Had they not commited the felony, he would still be alive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Lewkowski, you really think that life in prison is the only way to deal with theft?

---

I think he would prefer the thieves all got death. It's the Christian thing to do, after all.

As for the case at hand, based on the limited information in the article, the old man apparently discovered the teens stealing his car and opened fire on them. That isn't self defense, nor is death the penalty for car theft. In the spirit of "people ought to refrain from killing each other unless it's actually necessary," I would say *actual* justice would see the old man being charged at least with manslaughter, along with the 18 year old car thief. A human life is worth much more than a car, even a Lexus, and given the old man's life did not appear to be threatened, there is no just reason for him to kill the car thieves.

Now, if the kids had car-jacked him, or threatened to kill or injure him, and/or he had no safe place to retreat, that's a different story. But I don't get any hint of those circumstances from reading the quoted article. And even though the kid was breaking the law, and even though its a stupid thing to do all around and he definitely knew better, death for car theft is *not* justice.

This thread is another red flag. Someone please confiscate Lewk's guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

I think he would prefer the thieves all got death. It's the Christian thing to do, after all.

As for the case at hand, based on the limited information in the article, the old man apparently discovered the teens stealing his car and opened fire on them. That isn't self defense, nor is death the penalty for car theft. In the spirit of "people ought to refrain from killing each other unless it's actually necessary," I would say *actual* justice would see the old man being charged at least with manslaughter, along with the 18 year old car thief. A human life is worth much more than a car, even a Lexus, and given the old man's life did not appear to be threatened, there is no just reason for him to kill the car thieves.

Now, if the kids had car-jacked him, or threatened to kill or injure him, and/or he had no safe place to retreat, that's a different story. But I don't get any hint of those circumstances from reading the quoted article. And even though the kid was breaking the law, and even though its a stupid thing to do all around and he definitely knew better, death for car theft is *not* justice.

---

1. A man has a right to defend his property.
2. According to the homeowner the teens approached him after he confronted them. They sought to do him harm after coming on his property, this is self defense. Chicago is a liberal city, if it wasn't clear cut self-defense they would have tried to arrest him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Its a death caused due to a felony. Had they not commited the felony, he would still be alive.

---

I know how it works, but that doesn't mean it makes sense. It's not like they committed worse crimes than if the guy had missed.

Plus in this case you encourage criminals to try to kill the victim, if you're going down for murder anyway, that way you have a better chance to get away with it. Surely that's not the intention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

I know how it works, but that doesn't mean it makes sense. It's not like they committed worse crimes than if the guy had missed.

Plus in this case you encourage criminals to try to kill the victim, if you're going down for murder anyway, that way you have a better chance to get away with it. Surely that's not the intention.

---

Most criminals don't go into an altercation thinking that one of their number is going to die so the logic doesn't hold up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Most criminals don't go into an altercation thinking that one of their number is going to die so the logic doesn't hold up.

---

In that case as a deterrent it also doesn't hold up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

1. A man has a right to defend his property.

---

It is not remotely reasonable to value property over a human life.

Quote:

---

2. According to the homeowner the teens approached him after he confronted them. They sought to do him harm after coming on his property, this is self defense.

---

If that's true, then fair enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

It is not remotely reasonable to value property over a human life.

---

If you're a scumbag who tries to trash other people's lives, I think it is reasonable to value my property over your life. Especially when my property has my wife and children in it too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

If you're a scumbag who tries to trash other people's lives, I think it is reasonable to value my property over your life. Especially when my property has my wife and children in it too.

---

Ah, Brexit is really a gateway to the real stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

If you're a scumbag who tries to trash other people's lives, I think it is reasonable to value my property over your life. Especially when my property has my wife and children in it too.

---

Ah, Brexit is really a gateway to the real stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

If you're a scumbag who tries to trash other people's lives, I think it is reasonable to value my property over your life. Especially when my property has my wife and children in it too.

---

Fortunately you live in a country with laws that do not value property over life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Ah, Brexit is really a gateway to the real stuff.

---

In this case I believe the relationship is the other way around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

If you're a scumbag who tries to trash other people's lives, I think it is reasonable to value my property over your life. Especially when my property has my wife and children in it too.

---

I have a sneaking suspicion this 75-y-o man's wife and children were not in the car they were in the process of stealing, but sure, froth away.

Incidentally, are you allowed to say America has many faults, Lewk? Shouldn't you be keeping America great?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

I have a sneaking suspicion this 75-y-o man's wife and children were not in the car they were in the process of stealing, but sure, froth away.

---

I was responding to the point made not the case in question, nor Lewk's hard on for vigilante violence which outside of Batman comics I've always opposed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

If you're a scumbag who tries to trash other people's lives, I think it is reasonable to value my property over your life. Especially when my property has my wife and children in it too.

---

And with that kind of thinking you get laws where if you rape a woman you get two years while if you also stole the tent she was in at the time you get three years.

Took some time to get those laws sorted. Coincidentally, they entered the German law code in 1933.

Three years from the robbery from the woman sounds appropriate, two years is nowhere near long enough for rape.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Incidentally, are you allowed to say America has many faults, Lewk? Shouldn't you be keeping America great?

---

America has many faults including ridiculous laws against things like drugs and gambling and a ridiculous amount of regulation.

Another America-hater. :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

I know how it works, but that doesn't mean it makes sense. It's not like they committed worse crimes than if the guy had missed.

Plus in this case you encourage criminals to try to kill the victim, if you're going down for murder anyway, that way you have a better chance to get away with it. Surely that's not the intention.

---

And Lewk will actually applaud this but it also provides a perverse incentive to use lethal force AGAINST anyone committing a crime, no matter how non-violent, to increase their potential sentences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

And Lewk will actually applaud this but it also provides a perverse incentive to use lethal force AGAINST anyone committing a crime, no matter how non-violent, to increase their potential sentences.

---

Despite this probably being true, it's actually not a very convincing argument; because it already works for violent crimes like rape and sex with children.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

I was responding to the point made not the case in question, nor Lewk's hard on for vigilante violence which outside of Batman comics I've always opposed.

---

You made a straw man then attacked it. Well done. Property shouldn't be valued more than a human life.

I don't value my property more than my life.