I understand what you're all saying and a lot of it is true, but what about the family and friends of the burglars themselves? I know it may seem like i'm siding against the man that shot the two, but wouldn't it have been more humane to have maybe gotten in there and hit them over the head with the butt of the rifle? That way, the police could arrive and it would be a bit less..... violent, so to speak.

If a 70 year old man tried to knock them out with his shotgun butt they'd probably just take it from him.

Good point up there, Major....

Ditto what ml said.

Anyways, that is what happens when you are family members of criminals. Yes, it's sad for what they feel...but it's that mentality that has screwed up our justice system. (IMHO).

In short, I don't really care about the families of the law breakers.

I'll bet that if they were aware that their relatives were committing robbery, they would not have reported them to the police, making them accessories to the crime. So the message here is, if you feel that a family member is committing criminal offences, report them to the authorities yourself, and perhaps save their lives, if you don't and they are killed whilst committing an offence you have no one to blame but yourself.

In this case the burglars knew the possible consequences of their actions and knew that it was sanctioned by law, if they didn't, ignorance of the law is no excuse..

I agree that, those who wish to prey on society must take the risk of becoming a victim of that society. I think that Texas has got it right in this respect and wish it was the case in Australia.

I've been thinking about the fact that he was seventy years old. I agree with what senojekips said and that was one of the points I was trying to get across.

Originally Posted by pixiedustboo

No, but I'd be very glad he cared enough to protect my property if I was that neighbor.

If the government had it's way we'd be letting out child molesters out after two years and keeping someone who has weed in the prison system for 10 years.

Oh, wait, they are already doing that.

Vote in better Government if you do not like the way things are going.

The White House (Republican) is in charge of the DoJ at the moment, perhaps a change of Party.....

I fully agree with Senojekips and Major makes a nice true point.

This situation is a symptom of the lack of the effectiveness of the law and its implementation. It was a message to the authorities of his frustration and desperation on this score. Will he get a medal? Is there any doubt that they would have killed him if they felt they needed to?

Just like here, a change of party is not enough, it requires a complete change in attitude, or a new party of the people which carries such an attitude; zero tolerance of those who prey on society.

Everyone has a reason to commit a crime.
In almost every case you see, it's never an inevitable.
In America there's just about a million ways a guy can get out of poverty. All you need is to graduate from high school, which by the way, is possibly the easiest thing you can do in your whole life. And if you messed up, then you can get high school equivalent certificates. I cannot think of a system that is more forgiving.
Then you turn to crime?
There is no excuse.
If these people win, if these people are eligible for all sorts of "rights" and privileges then we who follow the rules and laws are the losers.

Originally Posted by Gator

Vote in better Government if you do not like the way things are going.

The White House (Republican) is in charge of the DoJ at the moment, perhaps a change of Party.....

And DOJ controls the federal level. The problem the main problem is at the State level. Federal sentencing and truth in sentencing is fairly straight forward and adhered to. The states all have different standards.

The big zero tolerance push in the 80's on narcotics charges in most states failed to recognize the difference between street level dealers and traffickers and users who were caught with wieght. So we end up clogging the system with dime baggers which leads to early paroles in the state systems on other types of charges to include violent and sex offenses.

The Fed's on the other hand only pick up cases that violate the USCC
and BOP is not nearly as clogged as are the state DOC's. So Fed offenders if convicted end up doing generally 75% of their sentence before eligable for the Fed Parole system.

So blaming the DOJ or the White House is not even realistic when you consider that the States control the majority of the issues on setencing parole probation etc. The State legislature would be a better place to voice your opinion.