[N8 v2.0]

There should be more car thiefs shot then maybe the stealing will stop.... too bad this poor car owner lives in liberal SoCal....




L.A. man shoots car thief, charged with murder
07 Apr 2004 22:20

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A 26-year-old Los Angeles man who prosecutors say shot at two thieves stealing his car, killing one of them, was charged on Wednesday with murder.

Yoon Ho Song could face 50 years to life in prison if he is convicted of the first degree murder of Mario Sandoval Martinez and a special allegation of using a handgun, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said.

Prosecutors say Song came out of his house to find two car thieves pushing his customized Honda out of his driveway in the predawn hours on Monday and opened fire, hitting Martinez, 25, in the back. The second suspect got away.

"The fact that your car is being stolen isn't a legal justification for killing somebody," Deputy District Attorney Frank Somes said. "Generally, you're not allowed to kill people unless they are committing a violent felony or you are acting in self defense."

Somes said police initially focused on Song as a crime victim but "essentially began questioning whether he was the victim or a suspect when they learned the person stealing the car had been shot in the back."

An attorney for Song, who was expected to make his first court appearance in the case as early as Wednesday, could not be reached for comment.

 

[Spud]

Hell, it was just a car, now if he had shot a bike thief, then it would be justified!

:devil:

Seriously, in most jurisdictions you'd be f^cked for shooting a goon in the back as they are vacating your property, no?

Murder charge seems out of line though.

 

[Westy]

Shooting an unarmed man in the back is murder. There were few details given but their was no mention that the thief had endangered or threatened him in any way.

If shooting someone for stealing your car is justified then every repo-man would end up with a cap in their ass.

 

[N8 v2.0]

It should be legal to shoot anyone in the back who's stealing your stuff. No question about it.

You steal stuff, you accept the risk that you just might die as a result.

 

[Westy]

Originally posted by N8
It should be legal to shoot anyone in the back who's stealing your stuff. No question about it.

It should be legal to shoot anyone with a customized Honda.

 

[nicklin]

yeah, if you let the thievies go after threatening them they will be guaranteed to come back for a drive by. It is LA we are talking about, and these guys didn't sound like good citizens to me and probably had friends who would get beck at the car owner.

 

[llkoolkeg]

Originally posted by N8
It should be legal to shoot anyone in the back who's stealing your stuff. No question about it.

You steal stuff, you accept the risk that you just might die as a result.

Although I would personally be willing to abide by your rule, in practice, this loophole would be abused. Shooting someone in the back for stealing is just not right. They have to be threatening violence towards you or your family...or at least be inside your home.

I always have a large handgun in my mitt when my car or house alarm goes off. If I catch someone stealing my stuff, though, I'm not gonna shoot 'em. I'm gonna make them piss their drawers and I'm gonna pistol whip the $hit out of 'em if they don't kiss the concrete real quick while the police are being called.

 

[Spud]

Isn’t first degree murder contingent upon premeditation? I don’t see that in this particular case. The dude was arguably minding his own business when the clowns went to steal his ride. I’d agree that he over-reacted in a criminally reckless manner. But first degree murder seems like a stretch.

An interesting discussion might be at what point can back-shoot a perp leaving your property? When they are taking your car? A garden gnome? What’s the cash value threshold for justifiable homicide vs manslaughter (or in this case murder)?

 

[Spud]

Originally posted by N8
It should be legal to shoot anyone in the back who's stealing your stuff. No question about it.

You steal stuff, you accept the risk that you just might die as a result.

Does that include pink flamingos and the value of IMCLONE stock (ref: Martha Stewart). :devil:

 

[BostonBullit]

"a car isn't worth killing someone over!"

it's not the car, it's the principal of the thing. what's he gonna do, call the cops? and then when they get there 20mins later he can give the description of the two guys who successfully took his car. If he just went out with the gun and threatened them to scare em away that's assault. If he goes out without the gun they'll kill his azz. so you're really legally left with just letting them take the car...might as well just give them the keys. maybe if it was legal to pop someone who was stealing your stuff there'd be less stealing of stuff hmmm?

 

[Booker]

I just received my concealed carry license for the state of Kentucky. According to all the paper work and classes i had to take you are only allowed to kill a person if you feel your life is in danger, you feel someone else could be killed or harmed (this includes rape) or if someone is in the act of settng your house or other shelter on fire (includes garage, barn, shed, ect). There is a grey area which includes physical but not leathal harm, theft, threats, shooting before the intruder has entered your home, ect. I personally would have to feel extreamly threatened befor i would kill a man, but once the threshold is crossed i wouldn't think twice. In this case i would have just scared the guys off.

 

[Westy]

Originally posted by Booker
I just received my concealed carry license for the state of Kentucky. According to all the paper work and classes i had to take you are only allowed to kill a person if you feel your life is in danger, you feel someone else could be killed or harmed (this includes rape) or if someone is in the act of settng your house or other shelter on fire (includes garage, barn, shed, ect). There is a grey area which includes physical but not leathal harm, theft, threats, shooting before the intruder has entered your home, ect. I personally would have to feel extreamly threatened befor i would kill a man, but once the threshold is crossed i wouldn't think twice. In this case i would have just scared the guys off.

Kentucky is just full of a bunch of liberals like SoCal anyway.

IMO it would be just plain immoral to kill someone over something stupid like a car anyway, it even goes well beyond an eye for an eye.

 

[Booker]

Originally posted by Westy
Kentucky is just full of a bunch of liberals like SoCal anyway.

Yep just like SoCal And who you calling liberal ?

I agree it is immoral to kill someone over your car, but i also think it is pretty freaking immoral to steal a car in the first place. Like i said i would have just scared the guys off. If one pulled a gun i would be ready. I guess i could always just shoot them and then say they where burning my house down.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Gotta love Shoot the Robber laws that are in several states...

 

[drtbikrr]

Those guys took a risk, it's like gambling, one of them rolled the snake eyes. Try and steal my stuff and you'll end up with a few holes in ya.
Nick

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Originally posted by N8
It should be legal to shoot anyone in the back who's stealing your stuff. No question about it.

You steal stuff, you accept the risk that you just might die as a result.

alright, so how do you make sure they were stealing before shooting?? its obvious sometimes, but what if you have a ferrari with dark windows and there is a fat 10yo kid who's trying to take a look at the interior.

under such a law, that kid could be a threat and you could kill him without any liability.

i mean, with a little thinking, i could kill a lot of people if i wanted to, and not go to jail under such a law.

a law like that would create more loopholes than the current law.

 

[N8 v2.0]

UPDATE:
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=4789903

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by Westy
It should be legal to shoot anyone with a customized Honda.

I know we sometimes get bogged down in partisan bickering, but I truly believe that Westy has finally found something we can all agree on.

 

[PsychO!1]

Can you imagine every store owner in the country pop'n caps at all the shoplifters????

Grab and run with a 6 pack, get shot in back.

Shooting an unarmed man for stealing is insane.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by PsychO!1
Can you imagine every store owner in the country pop'n caps at all the shoplifters????

Grab and run with a 6 pack, get shot in back.

Shooting an unarmed man for stealing is insane.

Simple solution... don't steal and you won't get shot.

 

[jimmydean]

I would have aimed for the knee. That way you can kick his ass once you catch up to 'em. Shooting in the air, or a warning shot near them would be justified. Shooting someone in the back seems a bit harsh, it is just a Honda.

Getting your car stolem sucks, but it only calls for a good ass wooping, not death.

 

[PsychO!1]

Originally posted by N8
Simple solution... don't steal and you won't get shot.

don't steal and you won't get shot.
don't speed and you won't get shot.
don't drink & drive and you won't get shot.
don't smoke pot and you won't get shot.
don't cut me off and you won't get shot.
don't run a light and you won't get shot.
don't barrow a tool and dont return it and you won't get shot.

This isn't the wild west...Where do you draw the line???

 

[Jr_Bullit]

What would happen I wonder...if all those potential thief killers carried a camera instead of a gun?

Just curious...not necessarily the way I'd go...but these days cameras are smaller than a gun and save you the danger of going to prison .

 

[N8 v2.0]

Originally posted by PsychO!1
don't steal and you won't get shot.
don't speed and you won't get shot.
don't drink & drive and kill/injure someone someone you won't get shot.
don't smoke pot and you won't get shot.

I like your thinking...

 

[Atomic Dog]

From the second article:

Though another gun was found at the scene, police said it did not belong to Martinez.

So who did it belong to?

 

[Repack]

No warning shot? I feel bad for the guy, but at the same time, somebody pushing a car out of a driveway is a lot different than say shooting someone who is walking off with your kid. I think the guy went a little overboard.

 

[phillyvanilly]

Insurance will give you alot more than you honda was worth anyway, you can claim your ****ty 17 inch rims for retail you know. I pray my bikes will get stolen, have them insured for retail, pay pro-deal

I would never take a man's life over something as worthless as a car... and I love cars. I am of the sentiment that not stealing cars would be a great way to avoid getting shot by their owners, but even so this guy should not have shot this dude in the back. Murder one is clearly not applicaple here, manslaughter sounds about right to me. Anyone ever hear about the guy that shot an exchange student on his porch who was just looking for the right house where he was supposed to be staying? I think that guy got manslaughter.