Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumHome invasion without a good ending.
http://www.ydr.com/state/ci_21436397/police-nab-3-lancaster-county-killingHarmer drove the three, armed with a shotgun, to Herr's house, where they "shot their way into the residence through the back door," according to Stedman.
"He defended his property and he defended his castle. He made every effort to defend his right to life and liberty," Stedman said. "But these despicable thugs took his life and his liberty and then his money."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Three guys attack one with a shotgun the odds are against you. What do you do?
Forget the money, anyone can become a target. What could have he have done to harden his home?
I wonder if he had his HD firearm on his person or did he have to try and get to where it was stored?
I suppose the good news is these scumbags were caught.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Are you suggesting the victim should have been wearing a handgun at all times inside his home? Probably not the worst idea, as he apparently let it be known that he kept $200k in cash at home. Doesn't sound like he was too big on situational awareness, but a hardened bunker with a constantly manned machine gun emplacement might have acted as a deterrent.
Or, of course, he might have used a bank like everyone else.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)That's like going to a bar in a bad part of town and flashing a wad of cash.
First misake, keeping that much cash at home.
Second, worse mistake: Telling anybody about it.
I know I am blaming the victim, but people should take reasonable precautions. A self-defense gun is the last of the precautions, not the first.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Sounds like he did everything except put up a billboard announcing his stupidity. I think you would agree that 99+% of SD is avoidance.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... he was asking for it. Dressing like that.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)There is nothing in the article that indicates how the criminals came to know that there was cash in the house (or even if there actually was cash in the house).
Assuming there was, and assuming this guy ran his mouth about it, then yes, I would say that he shares some of the blame of what happened.
No one deserves to be a victim of crime. But if you set yourself up for it, well, you set yourself up for it.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)We reject that for other crimes of violence and this is no different. Dumb, hell yes, legally responsible, hell no. Ethically...that would depend on what he actually said and to whom.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)Like I said, no one deserves to be the victim of a crime. But like you said, if I do something "dumb" that results in me being the victim of a crime, then I am not blameless for the situation that resulted from my dumbness.
I was always told never to count my money where people could see. The obvious reason is if you flash your cash you might tempt someone into mugging you. It's not your fault if you get mugged, but if you made yourself a target, then you bear some blame for that.
If you advertise that you have $200,000 in cash in your house, that is very, very dangerous for obvious reasons.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)When things go apeshit in life, it is rarely the fault of just one person. It is not my place to ascribe blame, especially as details are scant. However, given what we know in this case, it is not difficult to see where the "victim" went wrong.
Do you think his behavior was appropriate? One can only assume that he kept such a large sum at home, because he either didn't trust banks, or didn't trust the government. Unfortunately, he trusted his own judgement, which let him down. How do you think these knuckleheads knew he had 200k stashed in his house?
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)At an instructors training, I met a retired cop. He told me about a case in his town where an intruder forced the homeowner to open his safe. Intruder failed to realize that the homeowner had a double stack 9mm in there and in the end there was a dead perp. Eventually they found out that perp knew the homeowner's girlfriend from work and had overheard her telling a friend that the homeowner did not like to use credit cards did most of his buying in cash, and made the assumption he had cash in the house.
I have seen this kind of thing before...most Americans are open and free with minor things and those who do ugly things will often leverage off of them.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)How do you think they knew? Let me know if you need help connecting the dots.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)They may have read an obituary and assumed there was an insurance payout.
They may have known someone at an insurance agency who processed the insurance payout.
They may have known someone who cashed the beneficiary check at a bank.
One or more family members who knew of the payout may have told others about it.
Again, there is nothing in the article that says how the criminals found out about the insurance payout.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)I never said that it wasn't loose lips that inspired the criminals.
I was taking issue with your statement:
Probably not the worst idea, as he apparently let it be known that he kept $200k in cash at home.
Which implies that it was the victim's loose lips that inspired the criminals.
And again, there is nothing in the article that tells us how the criminals found out about the supposed cache of cash.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Guy gets settlement of $200k.
Guy converts said settlement into cash.
Guy takes cash home.
Guy gets shot dead at home by guys wanting same cash.
Now, how do we know he came into this money and took it home in cash? How do we know the robbers knew? How did the robbers know?
Obviously, we are all clairvoyant, unless, of course, the guy happened to let that info slip somewhere, somehow.
If you aren't getting it yet, I really can't help you further. Sorry. Be well.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)I provided examples of how the information may have leaked out without participation of the victim.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Fact is, they found out. Fact is, he kept all that cash at home. Fact is, that didn't work out too well. Fact is, he became a target.
All of those facts demonstrate a very poor sense of awareness and preparedness. He didn't deserve to die for his foolishness, but his gun didn't help him either.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)Again, no one disputes that the criminals found out about the cash.
Again, what I take issue wit is your assertion that:
Probably not the worst idea, as he apparently let it be known that he kept $200k in cash at home.
Which implies that it was the victim's loose lips that inspired the criminals.
And again, there is nothing in the article that tells us how the criminals found out about the supposed cache of cash.
He didn't deserve to die for his foolishness, but his gun didn't help him either.
Yes, a firearm is no guarantee of success in overcoming violent criminals, and people should be free to respond to violent criminals with or without firearms, as they choose.