Student kills intruder with sword

[Armored Prayer]

No he didn't, he cut his hand off and sliced his chest...didn't you read it?

Yeah I did. It just the first thing I thought of.

 

[Armored Prayer]

Edit: To add a few more details, this happened in Baltimore, Maryland

Shit. Another reason why I'm glad I don't live in Baltimore.

 

[Skeleon]

*snip*

That's where my new favorite word "commensurability" comes into play again.
When there's an actual threat for your life or health, sure, go ahead.

But otherwise, no. I don't care how you try to reason it, it's not right. I don't really give a damn about stuff I own, I'll get it back from my insurance company anyway. I would never kill anybody unless under serious threat (or if it's an accident).

If a guy tries to steal my stuff, I'll yell at him and hit him over the head with a bat or try to tackle or knock him out some other way.
If he's got a gun, I put my hands up. I'm neither a murderer nor an idiot.

Sorry, but in my opinion you guys put far too much worth on material goods and far too little on human life. But I knew what the responses'd be and I posted anyway. Sigh, damned principles.

 

[kawligia]

Self-defense is technically a crime in Canada. It is illegal to kill a criminal intruder with the intent to kill you in your own home. I HATE our idiotic hippy populace. And I'M a god damned member of the NDP, the socialist party! Of course, my fellow party members may be more deluded than I on the matter of self-defense and gun control...

I don't intend to call you a liar or anything of that sort, but I find that difficult to believe. It's one of the most unreasonable things I have ever heard in my life.

A criminal intentionally forces you, an innocent person, into a situation where one of you will die, and you are supposed to allow yourself to be sacrificed like a lamb rather than prevent a crime? That is the abandonment of all reason and criminalizing the most basic instinct of survival.

See, NRA? You don't need a gun to defend against burglars.

If the burgler had a gun, it would be the kid who was dead and not the burglar. He was very lucky that he didn't wind up bringing a sword to a gunfight.

 

[darthsquizzo]

It's fair enough if it was in self defence, the guy was trying to steal from him after all. But if you were caught stealing from a guy with a katana, trying to engage them in a melee seems a really stupid idea. Granted killing him seems a little excessive but in the heat of the moment.. Good luck on getting acquitted.

And I find it oddly awesome in a slightly twisted way.

 

[[Cold-Shoulder]]

I have to admit what the kid did was awesome!
I hope he doesn't get in trouble for it unless the sword is illegal.

 

[nerdsamwich]

*snip*

That's where my new favorite word "commensurability" comes into play again.
When there's an actual threat for your life or health, sure, go ahead.

But otherwise, no. I don't care how you try to reason it, it's not right. I don't really give a damn about stuff I own, I'll get it back from my insurance company anyway. I would never kill anybody unless under serious threat (or if it's an accident).

If a guy tries to steal my stuff, I'll yell at him and hit him over the head with a bat or try to tackle or knock him out some other way.
If he's got a gun, I put my hands up. I'm neither a murderer nor an idiot.

Sorry, but in my opinion you guys put much far too much worth on material goods and far too little on human life.

Actually, legally speaking, If you pull a weapon on a guy, you'd better kill him. If you hit an intruder with a bat, and he survives, you're looking at attempted manslaughter at the least, probably aggravated assault, and if the DA is feeling his oats that day, attempted murder. If you kill the intruder, however, you've got justifiable homicide on the grounds of self-defense. Incidentally, to those of you stating that a single bullet would have done the job just as well, your local prosecutor will have a field day with that one. At trial, you will be painted as making a cold, calculating decision to end a human life, whereas if you empty your gun into the "victim", you were acting in fear for your own safety.

 

[Jimbo1212]

The kid should have all charges dropped against him. Some scummy thief broke into his house to steal and then attacked an innocent person. I know I wont be missing him (the thief) from our society. In fact, I'll sleep better knowing there are less people like that on our streets.

 

[SsilverR]

if having a sword is legal there then he'll get off scott free ... maybe win at first but i predict some PTSD somewhere along the line

 

[Hybrid Sight]

wow death by katana, guy probably deserved it.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

*snip*

That's where my new favorite word "commensurability" comes into play again.
When there's an actual threat for your life or health, sure, go ahead.

But otherwise, no. I don't care how you try to reason it, it's not right. I don't really give a damn about stuff I own, I'll get it back from my insurance company anyway. I would never kill anybody unless under serious threat (or if it's an accident).

If a guy tries to steal my stuff, I'll yell at him and hit him over the head with a bat or try to tackle or knock him out some other way.
If he's got a gun, I put my hands up. I'm neither a murderer nor an idiot.

Sorry, but in my opinion you guys put far too much worth on material goods and far too little on human life. But I knew what the responses'd be and I posted anyway. Sigh, damned principles.

What if hitting him over the head with a bat causes his death? What if tackling him causes him to smack the back of his head against a wall, and he dies?

It's easy to claim moral superiority without perspective.

I think the law should protect the person who's being robbed and then attacked (guess you missed the part where he was ATTACKED by the thief, and could have been killed himself). But then, what do I know?

 

[TheFacelessOne]

Wow...

That kid has sick skills.

If they arrest the guy because he "murdered" someone, that'll be so wrong.

Unless, of course, he killed the wrong person.

 

[chiggerwood]

I don't know about Maryland but in Arizona if someone breaks into your house and you're in fear of your life you can legally unload an entire clip on him.

OT: I hope the kid's fine, because the fact that he took a life can really mess him up. In my opinion nothing should happen to him legally, but I don't know Maryland's laws. I just hope everything turns out alright

 

[Nickolai77]

As other's have said, the kid acted in self defense, and killed a burglar in the process. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Salmaras]

Considering the guy was charged with burglary before and was in a strangers home I think it's fair to say he was there to steal.

Therefore I think it was justified as self defence as the sword guy didn't know what the intruder was capable of.

That kid's going to prison though.

Unfortunately the kids done for but I'll hand it to him.

Not necessarily, unless the sword was illegal. If the guy had lot's of wounds then it could be considered murder. Two wounds is not excessive so he could get away with self defence.

If he was attacked and he then acted instantly, it's self defense

 

[martin's a madman]

I have an Indian longsword that could work, as well as two machetes. I think there should be no charges, he was defending himself and his home. To press charges would be punishing someone for defending what they own from the guilty.

 

[hamster mk 4]

If he did this with a gun the NRA would probably pay for his defense and use him as an example of the right place for guns in American society. Unfortunatly there is no powerful sword lobby in the US to take up the case.

 

[Vuljatar]

Haven't heard of that one.
That kid's going to prison though.

For killing someone in self-defense? Are you shitting me? There's no way.

 

[Rheill]

The moral of this story:
Never attack someone who is carrying a fucking sword.

A lesson for the ages.

Sad that the intruder died, but seriously: "Killed with a freaking sword" will be a better obituary than most get.