Jump to content

home invasion stand to protect daughters


10phone2
 Share

Recommended Posts

Came across this article on yahoo:

 

A St. Louis couple is likely thankful to have guns in their home after they were forced to use them to defend their daughter against two men Monday night.

 

The men, one of whom had an extensive rap sheet, confronted the couples’ 17 year-old daughter after she stepped outside of the house to go to her car, reports the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

 

Cortez McClinton, 33, and Terrell Johnson, 31, held a gun to the girl’s head and used her as a shield as they entered the family home, where a five-year old child was also present.

 

The girl’s father and mother witnessed the abduction, and both retrieved their guns. When McClinton and Johnson entered, the father fired several shots, hitting both men. The girl’s mother fired one shot but missed.

 

Johnson died at the scene. McClinton was wounded but was able to scramble off. He had his brother take him to the hospital.

 

In 2010, McClinton was charged with shooting another man. Charges were eventually dropped due to lack of witness participation. He also had drug possession and distribution charges against him.

 

McClinton is charged with second-degree murder, kidnapping, burglary, and criminal armed action and is being held on $1 million bond.

 

 

Original link:

http://news.yahoo.com/two-men-girl-human-shield-until-her-father-040007545.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, definitely some parts missing/unexplained. I'd like to say it was a good thing but not sure. I'm wondering if the murder charge is from a previous incident or not.

 

On the other side of this coin, I watched a live feed of a couple playing DOTA who was robbed. They couple was also armed but the assailants were as well and were able to control them and take all their shit including their firearms. Luckily, people online finally figured out they were being robbed and it was reported to police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The othe guy that got shot was charged with second degree murder not the father and he was charged because his friend was killed during the home invasion. He will get it dropped to manslaughter and be out in less than 15 years to do it all over again
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The criminal who was charged was an accomplice to the man who was killed therefore he is charged with second degree murder b/c he was involved in the crime. I cant cite the exact name of the law but if you help someone commit a felony you can be charged with the other persons death because you were involved in aiding him/her in the felony.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The criminal who was charged was an accomplice to the man who was killed therefore he is charged with second degree murder b/c he was involved in the crime. I cant cite the exact name of the law but if you help someone commit a felony you can be charged with the other persons death because you were involved in aiding him/her in the felony.

 

Yup,

 

IF you are part of the crime, and someone is killed due to your cumulative "actions" you are guilty of he crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other side of the coin, you know that psycho couple who shot 2 cops and another person in Vegas before killing themselves? Yeah, that other person who died was an idiot trying to be a hero who pulled his CCW on the guy and didn't realize the accomplice was right next to him.

 

Just a reminder that if you're going to carry, YOUR JOB IS NOT TO BE A HERO, IT'S TO DEFEND YOURSELF AND ONLY YOURSELF.

 

The couple referenced by OP did well by their family, but they're fortunate their daughter wasn't killed by their gunfire. Can you imagine the burden that'd put on you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that other person who died was an idiot trying to be a hero who pulled his CCW on the guy and didn't realize the accomplice was right next to him. Just a reminder that if you're going to carry, YOUR JOB IS NOT TO BE A HERO, IT'S TO DEFEND YOURSELF AND ONLY YOURSELF.

 

I agree about the hero part, but first and foremost, again, his training was likely lacking. He assumed there was just one shooter. Not claiming everyone pretend to be G.I. Joe but in reality, never assume anything.

 

Speaking of.....take Joe's CCW class and he will talk about the above. He is a real life G.I. Joe though :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about the hero part, but first and foremost, again, his training was likely lacking. He assumed there was just one shooter. Not claiming everyone pretend to be G.I. Joe but in reality, never assume anything.

 

Speaking of.....take Joe's CCW class and he will talk about the above. He is a real life G.I. Joe though :)

 

I've held off getting my permit because I don't ever really plan to carry (though it'd be nice to have the ability to do so) but a little additional education could never hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've held off getting my permit because I don't ever really plan to carry (though it'd be nice to have the ability to do so) but a little additional education could never hurt.

 

I was the same way. I don't really have a lot of opportunity to "legally" carry on a daily basis but the way I look at it, you are exercising your right to do so even if you don't actually do so. Of course more training and education can never hurt.

 

Just a reminder that if you're going to carry, YOUR JOB IS NOT TO BE A HERO, IT'S TO DEFEND YOURSELF AND ONLY YOURSELF.

 

Technically its not your "job" / responsibility at all, but in the eyes of the law you can use deadly action to protect not only yourself but others as well. Protection of life and property if I remember it correctly. At least in the state of Ohio as far as I'm aware.

 

This was actually a question I asked my instructor, "Are we legally liable to take action if we see something that necessitates it?" (someones life in danger etc...) the answer was no btw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure his family would offer in his defense that he is a "good boy", but the state should execute the second offender as well, instead of him living on the taxpayer dime for the next decade or so.

 

Would it serve as a deterrent? It would to him, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure his family would offer in his defense that he is a "good boy", but the state should execute the second offender as well, instead of him living on the taxpayer dime for the next decade or so.

 

Would it serve as a deterrent? It would to him, at least.

 

Always been a fan of the modified death penalty.

 

If you can prove so conclusively, through multiple avenues of forensic data (and not just relying on witnesses), that someone did something to deserve the death penalty, just take the motherfucker out back and do it right away. Basically the death penalty is ruling to deprive someone of their right to life, so you should therefore be able to, under the strictest of circumstances, deprive someone of their rights to appeal and all the other shit that burdens the prison system.

 

If, however, it can't be proven that conclusively, the death penalty goes out the window because it bothers me how many innocent people have potentially been put on death row from shitty witness statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...