Jump to content

She had no right to defend her Miami home


Recommended Posts

Stories like this hit the media sometimes once a year, whenever a dangerous animal is put down by the Second Amendment.

http://conservativematrix.com/woman-shoots-person-robbing-home-now-robbers-family-irate-woman/?fbclid=IwAR1fL5PosJFXietMzEwgLkVskDWLNIPp8xSzr8tF7nnBvQ1OBn_EYMyDQgw

Woman Shoots Person Robbing Her Home… Now The Robbers Family Is Irate At The Woman

by Phoenix Brooks Views: 270532
 
Quote

 

In what should have been an open-and-shut case, a Miami home owner shot and killed a burglar that intended to rob her property and possibly hurt or kill her.

17-year old Trevon Johnson’s final action as a human being was to invade the private residence of a Florida woman who, unfortunately for Mr. Johnson, believed in her 2nd Amendment right to protect herself with a firearm.

The police have ruled the shooting incident a case of self-defense.

Nonetheless, Johnson’s family members have made some stunning statements to the news media in response to the justified killing of the teenage home invader. They have condemned the property owner, declaring that she had no right to protect herself by shooting him while he was burglarizing her home.

 Nautika Harris – Trevon Johnson’s cousin – stated,

“You have to look at it from every child’s point of view that was raised in the hood. You have to understand, how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school? You have to look at it from his point of view.”

Obviously, how could we have not considered that there is no earthly way that an individual can get money for school clothes without breaking into someone’s home and stealing their belongings.

In essence, Mr. Johnson’s relatives are speaking out against the woman’s right to protect herself from his attempt to invade her home, steal her private possessions, and possibly do her physical harm.

Ms. Harris added,

“I don’t care if she have her gun license or any of that. That is way beyond the law, way beyond. He was not supposed to die like this. He had a future ahead of him. Trevon had goals. He was a funny guy, very big on education, loved learning.”

 

Here's the animal who was LEGALLY put down.

Robbery-FI.thumb.png.55a1d94d2f44891c0ebf381c57c5af80.png

Apparently that animal wasn't very big on education when it came to the law. I'm pretty sure SOMEONE might have told his dumb ass NOT to break into homes.

In any event, one less strain on the human gene pool.

(Watch carefully, as the goose steppers here actually defend this piece of trash.)

 

 

Edited by reason10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Chicago, innocent CHILDREN here are murdered every week.

th?id=OIP.DyjHHPLqvBscCOpKOVH74gHaEK&pid

Gee! I imagine these beautiful children might have had the opportunity to grow up, have goals, be funny, be big on education and love learning if their communist retard home Chicago Illinois didn't criminalize their parents' CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to defend them with deadly force.

Here in the superior state of Florida, parents of these beautiful children have a choice. Sure helps when the law SUPPORTS the Constitution.

Edited by reason10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/28/2022 at 4:21 PM, herbie said:

What does murdering a robber have to do with protecting children? The state doesn't execute thieves, but you have a right to?

Why are you so stupid?

A private citizen has a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to defend his/her home with deadly force. This animal tried breaking into a private home. The resident was in fear of her life. A person in fear of his/her life is not executing anyone. It is called SELF DEFENSE. Putting a rabid animal down is NOT murder.

Murder is defined as non defensive taking of life, voluntary and with malice. First degree murder adds the element of pre meditation.

 

It is LEGAL SELF DEFENSE. And if you're in the state of Florida and you are planning a home invasion, you might want to think twice. Down here we RESPECT the United States Constitution. And millions of people are moving here every day, so we don't have a problem with killing a few animals who try to break into our homes.

Sheriff Grady Judd of Polk County warns all future animals not to try any home invasions or car jackings in his county because the citizens are armed and have been told to defend themselves. If you have a problem with that, it's easy. Don't try to break into someone's home in Florida.

(Earth to dumb ass. An EXECUTION comes after a murder conviction and millions of dollars of appeals and due process. Try keeping up with the class here, fella.)

Nothing in that second post links the CONSTITUTIONAL use of deadly force with some children WHO HAVE ALREADY BEEN MURDERED. How do you protect someone who is already room temperature, thanks to dumb gun laws and a bunch of predatory animals out there?

And you liberals wonder why everyone says you're such retards.

Edited by reason10
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody else in the brain less blue state gallery want to show why this animal was JUSTIFIED in a home invasion just because his imbecile mother couldn't make enough money to buy him $200 Nikes and a $300 phone, and was to stupid to raise him any better?

The thread was about this ignorant bee itch claiming her animal of a son needed to commit robbery in order to have nice things and get and education and that he didn't need to be killed when he broke into a private residence. Somehow it is the gun owner's fault.

So far, NONE of the Nazis here (liberals to you blue staters) have addressed the ignorant mother of this monster and her asinine claims.

And probably none of the Nazis here will. They're not smart enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, herbie said:

Says someone who can't tell a burglar from a rapist?

Seek help, sociopath.

Hang on...

You can tell a burglar from a rapist?

Cool!!! Tell us how you do that. Interview them, maybe, as their crawling through the window. Is that it?

How would that conversation go, anyway?

"Hey Bud, will you being needing to rape my wife and daughter, possibly me, or are you just here for the china?"

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/rape-burglary-and-opportunity

Quote
Annotation:
Although rape is commonly viewed as a street crime, a substantial proportion of rapes occurs inside homes following an unlawful entry. Because rape and burglary share a common locus in the home, it is hypothesized that they will exhibit a similar opportunity structure.

 

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Although rape is commonly viewed as a street crime, a substantial proportion of rapes occurs inside homes following an unlawful entry. Because rape and burglary share a common locus in the home, it is hypothesized that they will exhibit a similar opportunity structure.

Wrong. Rape is most often committed by someone the victim knows. Uncle, boyfriend, spouse or neighbour etc.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak to the argument, not the straw man.

The post has nothing to do with rape or defending your daughter, it was about shooting a robber. That crap was brought in because he couldn't defend his argument so he tried to make it about something else.
Sadly something that happens in almost every thread on this forum..

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2023 at 5:34 PM, herbie said:

Says someone who can't tell a burglar from a rapist?

Seek help, sociopath.

Can YOU tell a burglar from a rapist? SERIOUSLY.

An animal breaks into your house, usually carrying a gun. Is that animal wearing a Tee shirt with the term Burglar or Rapist on it, so you'll know when to shoot?

SERIOUSLY ARE YOU REALLY THIS FCKING STUPID?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2023 at 11:00 PM, herbie said:

Oh FFS, go out of your way to defend the indefensible...

Those of us with an education defend LOGIC, something you blue staters can't even SPELL.

An animal breaks into your home. There is no time to ask him if he intends to commit robbery, rape or murder. There is only time to get your pistol, load it, unload the clip into that animal's chest cavity and save the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in prosecuting him.

And the NEXT animal might decide NOT to break into a home at night.

Animals are stupid but they aren't THAT stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Wrong. Rape is most often committed by someone the victim knows. Uncle, boyfriend, spouse or neighbour etc.

Are you STUPID?

https://www.fox5ny.com/news/woman-repeatedly-raped-in-home-invasion

Woman repeatedly raped in home invasion

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rapes-detailed-in-conn-home-invasion-testimony/

Rapes Detailed in Conn. Home Invasion Testimony

https://www.inquisitr.com/656334/family-forced-to-witness-rape-during-brutal-home-invasion-in-florida

Family Forced To Witness Rape During Brutal Home Invasion In Florida

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/crime/dc-man-indicted-2-home-invasions-sexual-assaults-children-2011/65-8776c476-774f-4254-a572-1b34653dc8fa

DC man indicted for 2 home invasions, sexual assaults of children in 2011

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-06-10-me-237-story.html

Woman, Daughter Raped in Home Robbery

 

Guess what, Bat Guano For Brains. The MIAMI woman who defended her home with deadly force was NOT raped. And the animal she shot obviously will not be committing crimes ever again. This lady just saved the taxpayers a TON of money. It doesn't matter if that animal was going to rape her. She didn't know. She just heard that animal try to get in and blasted the son of a beech.

End of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two fifths of all victims (41%) were assaulted by an acquaintance, 10% by a friend, 28% by a family member, and the remaining 20% were victimized by a stranger.Aug 17, 2022
 

3. Statistics on Sexual Assault (cont'd) - Bill C-46: Records ...

 
As I said, most rapes are not perpetrated by strangers. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bcsapper said:

No charges laid in this one.  Seems reasonable to me.

If the Crown felt no charges were necessary, seems reasonable to me too. There's details we don't know, but they do.
And you're not a sociopath daydreaming and hoping to be able to "empty a full clip" into a burglar or stupid enough to think that would be self defence and you could walk away from shooting someone multiple times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, herbie said:

If the Crown felt no charges were necessary, seems reasonable to me too. There's details we don't know, but they do.
And you're not a sociopath daydreaming and hoping to be able to "empty a full clip" into a burglar or stupid enough to think that would be self defence and you could walk away from shooting someone multiple times.

Boy you have no idea what you're talking about. 

A man breaks into your home and you think you'd be rational enough to only shoot once? When? Before or after you pissed your pants?

You limp noodles have no idea how you'd react in a moment of fear and panic. But I'll postulate, based on what I've read from you, that you'd freak right out and fire till there's no rounds left. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Boy you have no idea what you're talking about. 

A man breaks into your home and you think you'd be rational enough to only shoot once? When? Before or after you pissed your pants?

You limp noodles have no idea how you'd react in a moment of fear and panic. But I'll postulate, based on what I've read from you, that you'd freak right out and fire till there's no rounds left. 

And you had better be able to show there was an imminent threat to your life. Lethal force against theft is probably illegal.

This is why I never keep a loaded gun in my home.

Edited by Queenmandy85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

And you had better be able to show there was an imminent threat to your life. Lethal force against theft is probably illegal.

This is why I never keep a loaded gun in my home.

Here it is illegal. Which I think is asinine. Think of it.

A criminal...a person used to the violence of a criminal life...breaks into your family home. You don't know what the criminal wants but you are scared for yourself and your family. You have a hunting rifle.

What do you do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, herbie said:

If the Crown felt no charges were necessary, seems reasonable to me too. There's details we don't know, but they do.
And you're not a sociopath daydreaming and hoping to be able to "empty a full clip" into a burglar or stupid enough to think that would be self defence and you could walk away from shooting someone multiple times.

Well, about that sociopath thing...

I hate agreeing with Republicans, but my default postion is, if something bad happens to you while you are committing a crime, it's your fault unless proven otherwise.

You get killed while robbing someones house?  Too bad. 

I don't actively hope it happens, but as I've never woken up with a thug at the end of my bed, I don't judge the response of someone who does.  I don't think there is such a thing as excessive force in such a situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you walk in and someone's stealing your TV, run down to the rec room, unlock your gun cabinet, remover the trigger lock, run over to the ammo, load the gun and run back and shoot the guy 7 times.

Or you might be one of those real smart guys that keeps a loaded gun in the house and handy. It's just too hard to use your fists or hit them with a chair or hockey stick...

There's this tiny legal difference between people and property. Shooting someone stealing your silverware is not self defence.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, herbie said:

So you walk in and someone's stealing your TV, run down to the rec room, unlock your gun cabinet, remover the trigger lock, run over to the ammo, load the gun and run back and shoot the guy 7 times.

Or you might be one of those real smart guys that keeps a loaded gun in the house and handy. It's just too hard to use your fists or hit them with a chair or hockey stick...

There's this tiny legal difference between people and property. Shooting someone stealing your silverware is not self defence.

I would try and use my cricket bat in the case you mentioned.  I walked in on him and I'm a little more composed than if he'd bashed my door in and run into my bedroom yelling don't move or I'll kill you.

I'm sure in that case you would suggest I just don't move, right?

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...