284

Teenager Ralph Yarl was shot without warning through a door after going to the wrong house to collect his brothers.

all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] xkforce@lemmy.world 91 points 1 year ago

The more stories like this I see, the less I sympathise with gun owners. If you all are so cowardly that youll kill anyone that stepped on your property or looked at you "the wrong way" or was black or a child in school, I want your hobby taken away.

You should have reigned in your crazies if you wanted to not be seen as a threat to society.

[-] ashok36@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago

In my town, Tampa, a retired police chief shot and killed a dude at the movie theater because they got in an argument and he threw popcorn on the cop.

The trial was extended over two years and the cop got off scott free.

That must have been tactical assault popcorn, the cop was lucky to get out alive. What a poor little soul...

[-] massive_bereavement@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago

There's a very profitable industry that lives out of scarying this people. The same happened with that lady that killed a Uber driver because she thought she was gonna get kidnapped.

There's a Behind the bastards episode dedicated to this subject worth checking:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK2ADmAjiF0

[-] Bipta@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

This is blaming a group for the actions of some individuals, which has got to be some logical fallacy.

If you want to call for no more guns have at it, but I've got to take issue with your reasoning.

[-] Pregnenolone@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

There‘s a hell of a lot of “some individuals”

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There are 72 million gun owners in the US.

There were 42,000 gun deaths in 2021. A slight majority were suicides.

Can y'all do the math on that one? Or is that too big an ask?

[-] Pregnenolone@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Yep, adds up to “too many gun deaths”.

Good one though

Lul, disarm the people over a rounding error as the fascists work themselves up to a civil war again, libs gonna lib.

[-] Rambi@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I know this was a few days ago but this argument from a leftist pro-gun point of view is so stupid to me. If you're concerned about fascists, why do you support arming them lol?? It's just the easily rebuked good guy with a gun bad guy with a gun argument repackaged to appeal to left wing people. Muricans going Murican

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They're already armed. Besides immediately triggering a civil war that push a whole bunch of "independents" to the wrong side, all it will do is disarm the sane.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Harrison@ttrpg.network 10 points 1 year ago

That's 4x higher than car related deaths per number of car owners, and cars require a license and insurance, and doing something dangerous with one can have you lose your right to use it permanently.

Cars have the additional factor that they are practically required for living in the US, so reasonably we would be willing to accept a higher number of deaths than we would otherwise for other objects.

I agree, let's do gun licenses.

[-] xkforce@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Blaming a group that is many many times more likely to kill those around them and habitually defends their hobby with gems like "What if we need to overthrow our democratically elected government?", "There is no amount of people that die due to guns that would convince me gun ownership isn't worth the cost" and some lame analogy equating guns with penises and gun homicide with rape as if that didn't write the jokes about gun owners itself. (If you're a little slow, it means a lot of you just came out and said the quiet part out loud. Some of you really do use guns to compensate for... shortcommings)

And the fact that further down, you're arguing that "only 42,000 die a year" and that most of them are suicides (as if those deaths matter less for some reason) just proves my point. Could many of you handle guns responsibly? Sure. But I dont think that tens of thousands dead a year is worth waiting to find out which ones.

[-] keeb420@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

i dont think everyone should have their guns taken away. i used to have a coworker, retired now, who when the topic came up of crime hed say something like "i hope someone would, id love to." to me that sounds psychopathic. someone like that might should have their guns taken away.

[-] BubblyMango@lemmy.wtf 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What im wandering is this: is this one of those houses where you have to enter the yard in order to ring the bell/knock on the door? If so, this is an actual death trap - you dont know if this is the right house, and in order to verify you have to step into the property where you may be legally shot.

How do you protect yourself when you have to visit a house but are not sure which is the correct one?

[-] Stuka@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 year ago

You can't legally shoot someone for entering your yard...thats why he's on trial.

[-] BubblyMango@lemmy.wtf 2 points 1 year ago

I think there is a low in the US that if someone infiltrates your property you can legally shoot to kill. Not sure about the specifics. I assume this case was either too extreme or that there are more specifics to this law.

[-] Stuka@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

No, specifics depend on the state but in none are you allowed to shoot someone for entering your yard.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 year ago

You're talking about "Stand Your Ground" laws. They allow you to shoot in self-defense when someone enters your home or otherwise threatens you. This is why George Zimmerman got off after murdering a child. Don't forget, kids, George Zimmerman killed a child.

Being on your property probably doesn't count in most states, but I say "probably" because some states are fucking insane, so who knows.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

George Zimmerman killed a child.

Hey now, that's not fair. Zimmerman stalked a child through the night after police told him not to, started a fistfight with that child, and only murdered the child after it became evident that he was losing the fight he started.

That's what stand your ground is for, shooting your way out of fights you start. Ask Marissa Alexander, it's certainly not for firing warning shots at your abusive ex husband when he's on your property in violation of a restraining order and threatening your kids.

[-] zimmernan@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I know How could this monster

Have really killed this totally innocent angel of a child,

His social media post were so innocent!

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

BuT hIs SoCiAl MeDia

Get fucked

[-] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

These laws, castle doctrine, are not anywhere near that crazy. They're the same idea as self defense... however, normally you have a "duty to retreat", what castle doctrine says is if you're in your own home you no longer have that obligation.

You still have to meet the bar for self defense, i.e., they need to be a threat... someone walking in your yard or knocking on your door that's not brandishing a weapon is not going to meet that bar.

Edit: Wikipedia disagrees with me ... though I'm not sure if that's a factual disagreement or an editorial disagreement.

Justifiable homicide[2] in self-defense which happens to occur inside one's home is distinct, as a matter of law, from castle doctrine because the mere occurrence of trespassing—and occasionally a subjective requirement of fear—is sufficient to invoke the castle doctrine. The burden of proof of fact is much less challenging than that of justifying homicide in self-defense. It would be a misconception of law to infer that because a state has a justifiable homicide in self-defense provision pertaining to one's domicile, it has a castle doctrine protecting the estate and exonerating any duty whatsoever to retreat therefrom.

There's a lack of citation here which honestly should probably be raised on the wiki. The cited source does not support that text (I've added the appropriate citation requests on the wikipedia side -- if anyone can prove these claims, we should contribute the reference there as well).

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

The laws on self-defense are extremely state specific. Your understanding of self defense laws is highly sensationalized and I recommend in the strongest possible terms you do some research before they become relevant to you personally one way or the other.

[-] BubblyMango@lemmy.wtf 2 points 1 year ago

I dont live in the US and dont plan on visiting there in the near future. I am aware of the laws in my country.

[-] Dozzi92@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

But you had no qualms opining about those laws on the internet.

[-] BubblyMango@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 year ago

My posts here were full of "i think" and "not sure". Also not sure which part here was an opinion.

And this is the internet. Not an academic paper. This IS the place to ask/discuss topics you are not sure about. Just dont go around claiming to be an expert in something you are not.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 1 year ago

“He said he hoped he didn’t kill anybody,” Gale testified.

Prosecutors don't want you to know this one wild phrase.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Mfw face when I get my neighbor's mail by mistake and as I'm dropping it off to him I hear "IT'S COMING RIGHT FOR US!"

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

As a young black man what actually has to happen in order for it to be illegal for someone to shoot you?

[-] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Vitiligo?

In all seriousness, MLK Jr. style of mass protesting and boycotts. It will be tough to sell such an inconvenience, so getting that ball rolling seems very difficult.

[-] inanna@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

How do you goto the wrong house?

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

People make mistakes sometimes. For example, your post.

[-] Procleus@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

He was picking his brother up from a friend’s house. It wasn’t where he lived and he was unfamiliar with the area. If you search for the original news stories from when the event took place, more detail is given.

[-] ThePac@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 year ago

That's your question? Not "how do you shoot a kid through your front door?"

[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Maybe there was a typo in the address he was given. Maybe the house didn't have clearly marked address on the front. Or just maybe your question has nothing to do with a gun nut shooting anyone that knocks on his door.

[-] ElectricCattleman@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Tbh it doesn't matter if he had any business at the house. He could go there to ding dong ditch, or ask a survey question, or complain about their yard, or ask how their day is going.

None of these things are a legal reason to shoot someone knocking at your door.

[-] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

He had the wrong street name when he was going to pick up his little brother.

[-] Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

This question cannot be legitimate

[-] sumofchemicals@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I don't consume conservative media, but I'm wondering is there some current of thought that's leading to all these shootings after someone goes to the wrong door? Seems like there's been a lot recently, and makes no sense to me.

[-] baruchin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

And then there's this. So that makes me think that the shooter will win this case.

[-] Otkaz@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

That's a very different case. Read the actual article. That guy broke a window and was reaching in to try and unlock the door at 3am. The whole thing was caught on a surveillance camera. I think they made the right choice not charging the home owner if those reported facts are accurate.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Is anyone else seeing a broken link to the piracy community when they click this?

this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
284 points (100.0% liked)

News

23296 readers
2777 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS