Man, 20, charged with manslaughter in slaying of car prowler

[Trlsmn]

hey man, nice shot!

Time for some Filter!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODmQaQd03Ig

 

[eriknemily]

He was shot in the back for theft.

Not exactly. Shot in the back of the head. Much more lethal

 

[JumpWing]

If you don't want to run the risk of getting shot in the back of the head then don't steal.

This isn't about "what's a fair trade for a subwoofer," this is about the criminal creating a dangerously unpredictable situation by committing theft. You choose whether or not to gamble... YOU ARE NOT "GUARANTEED" A MAXIMUM COST FOR LOSING. If you don't like the possibility of losing your life over a piece of audio equipment, THEN DON'T STEAL IT.

I get tired of hearing how a criminal "didn't deserve" the awful outcome of his own crime. "Deserve" has NOTHING to do with it. He made the bet and he lost.

One more thing to consider: Where were the proceeds of the theft going to go? Supporting gang activity? Drug trafficking? I'm guessing it wasn't going to be used for buying milk and bread.

 

[SavageGerbil]

I'm not throwing in my approval for stealing stereos, or looking at it as a clean shoot, but:

"Sheets told police that he ordered the car prowlers to the ground but they refused. Sheets said Hernandez turned in his direction as he ran and reached for his waist band, according to charging documents.

Sheets then "pointed his rifle at the victim and fired. The bullet hit Mr. Hernandez in the back of the head. The victim immediately fell to the ground, dropping the subwoofer," the documents say, noting that Hernandez was almost 70 feet from Sheets and facing the opposite direction when he was shot."

I would love to see someone manage to run holding a subwoofer and still somehow reach for their waistband, I used to have 12" subs in my car, carrying them in the speaker box I nearly had to waddle, just struck me as a little odd.

 

[michaels]

No possesion is worth a human life.

I feel bad for the kid that did the shooting.

He knows that he killed someone over a couple hundred dollars.

For f@#@@k's sake.

 

[powermad]

70 feet with a Mosin, he probably was aiming at his leg. I wonder if the guy had scorch marks too.

Bad judgment on the shooter, if you are going to pop someone you had better make sure that you won't be sitting in jail over it.

Shooting a guy in the back of the head while he is carrying an awkward 30 pound speaker is not going to go down very well.
Especially when it's less than 25 yards and still light out.
As he found out.

Shooting that gun in town was pretty stupid too. But at least the scumbag thief caught it and not some 5 year old kid playing in the yard..

It's not about shooting the guy over a speaker.
It's about spending time in jail over a speaker.

 

[Marshall Tall Eagle]

Most of all this post would suggest that those who go around at night to steal our stuff will be facing a bullet. I'd like to find a way for all those crinimals to see or hear about this bullet in the head situation, that may stop them the next time they venture out to steal my stuff.

Can we raise funds to help the victim?

p.s. I'd call the shooter a Crime Stopper and issue him a Crime Stopper Badge

 

[wsu 5.9er]

As a side note the DA should have charged the accomplice of the dead criminal with murder as the death occurred while committing a crime he was involved in.

This.

Just to clarify something, nobody here thinks that it is acceptable to shoot someone in the back of the head from 70ft because of a car speaker, right?

Depends how much the speaker is worth.

RCW 9A.16.050
Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.

Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.





1) A person is guilty of theft in the second degree if he or she commits theft of:

(a) Property or services which exceed(s) two hundred fifty dollars in value but does not exceed one thousand five hundred dollars in value, other than a firearm as defined in RCW 9.41.010 or a motor vehicle; or

(b) A public record, writing, or instrument kept, filed, or deposited according to law with or in the keeping of any public office or public servant; or

(c) An access device.

(2) Theft in the second degree is a class C felony.

 

[powermad]

And who cares if the shooting was 'in town' or not? The shooting was a result of STEALING. No stealing, no shooting. No wonder our country is in the toilet with such 'enlightened' attitudes.

Just to clarify on shooting in town.
We are not talking about a .22 or buckshot but a 7.62x54r gun.

You can blast away at a stereo thief with whatever you want to.

"if" I were to start blasting away with a .308 or 30-06 rifle the situation would have to be pretty bad.

For me, some dude stealing my speaker is really not dire enough to warrant that.

Some people just don't seem to think about the consequences after the trigger is pulled.
I suppose if some kid 9 blocks away catches one in the head that's cool with you?
So just to clarify..
Shooting a full power rifle cartridge in town with people all over the place is stupid. Especially over a freakin speaker.

 

[eriknemily]

Just to clarify on shooting in town.
We are not talking about a .22 or buckshot but a 7.62x54r gun.

You can blast away at a stereo thief with whatever you want to.

"if" I were to start blasting away with a .308 or 30-06 rifle the situation would have to be pretty bad.

For me, some dude stealing my speaker is really not dire enough to warrant that.

Some people just don't seem to think about the consequences after the trigger is pulled.
I suppose if some kid 9 blocks away catches one in the head that's cool with you?
So just to clarify..
Shooting a full power rifle cartridge in town with people all over the place is stupid. Especially over a freakin speaker.

Agreed. Not exactly a 'home defense' type of gun.

 

[Teufel_Hunden]

C'mon guys....are you actually suggesting that we should really take time to compare weapons lethality if we are faced with a potential life threatening situation?

And no...no posession is worth a life but that was the perps decision.

I've said this before on a similar thread.

I hope to NEVER actually face this sitaution but....

If I ever feel that I may have to protect myself with a firearm I will shoot to kill if I am forced to shoot....I will use the most lethal weapon at my disposal. (yes thats a period at the end of the sentence).

This is NOT a grey area.

This is not a graduated type of issue....thats why its called "Lethal Force".

 

[eriknemily]

C'mon guys....are you actually suggesting that we should really take time to compare weapons lethality if we are faced with a potential life threatening situation?

And no...no posession is worth a life but that was the perps decision.

I've said this before on a similar thread.

I hope to NEVER actually face this sitaution but....

If I ever feel that I may have to protect myself with a firearm I will shoot to kill if I am forced to shoot....I will use the most lethal weapon at my disposal. (yes thats a period at the end of the sentence).

This is NOT a grey area.

This is not a graduated type of issue....thats why its called "Lethal Force".

Actually, when I've thought that I heard unusual noises outside I sit in bed for a good 10 minutes doing through which weapon would be best in this particular situation.... NOOOO NEVER!!!
I would never think about the lethality of my weapon choices. From what I read of this story only the perps life was in jeopardy. I personally wouldn't have gone out of my house to confront him. That would have been putting compromising my safety. I don't have anything outside of my home worth killing over. I keep my family inside my house

 

[quattrokai]

I prefer dead perpetrators !

I second that. F*** these criminals who get away with everything and the hard working people get punished.

 

[powermad]

If it comes down to me shooting someone they will be..
A. Life threatening
B. Facing me.

Not in the back of the head, holding a large speaker while running away from me.
Ya can't really claim self defense on that.

I dunno maybe I need to work on my blood thirsty killer skills.

 

[Trlsmn]

If it comes down to me shooting someone they will be..
A. Life threatening
B. Facing me.

Not in the back of the head, holding a large speaker while running away from me.
Ya can't really claim self defense on that.

I dunno maybe I need to work on my blood thirsty killer skills.

 

[torpedoman]

I see a lot of liberal thinking here, "not worth shooting someone over" Well were is the cost line? Maybe that guy had worked at minimum warg and saved his money for a year to get that speaker, IT WAS HIS. Consider your weapons lethality before using it, If you don't want to use lethal force why do you have a gun? The law should read if someone is stealing your property you have every right to shoot them. It is yours, the excuse of it was'nt worth shooting someone over should be yours to make not the governments.

 

[michaels]

for f@#@@k's sake; NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO STEAL-ANYTHING-PERIOD

You're correct!

Stealing is a privlege that is earned by going to a decent school, working for AIG, UBS, Citi bank, and buying some polititians (Bush or Obama, the orders still come from wallstreet)

Guys, this is coming down to disproportianate (sp?) punishment for the crime.

Stealing is wrong.

Getting shot for it, in this situation, (outside the home, no direct danger, fleeing person) was not the correct response.

Did any of you ever play sports?

There is such a thing as losing gracefully.

Please do not justify this by saying "Washington law says....".

There is legal, and then there is ethical and common sense.

 

[raindog]

I see a lot of liberal thinking here, "not worth shooting someone over" Well were is the cost line? Maybe that guy had worked at minimum warg and saved his money for a year to get that speaker, IT WAS HIS. Consider your weapons lethality before using it, If you don't want to use lethal force why do you have a gun? The law should read if someone is stealing your property you have every right to shoot them. It is yours, the excuse of it was'nt worth shooting someone over should be yours to make not the governments.

I agree!

I completely understand the arguments made here about gun safety. I would not have popped off a round of 7.62x54 in the city unless someone was advance on me/loved one with evil intent.

However, I don't think what the guy did was wrong. Saying "a $200 speaker wasn't worth it" leads to the question "how much do the stolen goods have to be worth in order to justify it"? If the guy was walking away with a $100,000 diamond ring, would that be "worth it"? What if it was a necklace worth 50 cents...but it had been in your family for a hundred years?

The question isn't the monetary value of the stolen goods...the question is if people have the right to use force to defend themselves versus criminals. I answer Yes, absolutely. No criminal scum has the right to come into my house (or car, or wherever) and steal from me. Once you decide to commit a crime, you give up your right to say "it wasn't fair".

However...I am talking abstractly, and in a perfect, sane world. In our current, insane legal world, it was a bad shoot. I don't know about Washington, but assuming the laws are the same as Oregon, you can only shoot if you are facing bodily harm. That bit about "reaching for his waistband" seems a bit hokey to me. Note that the article doesn't say the dead criminal was found with a gun.

I would not have taken the shot, because I don't want to face the legal/financial consequences. That makes me angry, not the fate of some scumbag.

Question: What would you all think if the owner had grabbed his rifle, trained it on the criminal, and ordered to stop, but never had any intention of shooting? In other words, a show of force? Obviously, the bad guy would not have known that he wouldn't shoot in this scenario.

 

[The B]

anybody catch the yankees the other night?

 

[slythorne]

I don't know about the rest of you, but 30lbs isn't all that much, and a subwoofer isn't too bulky to hold it under one arm and reach for a pistol if I had one. If someone looks my way with a "I'm gonna kill ya sucka" glare and reach toward their waistband - I am going to pull the trigger.

As for being hit in the back of the head, he could have glanced toward his cohorts in that split second it took to pull the trigger and the bullet to hit its mark. I am not saying that is what happened or not, but that will be up to jurors to decide.