Three teenage burglars shot dead in US
Share
- 5 hours ago
- From the sectionUS & Canada
Image copyrightABC
Image captionPolice believe the teens broke in to steal
Three teenagers who broke into a home in Oklahoma were killed by the homeowner's son firing an assault-style AR-15, say police.
"They were dressed in black, all had masks on, and all had gloves on," Deputy Nick Mahoney told reporters.
The intruders - who police say were armed with brass knuckles and a knife - were shot by a 23-year-old man in an act of "self-defence", officers said.
The son may not face charges due to so-called stand your ground laws.
"This may be a case of 'stand-your-ground,' however, it's still too early to say for sure, and we're still looking into all aspects of this," Mr Mahoney told local media.
He was referring to the laws in some states that say a citizen can legally use lethal force if they feel that their life in is imminent danger.
Four 'stand your ground' cases in the US
Two of the teenagers died inside the home and one ran outside before dying in the driveway.
Image copyrightABC
Image captionThe homeowner and adult son were home at the time of the suspected break-in
The teenagers broke through a sliding glass door in the back of the house before encountering the homeowner's adult son, who was armed with an AR-15 assault-style rifle, police say.
The man, who authorities say also lives at the address with his father, opened fire on the teens after they had a "short exchange of words".
Authorities say they have no reason to believe the home residents knew the teens.
Two of the teens are under 17 years old and one is between 18 and 19.
Image copyrightABC
Image captionElizabeth Marie Rodriguez
A fourth person has been arrested and is facing murder and burglary charges.
Elizabeth Marie Rodriguez, 21, turned herself in at the Broken Arrow police station and has admitted to serving as a getaway driver.
Nearby residents tell local media that there have been a string of burglaries in the area, but police have made no link.
It is sad because they were young and made some poor decisions, it ending up costing them their lives. But home owners should have a right to defend themselves. While its too bad that they died, I'd much prefer this outcome to hearing the homeowners were killed and their property taken. Some get lucky and escape Darwin, not this time. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Is [AR-15] dead better than regular dead?
That's pretty much what I think.
Their intentions are pretty clear in this case. It is well know than many US homes, have gun armed householders who might use them.
As you said, play stupid games and win stupid prizes.
My understanding is that if the householder(s) had only had normal hand guns. Then it would have been more likely that we would have seen more survivors.
I only had a limited number of characters for the title, and wanted to hint that the controversial AR-15 like gun, had been used.
So I'd say this may be an argument for why more guns are good. Who knows what these teens may have graduated to in the future, they were young and participating in armed robbery already. Lives in the future may have been saved, but I guess we'll never know.
Okies are people too.Zero fucks given for these low lifes...
My understanding is that if the householder(s) had only had normal hand guns. Then it would have been more likely that we would have seen more survivors.
I only had a limited number of characters for the title, and wanted to hint that the controversial AR-15 like gun, had been used.
How do you figure there would have been more survivors?
Three armed robbers, even a low capacity handgun holds at least six rounds typically. Dead is dead.
I still think overall, normal households should NOT have very powerful gun, such as AR-15 like, assault rifles.
But, on some occasions, such as this one, it may have actually helped save the householders from being harmed.
I guess in theory, a normal hand gun, would have equally well protected the household. But if the intruders had been armed with guns, the AR-15 like gun may have swung things in the householders favor.
I guess I don't get the argument in regards to how powerful a gun is. It only takes x amount of energy to kill a person. If the gun has 5x, then that person is just as dead. Many people like the AR15 for this purpose, it has light recoil, is reliable, and is easy to keep on target. I'd rather the homeowner keeps on target than shoots bullets through the walls into the neighborhood.
I've put two quotes, as I think my reply answers both posts.
My understanding is that you are much more likely to be killed (and quickly), by assault rifles, compared to handguns. The handguns relatively lower power of each shot, means that surviving a particular shot is much more likely, than a high powered assault rifle.
Also assault rifles can fire many more bullets, in a limited time. With each shot being much more likely to kill, as well, statistically speaking.
I agree, a hand gun could have had the same outcome. It depends how good the son was, with shooting guns. If they were good enough, they could have easily killed all three with a hand gun. Even if they weren't so good with guns, the outcome could have been the same.
But the AR-15, made it more likely that all home intruders would be killed.
It sort of depends. Hollow points will probably leave the perps just as dead as a 223/5.56 ammo. That particular rifle ammo will actually fragment when it hits the body and leave a would larger than its caliber would indicate. The benefit of rifle ammo for home defense is that it will not over-penetrate compared to hollow point or ball point handgun ammo because the bullet will tumble and fragment when it contacts the drywall/studs/doors of a house.
Assault rifle is also a nebulous term. AR-15 stands for armalite rifle, Eugene Stoner worked for Armalite when he developed the rifle.
Most important factor is the number of rounds it holds. Reloading takes time and in that time one of the intruders could have necked him with a knife.
Maybe true, but the intruders left the homeowner NO CHOICE. They removed that option when they decided to break in. 3 vs 1? Armed with knives and brass knuckles it's possible, maybe even likely the homeowner would have been killed.
And depending on the ammunition used, you're more likely to die from a hollowpoint 9mm that expands than from a fmj 5.56 round on a through and through.
More survivors means likely jail time for the shooter. For all we know the "words exchanged" were "shit we're sorry we will leave don't shoot." Dead kids tell no tales.My understanding is that if the householder(s) had only had normal hand guns. Then it would have been more likely that we would have seen more survivors.
I only had a limited number of characters for the title, and wanted to hint that the controversial AR-15 like gun, had been used.
EDIT:
You are right. I've updated the title, to hopefully minimize any confusion.