Teen kills attacker with Gun

[left15]

Even a "Child" (by Brady standards children range from 1-24 years of age)can save a life with a firearm.

This story also show how ineffective the police are at preventing crime.

Full Article Below:

"A 17-year-old boy killed a man who had kicked in the front door of a Fayette County home early Saturday and begun beating another man, state police said.

The teen retrieved a handgun from inside the North Union home and shot the 21-year-old man who had been hitting Jerome Zuzak, 39, of Dunbar, Fayette County, repeatedly in the head, face and upper body, state police said. Authorities identified neither the shooter nor the victim.

Zuzak argued with the attacker after he came to the Washington Street home at 3:30 a.m. Zuzak called police to report the incident, but the man was gone by the time officers arrived. He came back a short time later, forced his way into the home and began beating Zuzak, police said.

After the teen shot the man once, he struggled to the front door, fell and died at the scene, police said.

Police declined to say whether the teen would face charges.

State police in Uniontown and Fayette County Coroner Phillip E. Reilly declined to provide further details.

Zuzak declined to comment last night.


http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/fayette/s_284972.html

[BlueEyedSon]

1. The attacker had no weapon, so now this kid is judge, jury &

executioner. Yeah, that sounds like a good social compact.
Maybe some pepper spray or a taser would have been more appropriate.

[left15]

3. depends on the details

Depending on the state you live in, you may or may not have a duty to retreat. In many states, breaking into someones home and beating them is an agg. felony, which may be resisted by lethal force. If this is the case, the shooter was in compliance with the law.

Also if the attacker was kicking the victim in the head, (with a shoe on) it is assult with a deadly weapon.

Should he have just called the police a second time while his friend was beat to death?

As far as pepperspray goes,

Have you ever used pepper spray? It dosen't really work indoors.

You spray him with pepper spray, also get yourself.

Now you've got a blinded guy still beating the crap out of another blinded guy, and now your blinded too. Now what do you do?

[slackmaster]

13. Fallacy of Fairness

The article says the man who was shot was beating another man.

He was using his hands as weapons.

In any case, real-world fights are not fair. Someone attacking you with his bare hands is not exempt from being shot.

[XanaDUer]

2. Other than providing a body guard for the man

who was being beaten, how were the police to prevent the attack? Most police and detectives really only get there once a crime has been committed.

Also, most states and counties are stretched very financially thin now, thanks to our Commander in Chimp, and this is playing out in less cops being able to "walk the beat" so to speak.

The judge-jury-executioner idea is also disturbing, although I am sorry this young man had to go through this ordeal.

[Maat]

4. The only time one is allowed to respond with deady force is ...

when one is facing imminent deadly force, with either one or another as the victim. I think that a case could be made that any reasonable person would have viewed this as deadly force - because the other guy was being pounded in the head and torso (and someone can easily die from that).

I think that he has about a 75% chance of beating any charge against him.

Agree/disagree?

In any case, he can raise it as an imperfect defense if he is charged, and this might result in a finding of manslaughter.

[left15]

6. depends on you state

In IL stealing a TV is a Forcable Felony.

When in your home (and only in your home (acutally abode)) lethal force can be used to stop a forcable felony.

I don't konw if anyone has killed anyone over a TV and walked away, but that's how the law reads.

[left15]

5. not blaming the cops

Most criminals are smart enough to not commit a crime in front of them. That's why people need the means to defend themselves.

[vpigrad]

7. Why did a child...

have a gun? Where were his parents? Why did he illegally have access to one of those things?

> Police declined to say whether the teen would face charges.

He illegally had one of those things and killed someone. Why wouldn't he face charges?

[Maat]

8. Because he was acting in defense of another.

It is this law student's understanding that you may respond with deadly force if a reasonable person in the same shoes would have viewed the initial attacker's force as being deadly. While it is typically true that fists are not viewed as deadly force, as in an argument between two friends, this was certainly viewed as deadly force by the kid, and I believe would be viewed as deadly force by most.

Even if he is charged, he may assert it as imperfect defense, which essentially means that he and a reasonable man would disagree on whether or not the initial attacker's force was deadly, but he certainly viewed it as deadly = a ticket to a manslaughter verdict (lesser sentence).

[Jack_DeLeon]

9. Its not illegal...

for minors to have weapons.

Minors can own firearms, they may not be able to purchase them from an FFL, but there is nothing illegal about a minor owning or having access a weapon in and of itself.

[jody]

11. There are limitations of what a minor can possess. See

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 44 § 922. Unlawful acts

(x)
(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer to a person who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe is a juvenile—
(A) a handgun; or
(B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.
(2) It shall be unlawful for any person who is a juvenile to knowingly possess—
(A) a handgun; or
(B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.
(3) This subsection does not apply to—
(A) a temporary transfer of a handgun or ammunition to a juvenile or to the possession or use of a handgun or ammunition by a juvenile if the handgun and ammunition are possessed and used by the juvenile—
(i) in the course of employment, in the course of ranching or farming related to activities at the residence of the juvenile (or on property used for ranching or farming at which the juvenile, with the permission of the property owner or lessee, is performing activities related to the operation of the farm or ranch), target practice, hunting, or a course of instruction in the safe and lawful use of a handgun;
(ii) with the prior written consent of the juvenile’s parent or guardian who is not prohibited by Federal, State, or local law from possessing a firearm, except—
(I) during transportation by the juvenile of an unloaded handgun in a locked container directly from the place of transfer to a place at which an activity described in clause (i) is to take place and transportation by the juvenile of that handgun, unloaded and in a locked container, directly from the place at which such an activity took place to the transferor; or
(II) with respect to ranching or farming activities as described in clause (i), a juvenile may possess and use a handgun or ammunition with the prior written approval of the juvenile’s parent or legal guardian and at the direction of an adult who is not prohibited by Federal, State or local law from possessing a firearm;
(iii) the juvenile has the prior written consent in the juvenile’s possession at all times when a handgun is in the possession of the juvenile; and
(iv) in accordance with State and local law;
(B) a juvenile who is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or the National Guard who possesses or is armed with a handgun in the line of duty;
(C) a transfer by inheritance of title (but not possession) of a handgun or ammunition to a juvenile; or
(D) the possession of a handgun or ammunition by a juvenile taken in defense of the juvenile or other persons against an intruder into the residence of the juvenile or a residence in which the juvenile is an invited guest.
(4) A handgun or ammunition, the possession of which is transferred to a juvenile in circumstances in which the transferor is not in violation of this subsection shall not be subject to permanent confiscation by the Government if its possession by the juvenile subsequently becomes unlawful because of the conduct of the juvenile, but shall be returned to the lawful owner when such handgun or ammunition is no longer required by the Government for the purposes of investigation or prosecution.
(5) For purposes of this subsection, the term “juvenile” means a person who is less than 18 years of age.
(6)
(A) In a prosecution of a violation of this subsection, the court shall require the presence of a juvenile defendant’s parent or legal guardian at all proceedings.
(B) The court may use the contempt power to enforce subparagraph (A).
(C) The court may excuse attendance of a parent or legal guardian of a juvenile defendant at a proceeding in a prosecution of a violation of this subsection for good cause shown.

[Jack_DeLeon]

19. I'm going to assume...

that what you posted was federal law.

In which I suppose the feds could prosecute if they choose to, however that doesnt mean that state officals can prosecute.

[jody]

21. Yes it is federal law and I provided the link to it. n/r

[left15]

22. There are clear execeptions listed

" (3) This subsection does not apply to—

(A) a temporary transfer of a handgun or ammunition to a juvenile or to the possession or use of a handgun or ammunition by a juvenile if the handgun and ammunition are possessed and used by the juvenile—
(ii) with the prior written consent of the juvenile’s parent or guardian who is not prohibited by Federal, State, or local law from possessing a firearm...

(D) the possession of a handgun or ammunition by a juvenile taken in defense of the juvenile or other persons against an intruder into the residence of the juvenile or a residence in which the juvenile is an invited guest."


As I read it, a juvenile can possess a firearm with his parents permission.

And if a juvenile uses a firearm in his house against an intruder (as is this case) there is no unlawful act.

[jody]

23. That's my understanding also. n/t

[Maria Celeste]

10. You might want to reread the article

While my personal experience is that the media gets it wrong most of the time when it comes to gun stuff, but lest take the story at face value:

- Assault/threats outside the house. Police come and go,
- Perp breaks down the door and attacks Person A
- Person B, inside the same house, retrieves a weapon and kills perp.

A lot unsaid here, but it would appear to be reasonable use of deadly force. That the minor had access to a handgun is not an issue in the shooting, but could be in a separate action against the homeowner, depending on local laws. Potential civil litigation against all concerned (as always).

For those who object to the use of a gun, how would they feel if the minor had buried a crowbar in the perps's skull instead?

Intervening physically in a serious fight is a superb way to get hurt and I don't have a lot of sympathy for violent perps.

[BlueEyedSon]

12. He couldn't shoot the guy in the leg?

[slackmaster]

14. You try shooting a violent, live, moving target in the leg

Let us know how well you do.

[BlueEyedSon]

15. See, this is where some training comes in handy.

You wouldnt put this kid behind the wheel of a mack truck without some lessons, right? If this was so tricky, maybe he might have shot and killed his friend instead.

[Factoid]

17. Training did come in handy - you may wish to learn from it.

Those who are trained to use firearms know that you never ever shoot for extremeties. Center-mass every time.

[Jack_DeLeon]

18. you mean like police training...

where they teach to shoot center of mass, because if you aim for arms and legs you will probably miss and you could injure an innocent third party.

[slackmaster]

20. Yes, everyone can benefit from training

Every firearms course I've ever taken teaches to aim for the center of mass, and if you aren't sure deadly force is appropriate, you don't shoot.

[left15]

16. maybe he was shot in the leg

if you hit an artery, a shot to the leg could be fatal.