Student Kills Burglar with Katana Watch

A is for Awesome
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#181
Report 9 years ago
#181
When you walk in the garden
You better watch your back
Well I beg your pardon
Walk the straight and narrow track
If you walk with Jesus
He'll save your soul
You gotta keep the devil
Way down in the hole
0
reply
jeanyl
Badges: 0
#182
Report 9 years ago
#182
1. Someone broke into my house. He is a stranger.
2. He tried to steal and rob me.
3. He may be armed. Knives? Guns? Oh my, I can still remember some other students who end up dead after being robbed, just like this one.
4. I have a Katana. Better to bring it with me, who knows, just in case. Even better if it could scared him off.
5. We asked him to stop but he didn't. One of us called the cops.
6. Suddenly he lunged at me!
7. Freakout, swing my Katana.
8. His hand were off, his neck bleeding. Presumably dead.
9. Cops arrived and I am detained.
10. Am I going to be charged? Gosh, I have a perfect career laying ahead of me to become a doctor!

Does this makes the student so wrong if this was what had happened?
For like I have never strike on anyone before, how would I know how much force it could bring to fatalities? On the neck and the hand was chopped? It sounds brutal?
I hope no one is assuming that the burglar had his hands placed right next to his hips when he lunged at the student. How could someone actually lunged at other with their hands placed neatly at their hips/thigh? I would have my hands up posing as if I were to grab or assault someone in front of me, and when the blade reached, what do you think would happened?
First, the strongest blow would had the hands chopped off for being too near, second, the blade is long enough to reach the neck and does some damages to it at the same time.
Why not choose another weapon?
Oh, I have got plenty of time to select one, while the burglar is just standing right there! He is going to wait for me until I made up my mind.
Then why not try to incapacitate him instead of "killing" him? Like give him a cut on his leg, not too severe, just make sure he can't stand up later. Or just give him some shallow cuts on some other parts that will hurt but will not kill him.
Great, I am the legendary Takezo Kensei / Miyamoto Musashi, I could hit him wherever however I want it to be. Hmm... a cut at about 3mm depth? He will bleed but definitely will not die. Right, when he lunged at me he seems as slow as a pathetic snail, I can make up hundreds of ways on which body parts of him that seems to be the best place to strike on very first. See, I can make up my mind in 0.5 seconds!


It is not like I feel happy that the burglar had died. But as the matter of fact, I don't think anyone in the incident would feel good either. But when emergency pops up, all you've got in your mind would to be defend yourself, and thus, accidents does happens.
No one wants to be harmed, when you sees some other people trying to attack you, it doesn't matter if there are any other people standing right next to you or not, for they would simply stunned and stoned when things actually rolled out. The burglar might not seemed armed at first, but how can you ever make sure he is not going to pull out a knife from his jacket/pants or whatever after he pinned you down and stab you later?
0
reply
319307
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#183
Report 9 years ago
#183
(Original post by EnthusiasticEnthusiast)
Beretta 92f's are pretty nice, those are the one's used by the Police in the US if I'm not mistaken, and the law is Britain is quite stupid. I remember reading about a burglar who prosecuted a woman because she had left bits of smashed glass on her wall so that people couldn't climb over, the burlgar tired getting up and over the wall and cut his hand open. She payed the price. Outrageous if you ask me.

The first thing I'll be doing when I move to America is buying a gun, preferably a mossberg.
Mossbergs are fecking SCHWEET..played with my fair share of shotties over time and even though I never fired it, I fell in love with the 500 series..:cool: the silver version: http://www.gun-review.com/images/upl...ossberg500.jpg

I have to say though, as something of a humanist, I have equal respect for people, and I grew up in London - where it was commonplace to see my garage being broken into or left open with a trail of my posessions leading down the driveway, but the lack of effective policing has certainly made me realise that if you wish to defend your home/property/life, then taking measures into your own hands is the way to go. Overkill can happen, but meh, I would be more scared about being harmed myself than losing anything. I would rather have my xbox stolen than get stabbed.

...then i'd chase the ******* who stole it and cut his head off, just because I could..

God help anyone who even thinks about coming into my dorm room with a guilty Mens Rea at uni..
0
reply
FAILINGKID
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#184
Report 9 years ago
#184
wait wtf??? he actually slit his throat and chopped off his hand with one swing??? OH DEAR LORD
0
reply
HJV
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#185
Report 9 years ago
#185
(Original post by spex)
Please do tell how you'd defend yourself against a man lunging at you when you have a samurai sword in your hand. And say how it's any less a self defense act than shooting them in the chest or playing golf with their face.
After chopping his hand off when the guy is screaming on the floor, I wouldn't proceed to stab him in the neck.
0
reply
Profesh
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#186
Report 9 years ago
#186
While in principle I agree with this:

(Original post by foxo)
I can't believe how many people support the murder of an unarmed man committing a petty crime. With four people present there is absolutely no way that any of their lives were at any point endangered, they could have quite easily incapacitated him and phoned the police. This is not a case of reasonable self-defence, this is utterly ludicrous.
I also concur with this:

(Original post by jeanyl)
1. Someone broke into my house. He is a stranger.
2. He tried to steal and rob me.
3. He may be armed. Knives? Guns? Oh my, I can still remember some other students who end up dead after being robbed, just like this one.
4. I have a Katana. Better to bring it with me, who knows, just in case. Even better if it could scared him off.
5. We asked him to stop but he didn't. One of us called the cops.
6. Suddenly he lunged at me!
7. Freakout, swing my Katana.
8. His hand were off, his neck bleeding. Presumably dead.
9. Cops arrived and I am detained.
10. Am I going to be charged? Gosh, I have a perfect career laying ahead of me to become a doctor!

Does this makes the student so wrong if this was what had happened?
For like I have never strike on anyone before, how would I know how much force it could bring to fatalities? On the neck and the hand was chopped? It sounds brutal?
I hope no one is assuming that the burglar had his hands placed right next to his hips when he lunged at the student. How could someone actually lunged at other with their hands placed neatly at their hips/thigh? I would have my hands up posing as if I were to grab or assault someone in front of me, and when the blade reached, what do you think would happened?
First, the strongest blow would had the hands chopped off for being too near, second, the blade is long enough to reach the neck and does some damages to it at the same time.
Why not choose another weapon?
Oh, I have got plenty of time to select one, while the burglar is just standing right there! He is going to wait for me until I made up my mind.

Then why not try to incapacitate him instead of "killing" him? Like give him a cut on his leg, not too severe, just make sure he can't stand up later. Or just give him some shallow cuts on some other parts that will hurt but will not kill him.
Great, I am the legendary Takezo Kensei / Miyamoto Musashi, I could hit him wherever however I want it to be. Hmm... a cut at about 3mm depth? He will bleed but definitely will not die. Right, when he lunged at me he seems as slow as a pathetic snail, I can make up hundreds of ways on which body parts of him that seems to be the best place to strike on very first. See, I can make up my mind in 0.5 seconds!


It is not like I feel happy that the burglar had died. But as the matter of fact, I don't think anyone in the incident would feel good either. But when emergency pops up, all you've got in your mind would to be defend yourself, and thus, accidents does happens.
No one wants to be harmed, when you sees some other people trying to attack you, it doesn't matter if there are any other people standing right next to you or not, for they would simply stunned and stoned when things actually rolled out. The burglar might not seemed armed at first, but how can you ever make sure he is not going to pull out a knife from his jacket/pants or whatever after he pinned you down and stab you later?
And I would add that none of us is sufficiently acquainted with the pertinent facts of this case to conjecture meaningfully as to the relative culpability of the parties involved.
0
reply
eulerwaswrong
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#187
Report 9 years ago
#187
(Original post by L i b)
You're a ******* idiot.
Sorry? excuse me - its a ******* opinion.

All im saying is that if a burglur is on my property trying to steal my belonging and endanger my family/friends i think that i should have the right to do whatever i want to him -
0
reply
RabbitCFH
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#188
Report 9 years ago
#188
I really shouldn't but... LMFAO, this is some crazy ****!
0
reply
Simplicity
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#189
Report 9 years ago
#189
(Original post by Profesh)
And I would add that none of us is sufficiently acquainted with the pertinent facts of this case to conjecture meaningfully as to the relative culpability of the parties involved.
Well, according to AP he hasen't been charged.

I doubt he will be charged anyway. In America you can defend yourself, but in England you end up in jail if you do that.

But, lol England is a joke for this stuff. I remeber reading about one person who defended himself and he was being done for manslaughter. I don't see how a person can judge if a force was reasonable in a circumstance unless the person in question was in it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/p...ble-force.html

P.S. Anyway, I think most people would have done the same if this happen to them.
P.P.S. Chopping someone hand off and slicing throat with a katana isn't that hard as katana are designed to do that.
P.P.P.S. Also, what life has a man got if he is 49 and a burglar.
0
reply
mf2004
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#190
Report 9 years ago
#190
If he heard someone in the house he probably picked up the katana to scare them. The thief didn't react sensibly at all (seriously running at a man with a sword wtf ?). I don't know much about katanas but how would you stop someone with one of them without there being a chance of death ?
My guess is the student only wanted to scare the thief but was then forced into action by him, in which case I think it's the burglars fault (even if he didn't deserve it) and the student should not be convicted.
If the burglar just stood there and the student attacked him I think it's completely disproportionate though.
0
reply
Delta Usafa
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#191
Report 9 years ago
#191
(Original post by HJV)
After chopping his hand off when the guy is screaming on the floor, I wouldn't proceed to stab him in the neck.
Where did you get the idea that the man was screaming handless on the floor and that the kid then proceeded to stab him in the neck? Really, did you just make that up?


(Original post by Simplicity)
I doubt he will be charged anyway. In America you can defend yourself, but in England you end up in jail if you do that.
But on the bright side, knowing the justice system these days, you'd probably only be in jail for like a month.

(Original post by foxo)
I can't believe how many people support the murder of an unarmed man committing a petty crime. With four people present there is absolutely no way that any of their lives were at any point endangered, they could have quite easily incapacitated him and phoned the police. This is not a case of reasonable self-defence, this is utterly ludicrous.
He wasn't murdered, and he wasn't killed "for committing a petty crime." He was killed because he made the giant mistake of lunging at a guy with a sword. Guy with sword, startled, is going to do the natural thing any scared person would do - try and block the lunge.

And he went out alone, the other people weren't with him. And you're forgetting - the man could have had a weapon, even a gun. Four people are no match for one guy with a gun. The statements that there is no way they could have been in danger and that they could have easily incapacitated him are absolutely ridiculous.

Think this through, come on.
0
reply
spex
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#192
Report 9 years ago
#192
(Original post by HJV)
After chopping his hand off when the guy is screaming on the floor, I wouldn't proceed to stab him in the neck.
The guy with the sword only swung once. Dunno which crevice you pulled that little tale from.
0
reply
Michel Foucault
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#193
Report 9 years ago
#193
(Original post by Profesh)

And I would add that none of us is sufficiently acquainted with the pertinent facts of this case to conjecture meaningfully as to the relative culpability of the parties involved.
^^This, a thousand times this. I can't believe the amount of people saying things like:

(Original post by foxo)
With four people present there is absolutely no way that any of their lives were at any point endangered, they could have quite easily incapacitated him and phoned the police.
etc. etc. How do you know this? You know barely any of the facts of the situation, all you have to go on is a Sky News article and a statement from a police spokesman. How can you possibly pass such a significant judgement on the situation when you know virtually nothing about it?

For all you know, the burglar could have been built like a tank, in which case it would be quite plausible that he could overpower 4 students with his bare hands.
I think it's safe to assume that with such a prolific criminal career behind him, the burglar probably knew how to look after himself. That being so, he probably fancied his chances against the 4 students more than they fancied their chances against him.
For all you know, the other 3 students might have (completely understandably) frozen in fear at the situation, and been unable to do anything to help their friend.

etc. etc. There are far too many combinations of events and circumstances in the run up to the situation for you to consider sufficiently to be able to make judgement.
0
reply
foxo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#194
Report 9 years ago
#194
(Original post by Delta Usafa)
He wasn't murdered, and he wasn't killed "for committing a petty crime." He was killed because he made the giant mistake of lunging at a guy with a sword. Guy with sword, startled, is going to do the natural thing any scared person would do - try and block the lunge.
A blow with enough force to sever the robber's hand then cut his neck =/= "blocking a lunge". And whilst it's not being treated as murder, I'm claiming that it's murder to the extent that the student was fully aware of the repercussions and intentionally struck with enough force to end the person's life, despite being at very little risk himself, and unsurprisingly this resulted in an entirely unnecessary death. To the people suggesting that he wasn't aware it would result in death: do you genuinely believe that someone, particularly as a student at one of the best medical schools in the world who therefore more than likely holds a firm knowledge of the human anatomy - do you really think that he was not aware that a deep laceration to the jugular would not more than likely result in death? The average five year old is probably aware of that.

(Original post by Delta Usafa)
And he went out alone, the other people weren't with him.
It certainly implies otherwise in the Sky article: "The group asked him to stop and while they called police, the man lunged at one of them, who retaliated by striking him with the sword, officers said."

(Original post by Delta Usafa)
And you're forgetting - the man could have had a weapon, even a gun.
Don't you think that if he had a weapon, and he felt threatened, an opportune time to produce that would have quite obviously been when the person came into the room with a sword? And do you not agree that lunging at someone, bare handed, is not the best way to go about using a concealed weapon to its full effect? On that basis I think that working on the assumption that he had a weapon is ******* daft.

(Original post by Delta Usafa)
Four people are no match for one guy with a gun. The statements that there is no way they could have been in danger and that they could have easily incapacitated him are absolutely ridiculous.

Think this through, come on.
Right, but he didn't have a gun or any other type of weapon and there seems little that suggested he did at the time, so that's completely irrelevant. I suppose everyone in this thread also supports the armed police killing of Jean Charles de Menezes too, eh? Despite there being piss all to suggest it, he might well have been concealing a weapon; in the same way that I might be the second coming of Jesus that is. Just because something cannot be disproved at the time, it does not mean that one should work on unsubstantiated possibilities.
0
reply
foxo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#195
Report 9 years ago
#195
(Original post by DBazza)
etc. etc. There are far too many combinations of events and circumstances in the run up to the situation for you to consider sufficiently to be able to make judgement.
I'm not suggesting that I can make entirely accurate judgements; but the neither can the hordes of idiots showing overwhelming support for his actions. I'm just expressing a different point of view that I believe is more than likely closer to the truth.
0
reply
KumakoXsd
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#196
Report 9 years ago
#196
Hmmm...
0
reply
Sam656
Badges: 1
#197
Report 9 years ago
#197
Baltimore is such a lovely place :p:

On Monday, police found the body of a 24-year-old Yale University student stuffed in a laboratory wall.

lol.
reply
foxo
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#198
Report 9 years ago
#198
(Original post by eulerwaswrong)
Sorry? excuse me - its a ******* opinion.
No, it's a ******* idiotic opinion.

(Original post by eulerwaswrong)
All im saying is that if a burglur is on my property trying to steal my belonging and endanger my family/friends i think that i should have the right to do whatever i want to him -
Why? Are you of the opinion that anyone should be able to do anything they like as long as it's in their own home? Are you friends with Josef Fritzl by any chance?
0
reply
spex
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#199
Report 9 years ago
#199
(Original post by foxo)
A blow with enough force to sever the robber's hand then cut his neck =/= "blocking a lunge". And whilst it's not being treated as murder, I'm claiming that it's murder to the extent that the student was fully aware of the repercussions and intentionally struck with enough force to end the person's life, despite being at very little risk himself, and unsurprisingly this resulted in an entirely unnecessary death. To the people suggesting that he wasn't aware it would result in death: do you genuinely believe that someone, particularly as a student at one of the best medical schools in the world who therefore more than likely holds a firm knowledge of the human anatomy - do you really think that he was not aware that a deep laceration to the jugular would not more than likely result in death? The average five year old is probably aware of that.
Well you're hardly going to be aiming to scratch when you're trying to stop an intruder from attacking you. I don't know what else you could really be expected to do in such a situation without giving the attacker an advantage against you.


It certainly implies otherwise in the Sky article: "The group asked him to stop and while they called police, the man lunged at one of them, who retaliated by striking him with the sword, officers said."



Don't you think that if he had a weapon, and he felt threatened, an opportune time to produce that would have quite obviously been when the person came into the room with a sword? And do you not agree that lunging at someone, bare handed, is not the best way to go about using a concealed weapon to its full effect? On that basis I think that working on the assumption that he had a weapon is ******* daft.
In a country there are half as many guns as there are people, and in one of the most crime riddled areas in the state, do you really want to take that chance? The assumption that he doesn't have a weapon is ******* daft, and it doesn't matter anyway. Even if he didn't have a weapon it just gives me the advantage in defending myself, let's not forget, against the guy who broke into my home in the middle of the night with malicious intent.



Right, but he didn't have a gun or any other type of weapon and there seems little that suggested he did at the time, so that's completely irrelevant.
Well this is all after the fact. I find it ridiculous that you're trying to criminalise the person who merely defended himself in an instinctive act. A death is supposed to be tragic and all but seriously, i can't see myself shedding a tear for this piece of **** for something he brought entirely on himself.
0
reply
eulerwaswrong
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#200
Report 9 years ago
#200
(Original post by foxo)
No, it's a ******* idiotic opinion.



Why? Are you of the opinion that anyone should be able to do anything they like as long as it's in their own home? Are you friends with Josef Fritzl by any chance?
Youve missed the point there - someone has unlwafully and against my will entered my house with the intention of stealing my property and/or injuring me and my family - i think that i should have the right to attack him/kill him.

When you hear stories about burgulars taking victims to court because theyve injured them its just absurd.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (377)
37.29%
No - but I will (77)
7.62%
No - I don't want to (71)
7.02%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (486)
48.07%

Watched Threads

View All