Thread: A father's Love and Rage

I wrote about this on facebook a few days ago when this happened. In my opinion the father acted justly, with out a deadly weapon or intent to kill the man. He was defending someone who could not defend themselves.

The incident was slightly different than the op but the the sherrif said the following: (taken from CNN)

Asked whether they would press charges against the father, the sheriff responded, "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person. Once the investigation is completed we will submit it to the district attorney who then submits it to the grand jury, who will decide if they will indict him."

Harmon described the dad as "very remorseful," adding that he didn't know the man was going to die.

Authorities were withholding the deceased man's name while they notified next of kin. Officials did not know immediately if he has a prior criminal history.

Originally Posted by Matt69

The farmer was quite a controversial case. He shot a fleeing, unarmed, teenage burglar in the back, with an illegally-owned weapon. That certainly gave the prosecution quite a lot to play with. (His name is Tony Martin if you want to google him, I'm sure there's tons of coverage.)

Personally I don't think he should have been jailed - he lived in a very rural area, and he had been repeatedly burgled over the preceding years. The police, when he had called them on previous occasions, had just turned up the day after and given him a crime number. Few of my friends agree with me on this, but I think the state lost its right to a monopoly on violence in Martin's case, because it failed in its side of the deal ("Citizens lose the right to mete out violence/ take the law into their own hands and in return the state uses its monopoly of violence to protect those citizens").

There is the difference between the UK and Texas. If your home is invaded at night, you have to right to use deadly force.

If someone is running away with your property and you have reason to believe the only way to recover you property is to shoot, you are allowed to.

Gotta Love Texas! Although I am rather disappointed there wasn't gunplay involved. Child molesters are indeed walking turds. If I was running the world, they'd get a fair trial, one appeal and then be walked out to the courthouse parking lot and shot. The Dad in question should receive civic recognition and not criminal charges.

Originally Posted by Matt69

The farmer was quite a controversial case. He shot a fleeing, unarmed, teenage burglar in the back, with an illegally-owned weapon. That certainly gave the prosecution quite a lot to play with. (His name is Tony Martin if you want to google him, I'm sure there's tons of coverage.)

Personally I don't think he should have been jailed - he lived in a very rural area, and he had been repeatedly burgled over the preceding years. The police, when he had called them on previous occasions, had just turned up the day after and given him a crime number. Few of my friends agree with me on this, but I think the state lost its right to a monopoly on violence in Martin's case, because it failed in its side of the deal ("Citizens lose the right to mete out violence/ take the law into their own hands and in return the state uses its monopoly of violence to protect those citizens").

This is one reason why you can not allow the state to have a monopoly on violence. It is funny how they can hold you responsible for violence and then yet the state is hardly responsible for anything.

The molester got what he deserved. I have 0 tolerance for child molestation.

My opinion, justifiable homicide. The father probably saved over a hundred other children from the same fate as well. The daughter is likely in for a rough life full of therapy however. At least no more damage will be done by that particular pos.

I believe the answer is simple, yes he was wrong by attacking the man.
Would any of us dads do the same? Of course, and wear the consequences proudly.
Did the molester get what he deserved? Debatable, Prison would have likely been torture for this POS.

Provoked beyond the limits of human endurance. Justifiable homicide that would be my defense in his shoes.

I think the guy performed a community service honestly. Child molesters will victimize hundreds of kids before they age out of it or go to prison long though to never get out again. Some percentage of them even become killers in order to better avoid detection or first hand witnesses.

Originally Posted by Crotalus

..............
Did the father cross the line? ..............?

...only if he had thrown him on the grill afterwards; there are some things that even a Texan won't eat.



.......yes, I love Texas, just kidding.

Originally Posted by Hirlau

...only if he had thrown him on the grill afterwards; there are some things that even a Texan won't eat.
.......yes, I love Texas, just kidding.

Dammit, you made me spill my beer