Mother Mistakes Daughter for Intruder, Shoots and Kills Her.

[Gameface]

https://www.sltrib.com/home/3362267-155/police-mother-mistakes-daughter-as-intruder

St. Cloud, Fla. • Police in central Florida say a mother mistook her daughter for an intruder and shot her to death.

St. Cloud police Sgt. Denise Roberts said Wednesday the mother was asleep when she heard someone enter her home late Tuesday.
The mother told police she heard footsteps approaching quickly so she fired a single shot. She then discovered the person was her 27-year-old daughter.

The daughter was taken to a hospital where she died.

I'm not posting this as an anti-gun thread. I'm posting this because this is an example of completely inappropriate (and I strongly believe criminal) use of a gun. For starters the mother violated the Four Basic Rules of Firearm Safety.

She was not sure of her target, obviously. To me, no matter what else, that makes this a criminal act. Shooting into the darkness is unacceptable, no matter what you think is lurking in the shadows. There have been several incidents where a person fired at an unknown target because they perceived a threat.

"Blade Runner" Oscar Pistorius is one such example, (https://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/...or-killing-girlfriend-but-could-be-freed.html) although shooting at an unknown target was actually his defense because it seemed likely he was actually trying to shoot at his girlfriend on purpose. I don't think shooting at an unidentified target should ever be considered an excuse. That's an admission of guilt, imho.

In another incident a homeowner shot and killed a college exchange student who was playing a prank based on a dare. In this incident the college student had entered the homeowners garage. The homeowner responded to noises and upon seeing a shodowy figure he fired and killed the exchange student. https://wwlp.com/2014/05/21/exchange-student-killed-in-garage-hopping-prank/

While "castle doctrine" often means that you can kill someone for property crimes, I think it is unacceptable to kill any person who does not pose an imminent threat to the life or limb of an innocent person. And there's no way to know if a shadow poses any real threat. You must be able to identify your target as a legitimate threat.

I support gun rights. But before gun rights we must have responsibility and discipline in regard to the use of firearms. Without that I'd prefer to have our rights to own and carry firearms severely limited.

 

[fishonjazz]

How sad. The mom must feel horrible. I can't imagine what she is going through.
Were it me, I think I would be suicidal

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

How sad. The mom must feel horrible. I can't imagine what she is going through.
Were it me, I think I would be suicidal

If she's not suicidal at a moment like this she is a sad excuse for a mother. GF is correct that her actions should be considered criminal. Saying that you didn't know what you were shooting at should never be a legitimate defense. If you make the decision to use deadly force you must take full responsibility for whatever/whoever you happen to kill. If they weren't presenting a mortal threat then it's murder.

 

[Gameface]

Incidents like this give so much ammo (pun intended) to anti-gun activists. As a pro-gun rights supporter I feel it is necessary to make it clear that this type of behavior is not at all compatible with responsible gun ownership. As a community the gun rights crowd needs to firmly condemn this situation and push for criminal penalties when such irresponsibility and negligence leads to harm. It blows me away (pun intended) that such condemnation is lacking from major gun rights organizations.

Laws need to be changed in regard to "castle doctrine" and "stand your ground" laws to require that teh gun must be used in a way that does not violate the four rules of basic firearm safety in order for such self defense protections to apply. If you violate basic firearm safety rules than your use of a firearm cannot be considered justifiable.

 

[Miggs]

Terrible.

 

[Boris]

27 years old. Did she live at home still or break in?

Not to be insensitive *** but if she lives at home at 27 maybe she should not burden her aging mother by waking her up all hours of the night. Still no excuse for moms actions but still kinda karma.

 

[Gameface]

27 years old. Did she live at home still or break in?

Not to be insensitive *** but if she lives at home at 27 maybe she should not burden her aging mother by waking her up all hours of the night. Still no excuse for moms actions but still kinda karma.

Yeah, the penalty for waking up mom is death. Karma indeed.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

27 years old. Did she live at home still or break in?

Not to be insensitive *** but if she lives at home at 27 maybe she should not burden her aging mother by waking her up all hours of the night. Still no excuse for moms actions but still kinda karma.

Claiming that you are not being insensitive does not protect your comment from being insensitive. The daughter was visiting her parents for the holidays. The step father is an undercover narcotics officer. He was in bed. Kind of bizarre that with a trained police officer in the home that the mother would take a matter like this into her own hands.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Here's the 911 call. It sounds to me like the stepfather claims that she is passed out from a heart problem (but maybe I'm mishearing the last part of that). I assume he knew what the problem actually was. The mother is obviously very distraught, and it sure sounds to me like she did not intend to do this. What a sad story.
https://www.baynews9.com/content/ne...cles/cfn/2015/12/30/st_cloud_shooting_in.html

Edit: Whoops. Here's the 911 call link:
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/new...ally-shot-killed-daughter-20151230-story.html

 

[The Midnight]

Replace this situation with a 80 year old lady living alone at home. Are we expecting her to be savvy with a gun as well to combat intruders?

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Replace this situation with a 80 year old lady living alone at home. Are we expecting her to be savvy with a gun as well to combat intruders?

Huh?

 

[babe]

Claiming that you are not being insensitive does not protect your comment from being insensitive. The daughter was visiting her parents for the holidays. The step father is an undercover narcotics officer. He was in bed. Kind of bizarre that with a trained police officer in the home that the mother would take a matter like this into her own hands.

pretty sure we don't know it all.

was the mom tested for drugs when the police arrived?

was a complete autopsy ordered, including drug screen and signs of violence.

could be the cops did their job thoroughly and reported it completely, whatever.

gun safety rules or no, people will do stuff because we're not all put together just right, and never always. We all have our moments.

would we care just as much if the weapon used was a brick, a bat, or anything else. We're off our nut if it takes a gun to make it newsworthy. Don't come traipsing around my house in the dark if you're gonna be fussy about how or when you die. We got light switches for a purpose, doe.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

pretty sure we don't know it all.

was the mom tested for drugs when the police arrived?

was a complete autopsy ordered, including drug screen and signs of violence.

could be the cops did their job thoroughly and reported it completely, whatever.

gun safety rules or no, people will do stuff because we're not all put together just right, and never always. We all have our moments.

would we care just as much if the weapon used was a brick, a bat, or anything else. We're off our nut if it takes a gun to make it newsworthy. Don't come traipsing around my house in the dark if you're gonna be fussy about how or when you die. We got light switches for a purpose, doe.

I'm certain you're right that there's a lot we don't know. Borris' speculation appears to be wrong. That's all I was pointing out.

My gut tells me that if a mother accidentally smashed her daughter's head in with a brick that it would probably make the evening news. I've decided not to come tip-toing around your house at night, btw.

 

[The Midnight]

Huh?

Well I guess I'm just asking a question for firearms advocate about how an 80 year old lady living alone is supposed to be able to defend herself using a gun against intruders?

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Well I guess I'm just asking a question for firearms advocate about how an 80 year old lady living alone is supposed to be able to defend herself using a gun against intruders?

There is no requirement to defend your home with a gun, no matter what your age. If you are too frail to handle one, it is probably not a good choice to have one. GFs rules seemed reasonable to me. The same is true with 80 year old ladies driving cars. At some point most of them have their licenses revoked because they cannot safely operate a vehicle.

 

[The Midnight]

There is no requirement to defend your home with a gun, no matter what your age. If you are too frail to handle one, it is probably not a good choice to have one. GFs rules seemed reasonable to me. The same is true with 80 year old ladies driving cars. At some point most of them have their licenses revoked because they cannot safely operate a vehicle.

Well I guess the main premise at least for me with gun ownership is in saying everyone can own a gun so everybody is on equal footing. (i.e., you threaten me with a gun, I have a gun also to defend myself)


However, if there are certain groups of people who cannot safely operate a gun (i.e., young & old single ladies), then it brings to question the equality of gun ownership.


My take is either everyone can own/operate it safely or disallow it all together.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Well I guess the main premise at least for me with gun ownership is in saying everyone can own a gun so everybody is on equal footing. (i.e., you threaten me with a gun, I have a gun also to defend myself)


However, if there are certain groups of people who cannot safely operate a gun (i.e., young & old single ladies), then it brings to question the equality of gun ownership.


My take is either everyone can own/operate it safely or disallow it all together.

Brilliant. Since old ladies can't operate guns safely then everyone else is going to turn them in, including the criminals of course, because we know that obeying the law is very important to them. And since old ladies can't drive safely we should also all turn in our cars.

 

[The Midnight]

Brilliant. Since old ladies can't operate guns safely then everyone else is going to turn them in, including the criminals of course, because we know that obeying the law is very important to them. And since old ladies can't drive safely we should also all turn in our cars.

Can't compare cars to guns. People don't use cars to intimidate and you don't use cars to defend yourself neither. I can drive a car to Walmart and an old lady can take a bus, we're both happy and can get to the same destination.


With guns however, if a man who holds a gun (because of his constitutional right) uses that gun to threaten an old lady - are you telling me she is supposed to defend herself with her crutches? (i.e., because she cannot safely operate a gun)?


That's unfair. Either everyone can own a gun or no one can (except the police of course). Fair is fair.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

^Despite the impression that the media is apparently giving you, America is not in a state of standoff where we all stand around pointing our guns at our neighbors, and only not firing because they are pointing their guns back at us. Most people have no interest whatsoever in shooting anybody.

 

[The Midnight]

^Despite the impression that the media is apparently giving you, America is not in a state of standoff where we all stand around pointing our guns at our neighbors, and only not firing because they are pointing their guns back at us. Most people have no interest whatsoever in shooting anybody.

But the premise of gun ownership is the right to defend one self with it. If a certain part of the population cannot operate it safely, to me that's a cause of inequality. It's a matter of principle as well as practicality.