I live not too far away and if I was on a jury for this guy I’d find him guilty of any charge related to having the gun unsecured, and I’d nullify any charge for shooting at Cavalcante. The law may say otherwise, but no jury would convict him for shooting at the guy.
As far as I’m concerned, the people riding around on scooters with guns are idiots, but I’m all for anyone who’s hunkered down at home who has a gun blasting away if they see the guy. Probably putting themselves at much more risk than they need to, but if they’re willing, the police sure as fuck aren’t doing a very good job here so I’m all for anybody who gets the chance ending this guy.
I must say I am a bit surprised about the opinions expressed in this thread. If I am not mistaken most of you oppose the death penalty yet seem to think that shooting a fleeing criminal is justified. There isn’t an inherent contracdiction here.
I just find it interesting that I am in favor of the death penalty but do not think it’s reasonable to shoot fleeing criminals even if they are armed. That’s just an abstract threat. Sure if someone believes there is a concrete threat then shooting a fleeing suspect is justified but I don’t see that here.
He’s not a fleeing suspect, he’s a fleeing convicted murderer.
He’s convicted of two murders, he escaped from prison, he’s armed and dangerous. One of the murders was stabbing his ex or his gf or something 38 times in front of her two kids, I think the other murder (in Brazil) was also a romantic partner.
I’m against the death penalty in the vast majority of cases, and I’d be fine with not having it since I think it should be used so rarely, but this is the time. He’s killed, he’s definitely a threat to kill again if not likely to kill again, and he’s on the loose and keeps slipping away.
I don’t think it has to do with whether he’s planning his next murder, so much as that a guy who’s killed two romantic partners who is 34 years old is probably an overwhelming favorite to kill another woman at some point.
Two main thoughts here… First is how many 5’0 tall Latino men are running around the woods or breaking into homes in this area? Second is, if a random burglar is dumb enough to sneak inside a police manhunt perimeter and start breaking into houses, I’m not saying they deserve to die but that’s some epic fucking around and finding out.
Like given a choice between reducing the chances a convicted murderer escapes the area and reducing the chances that the world’s dumbest and most brazen burglar gets killed fleeing a break-in… I’m going with reducing the chances of the murderer getting away.
This assessment should not carry a penalty of immediate execution because what you are talking about is way past self-defense.
That’s where I disagree. Random citizens shouldn’t make these decisions. How many incidents did we have where a person does something innocent as ringing a bell and gets shot for it?
There’s a world of difference between an unarmed guy fleeing, and a guy with a gun fleeing, or even between a guy with a knife and a guy with a gun. In most situations, a guy fleeing is getting considerably less dangerous. That’s not true for a guy with a gun. It’s really hard to tell the difference between a guy with a gun fleeing and a guy with a gun running to take cover before firing back.
At some level I think this kinda a philosophical question. Someone having entered you house, stolen a gun and running around I think is more than merely an abstract threat. Like statistically your chance of getting killed in the next 10 minutes after witnessing that is probably like 1000x higher than your baseline risk of getting shot during any other 10 minute period. Now is the risk as high as if he were to point the gun in your direction, no of course not. Is this risk enough to shoot at him, I really have no idea.
But where the risk line gets drawn seems inherently subjective/arbitrary.
There’s also the fact that he’s likely running in the general direction of other homes and is a significant threat to now be an armed intruder in another home, so there’s an argument that you’re also trying to protect other homeowners.
Let law enforcement take care of it. Don’t let John Q. Public play sheriff.
If the shooter says that he thought the criminal might be running for cover before firing back that’s a whole other story then if he says the criminal was running away.
Either way, retreat and let law enforcement handle it. Don’t let random guys get into shootouts. Stray bullets might be a bigger threat to innocent bystanders than the fleeing criminal.
Stray bullets would be my biggest concern, but the area he’s in is would probably be classified as exurban if not rural. The houses seem to be pretty spread out and they mostly back up to woods, so not much likelihood of random innocent bystanders being out there.
We’re on Day 13 and he’s apparently slipped through perimeters that they thought had him contained on multiple occasions. I have about as much faith in law enforcement on this as I do in Aaron Rodgers left Achilles.
I’m not in favor of the vigilantes riding around scooters and Jeeps strapped up, but if a homeowner on their property is armed and has a clear/safe shot and is willing to put themselves at risk to take it, I thank them for their efforts and hope they get him.
We’re already witnessing the downside of a gun obsessed country (this guy stealing loaded guns out of open garages), might as well at least have the upside at play too.
I don’t really trust anyone, cops included, so I’m just hoping someone, anyone, takes this guy out. Given the area we’re talking about, opening fire seems totally fine to me.
How do you think Cavalcante plans on escaping the area? A lot of the possible methods include hostages or more murders. The guy is a threat to everyone/anyone in that area for as long as he’s breathing free air.
I’m saying what I think the law is, not what I think is right. I think Stand Your Ground laws are awful and it is ridiculous that we value stuff over human life. I’m perfectly fine saying before you can shoot at someone in your home you have to give them a chance to flee, call it the Warning Shot.
Yeah I think this is the most reasonable heuristic overall. Although obviously all these random mass shootings certainly make it hard for society to feel confident about not trying to stop someone who is doing criminal stuff with guns even if it is for the best overall.
Yeah that guy is entirely out of touch and he’s never going to get that labor market back. Never. Society is aging. For a brief golden era (for employers) because of people living longer and having fewer children there were more workers as a % of the population than normal which drove labor costs down. And now the reverse side of that is coming through where the % of the population too old to work will go up every year pretty much from now until we all die.
I don’t think workers are going to feel lucky to have a job unless that job is amazing. Hate to be the bearer of bad news for wannabe slave owners everywhere.
