Kid stabs bully to death. Gets off with no charges

[1048576]

So.......defending yourself is wrong?

It's disheartening to hear that this is normal conversation. That this is how people validate their opinions these days. It's just...why? Don't you realize how much better the world would be if people could put an ounce of effort into having a rational, dispassionate discussion?

Assumption #1: Stabbing a person 12 times constitutes self-defense.
Assumption #2: If self-defense is wrong in one context, then self-defense is wrong.
Assumption #3: If someone acts in self-defense, then they are prone to killing people.

You have to think I think all 3 of those things are true before you can simplify what I said to "Defending yourself is wrong." I don't think all 3 of those things are true, and even if I did, it's not fair for you to assume that. If we go step by step, we'll prolly find some middle ground, and even if we end up disagreeing, we might gain some perspective on the other person's position.

To clarify. My position is that if a person is prone to killing people, they should be prevented from killing people, even if it means stripping some of their citizens' rights, until they are rehabilitated. Someone who stabs a person 12 times in response to being punched is prone to killing people (this is prolly where we disagree. IMO, the assailant was subdued after 1 or 2 stabbings. After that point, the stabbings became retribution instead of defense. I agree that someone who kills in self-defense is not necessarily prone to killing people.) Therefore, this person should be locked up until adulthood. (The time frame is pretty soft, and I'd back down if someone challenged that part specifically)

 

[Lore]

He wasn't punched. He was abused (bullying softens what happened), and there was a clear danger to his health in the situation. He had gotten hit in the head and was obviously about to get the **** kicked out of him, so he used a tool to equalize the situation.

Want to know why he stabbed 12 times? Blind rage from finally striking back at a ******* who tormented him. It's not like he conciously decided to stab him that many times. Besides that, they were all done within a short time frame, so it's not like he stabbed, stepped back for a sec, thought, and then stabbed again.

I love how the number seems to mean so much to people. It's like the death itself doesn't even matter; the number itself seems to be the most important thing for the posters here.

Also, LOL at you thinking he was subdued after 2 stabs. Do you really think an abused and tormented kid who is ****ing scared for his life is REALLY going to make a conscious decision as to how many stabs are enough?

 

[Master Xanthan]

He wasn't punched. He was abused (bullying softens what happened), and there was a clear danger to his health in the situation. He had gotten hit in the head and was obviously about to get the **** kicked out of him, so he used a tool to equalize the situation.

Want to know why he stabbed 12 times? Blind rage from finally striking back at a ******* who tormented him. It's not like he conciously decided to stab him that many times. Besides that, they were all done within a short time frame, so it's not like he stabbed, stepped back for a sec, thought, and then stabbed again.

I love how the number seems to mean so much to people. It's like the death itself doesn't even matter; the number itself seems to be the most important thing for the posters here.

Also, LOL at you thinking he was subdued after 2 stabs. Do you really think an abused and tormented kid who is ****ing scared for his life is REALLY going to make a conscious decision as to how many stabs are enough?

This pretty much sums up my thoughts on the situation.

 

[Luigitoilet]

It's disheartening to hear that this is normal conversation. That this is how people validate their opinions these days. It's just...why? Don't you realize how much better the world would be if people could put an ounce of effort into having a rational, dispassionate discussion?

Assumption #1: Stabbing a person 12 times constitutes self-defense.
Assumption #2: If self-defense is wrong in one context, then self-defense is wrong.
Assumption #3: If someone acts in self-defense, then they are prone to killing people.

You have to think I think all 3 of those things are true before you can simplify what I said to "Defending yourself is wrong." I don't think all 3 of those things are true, and even if I did, it's not fair for you to assume that. If we go step by step, we'll prolly find some middle ground, and even if we end up disagreeing, we might gain some perspective on the other person's position.

To clarify. My position is that if a person is prone to killing people, they should be prevented from killing people, even if it means stripping some of their citizens' rights, until they are rehabilitated. Someone who stabs a person 12 times in response to being punched is prone to killing people (this is prolly where we disagree. IMO, the assailant was subdued after 1 or 2 stabbings. After that point, the stabbings became retribution instead of defense. I agree that someone who kills in self-defense is not necessarily prone to killing people.) Therefore, this person should be locked up until adulthood. (The time frame is pretty soft, and I'd back down if someone challenged that part specifically)

Read the thread you dumb.

or here, I'll post this again

Some of you guys need some assistance.

"After Saavedra got off the bus and started walking to a friend’s house, Nuno punched Saavedra from behind, Brodie said.

Saavedra kept walking to avoid the fight but “Dylan Nuno started throwing punches again to the back of his head” while Nuno’s friends yelled, “‘get him, hit him harder,’” the judge said.

Finally, “Saavedra testified that he began to get lightheaded. He felt that his life was being threatened and thought the other boys might be joining in,” Brodie said.

That is when Saavedra “reached in his pocket, bent forward and stabbed Dylan with a knife as the punches continued,” the judge said.

But “even after that, he heard Dylan telling his friends, ‘go get him,’” Brodie said.

http://www.news-press.com/article/2...dge-rules-for-teen-in-fatal-bus-stop-stabbing

it's not exactly like Saaveedra was carving into Nuno like a turkey or that Nuno was incapacitated after one stab, or any of the stabs that we know of besides the one that nicked his heart which could have been the very last one.

 

[Sol9000]

I'm gonna reply to older comments...

It's a general statement.

This guy was, by the accounts, just a prick. I wouldn't choose anyone to die over something like that, but this kid was trying to get away. This Nuno guy was probably going to beat the crap out of him. He defended himself, point blank period.

In school, I was fortunate enough to not be bullied--but I saw plenty of kids who got tormented. When I say tormented, I mean downright tormented to the point that I was surprised they didn't bring a gun to school and just unload on the place.

It's a sad outcome for the family of the Nuno kid, but at the same time, you've got to understand where this Saavedra kid came from. He probably didn't intend to kill him, but his rage kicked in and it just happened. Hate breeds hate, and in an unlikely turn of events, the victim prevailed in this case. He was a freshman--he was probably scared to even go to school for fear of getting the snot kicked out of him everyday.

As far as I can see, this Nuno kid was the unfortunate individual of what I call karma. Not everyone is going to just take a bully session every day. If you get retaliated against, as the bully, you need to be ready for whatever the victim has in store for you if you want to act all big and bad.

Is the computer in charge of censoring this word really that lazy?

Well this does set a precedent for what's considered self-defence.

I think the kid should at least get charged for manslaughter or a passion murder.

It's no longer self defence after the first couple of stabs because after those the bully would have been incapacitated. I'd imagine that for the later stabs the bully was probably on the ground, kneeling down, or in some other completely comprimised position.

To me it's kinda like shooting someone in the leg in self-defence, and when they're on the ground incapacitated, putting a bullet through their head. The second act clearly isn't self defence.

However, it was probably just a moment of rage (I don't know enough to say for sure), so it should have at least been considered as manslaughter or a passion murder.

I wonder how the killer feels about it now.

Here's how I see it:
Senario A (Kids does nothing): Kid gets hanged by the bully
Senario B (Bully continues as normal): Kid hangs himself
Senario C (He stabbed but did not kill): Bully's family would sue and the kid would be in prison
Senario D (What Actually Happened): He will kill himself as punishment for his own actions

What a legend, the killer that is.

Lol @ bully's family being all wah wah, they should understand this was only a result of their son's continued abusive actions. Sure death is massively extreme, but being a massive **** does have consequences, especially if you target and victimise.

I've never like people who take specific victims purely for the sake of them feeling a sense of greater self worth, antagonism should only be displayed to an equal level thread or towards one who challenges you first.

Now let's give children knives and dump them on a desert island.

Might I suggest reading The Hunger Games? :3

I gotta say my feelings are mixed on this one. On one hand, the kid was bullied and tried to avoid confrontations, but the bully kept wanting to be an ***hole, and thus got what was coming to him. On the other hand, to kill a bully is rather over-excessive. He should've at least fist-fought the kid and gain respect from other people for standing up for himself that way, than to potentially be feared for being a cold-blooded murderer who got away with no penalties.

Being a kid was so complicated back then... especially in high school.

If he did that the bully would go Saint and taddle on the victim for getting in a fight with him.

I see how these idiots work. They're the SSB uber playing super Falco and the victim's a Low Tier poorly and hasn't even gotten past the second boss in SSE

That little punk was the bully? Suddenly, I get the feeling that nothing of high value was lost... but that's just my apathy. *flame shield up*

ALL SYSTEMS! FULL POWAH!

It's weird, he's the typical douche that you think to yourself in high school "If he died, I wouldn't mind".

I guess it's not that I mind so much as someone killed (A stupid person, but person nonetheless) someone, via STABBING them over 10 times, and isn't in trouble. I just don't see how you can possibly not stop cutting up another person after the first cries and screams come out of their mouth. Shoulda just cut the *****es face, teach him a lesson. THAT's something I can get behind. Teach him a lesson, not kill him.

More Lazy Censors... Goodnight everybody!

you know how you get to mad you throw your controller or you hit something cause your mad?


it's a temporary lapse of insanity

How do you know I've thrown my controller many a time in SSBB!?! :D

So, children are now allowed to murder their bullies, without reprecussion?

The amount of blind bias from people who can empathise with the killer is frightening.

I empathize with neither faction

Bullying, being teenagers, riding a bus are all irrelevant details.

The law says if you are attacked, you have the right to meet force with force. He did that.

This is wrong. Your 12 years old, do you really know when someone is officially down? Who knows what would of happened if he tried to just like stab him in the leg, but missed a critical area and the bully just beats the crap out of him.

There is a reason why when you shoot in self-defense your trained to shoot to kill. Shooting to "incapacitate" is just too risky, especially if they also happen to have a weapon on them.

I suppose you can make a case that the bully was unarmed (which you can't know at the time as the victim), but it's still a risk of trying to wound (which maybe stops them) or killing them (definitely stops them), then when the bully heals he gets even. Sure you can say switch schools or move but your kidding yourself if whole families can just pick up and leave the area they work in.

The situation sucks because they were so young, but not the outcome in terms of a self-defense standpoint. You don't see someone that was shot 5 times and think "well the first shot definitely killed them, this is a passion crime". When your in fear/panic mode fight or flight takes over. This kid fought and made sure the bully couldn't retaliate period.

I still don't see how you can get away FREE with stabbing someone twelve times. You think after the first bloody scream you would realize "Oh yeah, I'm killing him?"

I mean, it feels silly for him to get off. But whatvever. The kid's probably ****ed up for life now anyways.

Weirdo.

Here's my information so far:

1. Victim was forced to take the Bus. Parents had schedule and did not have the luxury to drop their kid off at school
2. Victim has been bullied many, many, times. This would cause an emotional crisis, the only thing that can come out a crisis is insanity
3. If I were punched in the back of the head with the force of a bully, I'd have a bloody FATALITY floating above me.
4. The Bully was a Black Belt
5. The Bully was probably raised incorrectly and/or bullied before.
6. Victim fled multiple times to prevent confrontation
7. Victim stabbed 12-14 times in fatal areas (brrrr), most likely in the duration of 4-8 seconds
8. Police/Restraining Order would take too long and there would not be enough evidence to help the victim
9. Suicide/Murder of the victim was unavoidable no matter what scenario. This was the only way for him
10. Parents, Teachers, and Friends proved either useless or temporary solutions
11. Moving to a different School/Place was not an option

Kid should've been charged with bringing a weapon into school, And his parents for neglecting him.

Everyone deserves to die. It's how you die and where you go from it is where he discuss.

Karma will defiantly be a monster to the victim.

And ultimately, if this gets seared into the mind of every bully as a message saying "THIS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU IF YOU CONTINUE. STOP NOW " we'd be rid of Trolls and Bullies in general for a long time...

 

[Holder of the Heel]

The reason people are curious as to the number is because if you take your hand out and pretend you have a knife in your hand, and then you stab, and you pull your knife out and do it another eleven times... Even imagine that. Even if there weren't meditative pauses in-between, that is still pretty excessive. It doesn't seem like sudden blind rage to me that you can justify, at least not so easily.

It is true those bullies are scum, it is true he was in danger, but the likelihood his life was in danger? The probability was probably astoundingly low, not to mention, even with the information given, the assumption his life was in danger is actually a leap. It is also true that he was likely to get beaten up bad, but his life would not have been taken. No lives had to be lost. And he could have simply went to the police after the fact whether they really tore him up or not. A sacrifice? Yes. Is the gain worth it? Depends on how much you value the life of a bully. I'd value them less than the average person, but there is more value there than an innocent person getting hurt and later punishing those who hurt him via the legal system.

Would I have wanted to stab the kid? Yeah, a dark place within me would have been overwhelmed with a sense of bloodlust. But that is the thing... it is actually bloodlust. We simply can't allow people to use fear as a justification to act on it. It is appetizing, it feeds that lust and we like the idea, that is why it is hard to say it is wrong. However, despite all that I have said, it is hard to really judge him. The kid did not instigate anything, and was in a very frightening situation, whether the stabbing frenzy was really "blind fury" or not, whatever reasoning he was using was probably skewed from emotion. I mean, the front part of your brain that controls emotion reacts first, and there is a round-about way to the center where actual morals or logic are weighed in (can't remember the names). He was probably thinking, but it wasn't with reasoning or logic, so the intention wasn't very raw, which people who dabble in the morality of life would find somewhat of a gray area. It seems tragic more than anything.

tl;dr mod why are you so mean? XD

 

[Luigitoilet]

I find it hard to believe that all twelve of these "stabs" are full-length deep penetrating wounds. Only one of the stabs was fatal as it knicked Nuno's heart. Considering Saveedra was still being attacked as he was stabbing (or more likely flailing) I'm assuming that many of these stabs are more like knicks and the fatal one happened to be placed in an unfortunate area.

I don't care about this "blind rage" talking point that others are bringing up, that point is moot as far I'm concerned. It is pure fight or flight. Saveedra tried fleeing several times, and was far outmatched and outweighed to even consider fisticuffs of any sort. He was getting attacked, presumably throughout all of these stabs. If the person you are trying to stop from hurting you is still hurting you...you keep trying. Not even to mention the obvious struggle for the knife that would have ensued and that itself probably resulted in several of these "stabs".

Also let me again mention that punching someone in the back of the head is lethal assault and people have died from less.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

If you knick someone with a knife, do they consider it a stab? I mean, I wouldn't, but that means nothing. Flailing also would cause slashes, gashes, cuts, or whatever you'd like to call them, but those are called stabs as well?

Also, it is like you say about the knife. When you are outnumbered and in this situation, pulling out a knife guarantees that someone is going to die or almost die. Either you defend yourself by stabbing, or they either beat the crap out of you because you threatened to stab them and either follow up by taking your knife and stabbing you. Pulling out the knife even was just a bad idea. He shouldn't have done it. Besides, the bullies might then think, "Now I have to fight because my life is threatened." Why else would you keep fighting while being stabbed? With the knife out, it was just escalated to a whole new unnecessary level.

 

[Luigitoilet]

I agree.

But I still find it hard to blame Saveedra. If we must play the blame game, I think it goes to the school, and school administrations in general. They do not do enough in regards to bullying and this is incredibly apparent to anyone who has ever been to a public school. The situation should not have escalated for so long, especially considering Saveedra had brought up the antagonism he recieved from Nuno long before the fatal altercation.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

That notion I could't agree more with. Schools need to enforce a strict no tolerance policy for bulling. That **** works. In fact, it is the only practical defense for it we can place right now, if any other way could work ever. What you say makes complete sense too, there had to be some build up with him and the bullies before they'd be willing to torment someone walking like that. That's why I just think it is sad..

 

[1048576]

I don't care if it was blind rage or not. That's what I started my train of thought with. I don't even appreciate a difference between blind rage and regular rage. Now if 11 stabs isn't enough to make the guy stop attacking, then cool, I agree with bullied dude getting off without jail time. But I find it very hard to believe that bully dude wasn't incapacitated after the first couple times. If you stab twice in self defense and then 10 more times out of vengenace-motivated bloodlust, then your *** belongs in jail before you kill someone else.

I'm sure everyone here has had revenge fantasies at one point or another. We'd all love to curbstomp that annoying douche who's taking forever in line or w/e, but we don't. We don't because society does not work that way. When someone does show a willingness to violate this social pact and carry out their violent revenge fantasies, they need to be removed.

 

[Fuelbi]

God bless Florida and its self defense act I swear that thing's gotten so much abuse as of late it's not even funny

Welp, I guess it's time to take out the list of every person who's wronged me in the past and just shank em all and call it self defense obv

 

[Claire Diviner]

I'd like to think that at the end of the day, everyone is to blame; the bully, the victim, and the school system. I'm sure the parents fall in there somewhere too, don't they?

 

[Luigitoilet]

I don't care if it was blind rage or not. That's what I started my train of thought with. I don't even appreciate a difference between blind rage and regular rage. Now if 11 stabs isn't enough to make the guy stop attacking, then cool, I agree with bullied dude getting off without jail time. But I find it very hard to believe that bully dude wasn't incapacitated after the first couple times. If you stab twice in self defense and then 10 more times out of vengenace-motivated bloodlust, then your *** belongs in jail before you kill someone else.

I'm sure everyone here has had revenge fantasies at one point or another. We'd all love to curbstomp that annoying douche who's taking forever in line or w/e, but we don't. We don't because society does not work that way. When someone does show a willingness to violate this social pact and carry out their violent revenge fantasies, they need to be removed.

Did you miss the reports that mention that Saveedra was still under attack during all of the stabs, and that Nuno was still telling his friends to continue attacking Saveedra after all of the stabs?

I mean, I posted one of the articles like 4 times. Also "read the thread/the news articles you dumb" doesn't seem to be getting through to you and I don't know how to simplify it any further.

anyways, I'm a pretty staunch opponent of Stand Your Ground legislation, but this is one of the cases where it seems like it is justified. Unless the judge's statements on the situation are false, Saveedra was completely within his rights to hinder the threat against him and apparently that threat was still ongoing after all of the stabbing occurred and until Nuno died. To compare this case to George Zimmerman or especially Greyston Garcia is a false equivalency considering the facts of each separate case, as they are known to us, all paint very different pictures.

 

[1048576]

Saveedra was still under attack during all of the stabs

This is what I need to see. 'The attacks continued as he stabbed him' from the article could mean once or it could mean 12 times.

I'm kinda disheartened by how hostile you are when we essentially agree. You're one of the cooler heads on these forums too.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

If everyone is to blame, then no one is to blame.

And Toilet has been pretty mean-spirited these days when I see him on here. D:

 

[Claire Diviner]

If everyone is to blame, then no one is to blame.

By "no one" what exactly do you mean?

And Toilet has been pretty mean-spirited these days when I see him on here. D:

Pressures of being a Moderator perhaps? I wouldn't really know.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

By "no one" what exactly do you mean?


Pressures of being a Moderator perhaps? I wouldn't really know.

Not sure, I just thought it sounded cool. Feels like there can be a meaning to it though, because if everyone contributed to a problem, you can't pin the blame on someone anymore. Yeah, that's what I meant. xD

 

[Pachinkosam]

Well to be honest just stop bullying. If you bully that's a sigh they want to die in such a young age i dont blame them .

 

[Froggy]

I don't mean to sound like an ***, but I'm actually happy the bully died. It sends a message to bullies everywhere, if you have the audacity to harm someone else for no reason other than your own enjoyment then understand that you forfeit your rights to be safe under the law.

 

[1048576]

Please attempt to define "bully" in such a way that it precludes someone who stabbed another human being 12 times.

 

[Luigitoilet]

Please attempt to define "bully" in such a way that it precludes someone who stabbed another human being 12 times.

I imagine such a definition would include possible fatal assault like punching someone in the back of the head and then continuing to hold down and punch said person while your friends also punch said person.

The issue is not mere "bullying". If this case involved two adults we would be approaching this case from the perspective of a self-defense from a violent assailant...which it is. Focusing so much on the "bullying" instead of the violent attacks is missing the point. It's not like Nuno got stabbed for calling Saveedra a gay nerd or something. Physical assault is not something to handwave away. That punch took the situation across the line and escalated it to begin with. Does that mean Nuno "deserved" to get stabbed and die? No, but it is a case of chickens coming home to roost.

Again, a punch to the back of the head is VERY DANGEROUS. People have died from less. it's banned in all MMA for a reason.

 

[1048576]

To me, it should take quite a bit of evidence to demonstrate that someone was unwilling to back down after being stabbed, say, twice. That you all just assume this guy was still the aggressor after 11! stabs just because the media labeled him a "bully" gets my goat.

No, you don't deserve to die from punching someone. Maybe you do deserve to die from crippling or killing someone, but this guy did neither. We ban prostitution, not fishnet stockings. (Please don't get fixated on the example and counter with the idea that prostitution shouldn't be banned. That's not my point.)

 

[GoldShadow]

No, you don't deserve to die from punching someone. Maybe you do deserve to die from crippling or killing someone, but this guy did neither.

So you're saying that if a gunman shoots at someone but misses or only grazes the target, and the target (in self-defense) ends up killing the gunman, the target (victim) is at fault and the gunman didn't deserve to die? Or that the target used excessive force to defend himself?

If you do not agree with that logic, then it's a little surprising that you're arguing what happened here.

In this case, the punches thrown by Nuno are 100% analogous to the gunman and the gun. A punch to the back of the head can cripple and kill. Saavedra acted in self-defense. Should Saavedra have waited until he was unconscious, crippled for life, or dead before he struck back with potentially lethal force? That would have been difficult, wouldn't it, considering he would already have been unconscious, crippled for life, or dead at that point. Saavedra stabbed his aggressor to prevent becoming unconscious, crippled for life, or dead.

I'm not sure how you keep arguing about the number of stabs, as it has been pointed out numerous times in this thread that 1) Saavedra was likely panicked, scared, and full of adrenaline, and thus was not exactly counting, 2) he was still being attacked while stabbing, 3) a person will attack until they no longer feel threatened, and Nuno was still talking and encouraging his bully friends to attack while being stabbed, so how could Saavedra possibly have felt the stabs were doing any good? 4) there is no universal key for number of stab wounds necessary to incapacitate a person; there is no law of physics that states "1-2 stab wounds are all that is necessary to bring down an opponent" or "11 stabs is excessive"; in some fights with some opponents, a single stab may be sufficient, and in other cases people have received stab wounds numbering in the dozens and still survived.

The fact that you keep arguing about the number is mindboggling and quite frankly inane.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Not to really get involved here, but the gunman and punch comparison is most certainly not 100% analogous. With the gunman there is obviously an intent to kill, whereas the bully probably didn't want to kill the kid, probably just wanted to hurt him. That is probably what people would have problems with when questioned whether the bully deserved to die, in a consequential sense a punch and gunman shot is similar (though the probability of dying from a gunshot and a punch to the head couldn't possibly be the same, though moving on) but in terms of intention that people usually take into account in matters of morality, they are very different.

 

[GoldShadow]

If you shoot at someone with a gun, whether the intent is to wound or kill, it is an attempt to kill--there is no such thing as shooting to wound.

Similarly, with a punch to the back of the head, whether the intent is to hurt or wound or kill, it is an attempt to kill. There is a reason such a blow (called a rabbit punch: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_punch) is banned in literally almost every fighting sport.

It does not matter what Nuno's intent was. His intent could've been to solve world hunger, but that doesn't make a lick of difference when you're the victim being punched in the back of the head. What matters is the effect: it was an attempt to kill (whether Nuno intended that or not). In such a case, the victim does not have time to think, "Why did he do that? Is he trying to kill me? Is he just trying to rough me up a little?" Does it even matter? It's not like the victim could have said, "Hey, slow down, a blow to the back of the head can be fatal," as if that would have made a difference. The victim in this case isn't even an adult, it's just some kid who doesn't have the mental and reasoning powers of an adult. All he knows is he's scared, he's being attacked, and he might die. He did what anybody would have done and fought back with enough force to prevent himself from being killed.

 

[Claire Diviner]

Regardless of how anyone sees it, it was still self-defense. Excessive? Some might think so, but you cannot fathom what went through both the heads of the bully and the victim. Had the punch killed the victim, what would have happened then? It's called "fight or flight" for a reason, and in the case of the victim, instinct took over and he made a decision that his only way of survival was to fight back, regardless of how it was done. Not that I'm condoning fighting violence with violence, I'm just saying you cannot understand or underestimate the potency of adrenaline and instinct.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Hey, I was only discussing your analogy. Though, I'm not sure what you mean there is no such thing as to fire a gun in the attempt to merely wound someone and subdue them.

I've already discussed my stance earlier in this thread, and although I felt the child was wrong, I do agree with what you are saying about the situation, and what Sol has gathered as well.

 

[GoldShadow]

I know, I was just pointing out that I think it is a fitting analogy. I agree that death is almost never deserved, and it wasn't in this case, but it was justified given the circumstances. What happened is a shame and a tragedy.

There's no such thing as shooting to wound because any shot from a gun with a caliber large enough to subdue a person has the capacity to kill them. Shooting to wound is mostly a myth propagated by TV and movies where they'll have someone aim and shoot for the knee or the arm or some "non-lethal" area when that "non-lethal" area simply doesn't exist. Any bullet wound has the capacity to kill, not to mention if you're trying to stop an assailant by shooting them, you're not going to be aiming for the arms or the legs (which are incredibly difficult to hit, especially if the target is moving--and if the target is a threat to your life, it's probably because s/he is moving). This is why police officers and military personnel are trained to aim for the center of mass. It's the quickest and surest way to stop an assailant. It's also the quickest way to kill them. And even if you are trying to aim for a so-called "non-lethal" area (which it isn't... perhaps less lethal, but not non-lethal), you're more likely to miss (and possibly hit a more lethal area) than if you were aiming for center of mass.

Basically, if someone is drawing a gun on another person, they'd better be ready for the possibility of killing them.

But we're straying from the original topic now, so I'll stop talking!

 

[1048576]

So you think a reasonable person should feel threatened if he stabs someone twice and that person stops attacking him?

You seem to be arguing against the idea that the murderer shouldn't have stopped if he was still being attacked. I have never made that argument. Nobody in this thread has ever made that argument. Obviously if someone shoots at you, misses, and still has the capacity to shoot again, you're justified in killing him. To further the analogy, if you manage to break both of the gunman's arms, you then don't get to shoot him. I can't imagine you disagree with that.

 

[Luigitoilet]

To me, it should take quite a bit of evidence to demonstrate that someone was unwilling to back down after being stabbed, say, twice. That you all just assume this guy was still the aggressor after 11! stabs just because the media labeled him a "bully" gets my goat.

No, you don't deserve to die from punching someone. Maybe you do deserve to die from crippling or killing someone, but this guy did neither. We ban prostitution, not fishnet stockings. (Please don't get fixated on the example and counter with the idea that prostitution shouldn't be banned. That's not my point.)

No, I'm assuming Nuno was still the aggressor during the stabs because that is what the judge overruling the case said, nearly verbatim, in the case report. If we can't rely on the dozen of eyewitness testimonies and evidence that was brought to the court and put into the case reports, what can we rely on? Your gut feeling? By the way, the term "bullying" is never used in the judge's order although the defense really focused on that terminology.

http://www.winknews.com/Local-Flori...n-charged-with-stabbing-acted-in-self-defense

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2012/jan/03/collier-judge-upholds-stand-your-ground-defense-ca/

edit: though, unfortunately now I am getting conflicting reports. Some mention Saaveedra being under attack during the whole ordeal, and some don't specify or use unclear language. So, I don't know really, but the majority of the testimony I've seen mentions Nuno telling his friends to continue pursuing Saaveedra after all of the stabs.

 

[1048576]

Appeal to authority? (re: the judge)

I do not have enough information to make a conclusion one way or the other. Hence, while everyone else is saying ("this guy deserved to die",) I'm saying ("if this guy was not the aggressor after a couple stabs, then he did not deserve to die".) You shouting from the rooftops: "THIS GUY WAS THE AGGRESSOR!" doesn't invalidate my stance. Doesn't that make sense to you?

I think it's important to consider, 1.) that one of the parties was not able to testify because he is dead, and 2.) this case only had to meet a standard of "reasonable doubt" for the defendant to be let off.

Edit: I guess these last 3 pages have boiled down to me not accepting your premise, so fine, I accept it. Bully dude continually attacked stabby dude. Stabby dude had to kill him. Nobody should be happy about that.

 

[Mic_128]

I hope yu aren't forgetting that this was't a one-off attack, the kid had been tormented for months by this guy and his friends, every weekday at school.This isn't some random event, it's the cumulation of all that terror, frustration, anger, despair being built up and up by the bullies exploding in their faces.

 

[rinisan]

Now the kid has to live the rest of his still long life as a murderer...Good luck to him if he won't have nightmares....

 

[Master Xanthan]

Now the kid has to live the rest of his still long life as a murderer...Good luck to him if he won't have nightmares....

It was self defense, not murder.

 

[rinisan]

It was self defense, not murder.

True. But when you stabbed a person, the memory will company you through your life time

 

[Master Xanthan]

True. But when you stabbed a person, the memory will company you through your life time

Most negative memories accompany you through your lifetime.

 

[rinisan]

But stabbing somebody is not just most of the negative memories...

 

[Master Xanthan]

But stabbing somebody is not just most of the negative memories...

Its better than letting people beat the crap out of you. 11 stabs does seem a bit much, but since we don't know the full story, its hard to say who was in the wrong. But IMO I'd rather try to defend myself than let people beat the crap out of me.

 

[rinisan]

Its better than letting people beat the crap out of you. 11 stabs does seem a bit much, but since we don't know the full story, its hard to say who was in the wrong. But IMO I'd rather try to defend myself than let people beat the crap out of me.

Some people just can't do **** without deadly weapons...