'Officer, he had a hoodie on. A hoodie! I have never been more scared in my life...it was a hoodie!'
SPD pulling over people on S Montgomery
- Thread starter paindonthurt
- Start date
- Status
'Officer, he had a hoodie on. A hoodie! I have never been more scared in my life...it was a hoodie!'
Give us context for that picture. It was just taken today at 11:44am?...guessing the time is wrong.
Anyways, how does that pic prove it isn't just kids ding dong ditching?
Officer he had on a white hoodie and and white robe. I’ve only seen this on tv but I was terrified for my life!
It was at 414 am. No idea of his intent. Don’t care. Stop it before someone gets hurt or robbed or killed. You know like do your GD job as a police officer?
The part where you shoot someone just for ringing your doorbell.
They aren't actively trying to break in, they aren't yelling aggressively, and you chose to open the 17ing door so you clearly aren't fearing for your life(if you were, the door would stay closed and locked).
So the part where you shoot someone for simply ringing your doorbell and standing on your front step waiting for someone to answer the door is the part that seems like a felony.
You can’t define what fearing for my life is.
I’m sure you’ll try and you’ll be inconsistent as 17 about it (Mike brown).
You are correct, I can't define that.
I do think that anyone who would choose to unlock a locked door in order to shoot someone standing in the other side of the door doing nothing illegal would find claiming they shot the person because they feared for their life to be a tough sell.
I mean, just don't open the door and you stay safe.
You do realize that the 'fear for my life' argument is scrutinized...right?
Sounds like the police should be doing something if it is as you described, but the point still stands, the homeowner is safer with the door closed. If they are trying to case the neighborhood and all owners open their doors, it’s easy to see who is not home. If no one opens the door, it’s harder to case the neighborhood.
You don't know his intent and you don't care, but you posted the pic as evidence that they aren't just dingdong ditching.
How is that proof when you say you don't even know what it is evidence of?
This seems like one of your emotional rants where the more you post the worse it looks and others start cringing a bit.
I doubt you'll find any data about homicides by people wearing hoodies just like you'll probably not find any data about homicides by people wearing steel-toed boots - because they're just random pieces of attire. Though, as always, if you have actual facts or statistics to support the position you're taking, I'll absolutely look at them. You never seem to, though.
It's much more probable that we can find data on killings by the klan and other people with white supremacist ideologies. It's going to be a lot more than you're thinking, probably.
You seem to have some stereotype in your mind about people who wear hoodies. From my experience, the only people who hold those kinds of stereotypes also probably have those white hoods and robes in their closets. Not saying you do, but that's the kind of company that holds the same opinion you seem to be holding.
Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. If a klansman shows up at your door, he's probably not alone and they're probably all armed. I would not open the door in that situation. But again, I generally don't open my door to any stranger I'm not expecting at any time of the day or night.
Not to repeat myself but you are mistaken about what the job of a police officer is. Their only job is to protect the state. Courts up and down this country, including the supreme court, have consistently ruled that the police have no obligation to protect private property.
You may not like that. You may think it doesn't make sense. You may even point to other examples where they did stop a crime and/or track down a perp after the fact. But they don't have to do it if they don't want to.
Also, you don't know his intent. But you know it needs to be stopped. Sure, that makes sense.
I’m skeptical “But he had on a hoodie” would prevent you from at least being indicted. Especially if they’re not attempting to break in.
You might have been inferring that they had a gun, or that an altercation had started, etc. I could see that changing things. But, I’m not sure you can walk out and start blasting.
A Texas jury convicted an Uber driver of murder for shooting a protestor in 2020. That protestor was armed with an assault rifle and dressed in fatigues. I get it - TX vs MS, but still.
How do you know the intent of an all white masked robed individual in a black neighborhood?
I opened my door and a hooded individual was standing there and I was scared.
I panicked.
I truly hope this situation does not play out for you… because if it does and your internet posting history comes up, you are probably 17’d.
Everyone has to do whatever they feel is best for themselves and their family. I wouldn’t want to be in that situation. But I’m afraid if the situation plays out exactly as you have described (guy in a hoodie not just standing there not showing a weapon) probably wouldn’t play out too good for someone who shot the guy just standing there at a doorbell.
I think if it were me, I’d make sure the guy at the doorbell knew I was armed and the cops were on the way. I’d advise him to not come in my house. But my door would not be opened, at least not by me.
Well, obviously there are concerned citizens wondering why the heck you’re inside a house that you don’t own. **
I would expect you to face felony charges. Your freedom probably rides on the ability of your legal team to create additional probable cause to fear for your life. They had threatened you or attempted to enter your home (it just wasn’t captured by the Ring); you thought the outline of his cellphone was a firearm; etc.
Im not sure a spike in local crime would even be admissible. That might depend on the judge. That could be one of the focuses of your appeals - ha.
Maybe one of our SPS legal friends can shed some light on it for us.
I don't.
- Maybe they want to draw attention and make people feel uncomfortable.
- Maybe they want to try and have an incident happen where they are attacked to try and prove a point.
- Maybe their car broke down, their phone dies, and they are looking for the past payphone in the country.
- Maybe they are heading to hurt someone.
I have no 17ing idea.
But you apparently do know the intent of the person(and others) you put a picture of up on a message board. And based on your question posed to me, it looks like you know that intent based only on the lid's skin color.
You claim you know his intent based on a pic, you then say you have no idea his intent, and then you hint at knowing his intent by asking me a race/skin color based question.
Like I said- this is one of those threads where the more you post the cringier it gets.
According to Nextdoor, kids who do Ding-Dong-and-Dash pranks will being pulling home invasions in a few short years. That app is built for alarmists.
I’m speaking hypothetically.
As I’ve stated from the beginning of this thread and the other thread several weeks ago, the police could fix this very easily. Why won’t they?
It’s a trend. Follow the trend. If you don’t have the man power, skip the speeding tickets in the day and patrol the neighborhoods at night. It’s really simple.
so again. Answer the question. White guy in a black neighborhood beats on door and black person feels threatened and shoots white guy.
do you support felony charges in that case? Yes or no?
I absolutely don’t care how cringy your think it sounds. The cringier you feel the better for me.
Simple fix. The police can do their job before citizens have to.
What part of the job are the police not doing?
'Hey Bob, we have a report of a doorbell being rung and no illegal activity taking place. Go check it out.'
I don’t think simply knocking on your door warrants the use of deadly force. White, Black, 3am, 3pm, hoodie, no hoodie - you name it.
Now, that all starts to change if they try to grab your gun, or enter the house, or threaten you. Let’s say it’s your daughter’s ex boyfriend and he’s saying “open up or I’ll kill all of you”. I could see that not being charged.
Hey golfer. Wuit posting up on south Montgomery during the day writing speeding tickets and instead patrol the neighborhoods at night.
OR do both.
It’s really simple for someone with an average iq or above.
At no point did I say open the door and start blasting.
but the likelihood of something bad happening increases as long as this keeps happening.
So do something about it. It’s really simple.
What about when the person you are going to shoot it outside your locked house, not acting wildly or threatening, and simply standing there after having rung the doorbell to notify you of their desire to reach you?
Is that a 'Castle Law' incident? If so, Mormons and Pest Control companies must have your house on a 'no call' list.
Bc kids these days (at least up here) aren’t knocking and running. They’re now knocking and hiding; waiting a few minutes and returning only to terrorize people like this on multiple nights. They’ll push people to the brink bc the cops aren’t around when they’re doing it. Defend it all you want but what they’re doing isnt a harmless prank.
I find it hard to believe people can trivialize theft of private property. Those exceeding speed limits aren't intentionally trying to harm others. Ridding neighborhoods of parasitic vermin is MUCH more important.
Frank may be the funniest TV character so far this century.
If the McPoyles were dingdong ditching, then any shooting is justified.
I know critical thought is hard for you....
A home owner could open the door and end up shooting a person without just opening the door and blasting.
A homeowner could go to bed drunk or even not and wake up in dazed state and open the door while someone is knocking. Get alarmed and have a gun or weapon next to the door.
A homeowner could wake up and think paindonthurt or another friend was at his door. You know maybe an actual friend who left the country club or got a ride so they didn’t have to drive home drunk.
There are lots of normal scenarios where a homeowner might open the door and be startled and something bad happens.
Like I said from the beginning of this thread. The fault will like first with the moron at the door. Second with the police or people in charge of the police who won’t fix the issue.
The law will certainly be on the homeowners side, but we know you lunatics will defend it he assailant/trespasser no matter what.
Yeah again I know critical thought and reasoning isn’t your strong point.
I won’t waste my breath explaining it again.
I’ll add this though.
First person at fault will be the moron, then the cops, then people like you who normalize this type of stuff.
“Oh the poor innocent victim”
I know a guy that was killed by his father in law because he jumped from behind the bushes yelled “Surprise”. He flew in to surprise him for his 60th birthday. No charges were pressed.
Somebody is going to win a stupid prize.
FYI, Mississippi's castle doctrine is slightly more nuanced than "you can shoot somebody if you feel threatened." In the 2:30 a.m. doorstep hypothetical, the homeowner must have a reasonable belief that the guy was attempting to kill the homeowner, or in the process of committing a felony, or attempting to forcibly enter the home. A guy knocking on your door meets none of these criteria. Now, whether the DA would bring charges is up for debate and probably depends on the jurisdiction.
- Status