Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Kevin · Feb 22, 2007, 04:40 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html

One of the tourists -- a retired U.S. serviceman whom officials estimated was in his 70s -- allegedly put Warner Segura in a headlock and broke his clavicle after the 20-year-old and two other men armed with a knife and gun held up their tour bus Wednesday, said Luis Hernandez, the police chief of Limon, 80 miles east of San Jose.

olePigeon · Feb 22, 2007, 04:49 PM

Rumor · Feb 22, 2007, 04:51 PM

Seniors: 1
Muggers: 0

Gossamer · Feb 22, 2007, 04:51 PM

awesome

andi*pandi · Feb 22, 2007, 05:03 PM

badass.

Sky Captain · Feb 22, 2007, 05:22 PM

American ex-military.
I don't care how old, don't f--- with an ex-soilder.

More criminals need to die this way.
Lots more.
It would ease overcrowding in jails.

spice003 · Feb 22, 2007, 05:50 PM

nice

reader50 · Feb 22, 2007, 06:04 PM

Too bad they didn't specify which service branch he'd been with.

Kevin · Feb 22, 2007, 06:54 PM

Can you imagine being the person he headlocked? Realizing you just got pwnt by a 70 year old?

Person Man · Feb 22, 2007, 07:29 PM

From that same story:

Costa Rican authorities said they did not plan to file charges against the tourists, who left on their cruise ship after the incident.

"They were in their right to defend themselves after being held up," Hernandez said.

If the attack had happened here, more likely than not charges would have been filed against the person defending himself. We live in a country where a burglar can enter your house, get injured when you defend yourself, and successfully sue you for assault.

Mastrap · Feb 23, 2007, 01:13 AM

Charges should have been pressed. I am not saying that the retirees didn't have the right to defend themselves, but come on people, one person is dead here. That should be investigated in a court of law.

Cipher13 · Feb 23, 2007, 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by Mastrap

Charges should have been pressed. I am not saying that the retirees didn't have the right to defend themselves, but come on people, one person is dead here. That should be investigated in a court of law.

Investigated, yes. Charges pressed? No.

It should have been investigated to ensure that this was not a setup in which the retiree placed the other man in a situation whereby he could kill him freely, as unlikely as that seems.

Assuming what happened is exactly as described, then good riddance. Unprovoked attacks on people should end this way more often.

- - e r i k - - · Feb 23, 2007, 02:16 AM

In death?

I'm sorry. Death > Mugging.

Cipher13 · Feb 23, 2007, 02:19 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

In death?

I'm sorry. Death > Mugging.

Not necessarily.

Unprovoked mugging = death via self-defence.

What would you suggest is equal, mugging them back? An eye for an eye doesn't work, as it only neutralises the initial, unprovoked attack; two eyes for an eye is more like it.

Kevin · Feb 23, 2007, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by Mastrap

Charges should have been pressed. I am not saying that the retirees didn't have the right to defend themselves, but come on people, one person is dead here. That should be investigated in a court of law.

How about if you don't want dead, don't try to mug people. He made his bed. He lays in it now.

This was self defense. It wasn't him punishing him for mugging him BTW.

Seriously.

Sky Captain · Feb 23, 2007, 08:42 AM

By brother ventilated an idiot.
End of story.
No criminal to incarcerate.

Peter · Feb 23, 2007, 08:46 AM

too much force me thinks.

Person Man · Feb 23, 2007, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by Mastrap

That should be investigated in a court of law.

No, it should be investigated by the police, which they did. If there is any wrongdoing found by the police department (and there wasn't in this case), then it can go to court.

Person Man · Feb 23, 2007, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

In death?

I'm sorry. Death > Mugging.

I don't think the 70 year old meant to kill the guy. But when you're defending yourself, accidents happen.

Sky Captain · Feb 23, 2007, 10:15 AM

20-year-old and two other men armed with a knife and gun

100% justifiable.
Mess with the wrong people. Die.
I carry a gun.
You pull a knife on me or my wife and make it known you intend to hurt me,
I'll punch holes in you.
Lots of them.

I did my term as a victim.
Never again. Ever.

Millennium · Feb 23, 2007, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by Mastrap

Charges should have been pressed. I am not saying that the retirees didn't have the right to defend themselves, but come on people, one person is dead here. That should be investigated in a court of law.

An investigation may be warranted, but certainly not a conviction. The mugger knew the risks when he chose to mug someone, and if he got burned by that then it's merely part of the risk he chose to take.

Sky Captain · Feb 23, 2007, 10:50 AM

It's called consequences for one's actions.
In this case, the mugger took a chance on th victims being submissive.
The victim took a chance that his attacker might either pass out or die.

It worked out for the best.

invisibleX · Feb 23, 2007, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

100% justifiable.
Mess with the wrong people. Die.
I carry a gun.
You pull a knife on me or my wife and make it known you intend to hurt me,
I'll punch holes in you.
Lots of them.

I did my term as a victim.
Never again. Ever.

I guess it comes down to how much you value the other person's life against your own.

Kevin · Feb 24, 2007, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by invisibleX

I guess it comes down to how much you value the other person's life against your own.

Depends. Is that person holding a knife or gun to me?

SirCastor · Feb 24, 2007, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

Depends. Is that person holding a knife or gun to me?

Does it really matter? That person is threatening your life. Few people are going to be aware enough/ level headed enough to change the amount of force they use depending on the potential for pain/death.

It always comes down to argument of who the enemy is. I would be loathe to take someone's life, but considering that these people would not hesitate in taking my life, I would put my life ahead of theirs.

Anyone who's making the arguement that it was 'just a mugging': They had gun and a knife. The non-verbal equivalent to "If you do not give me what I want, I will kill you." It doesn't matter if the Mugger didn't really want to hurt them, they said so by the act.

macforray · Feb 24, 2007, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

100% justifiable.
Mess with the wrong people. Die.
I carry a gun.
You pull a knife on me or my wife and make it known you intend to hurt me,
I'll punch holes in you.
Lots of them.

I did my term as a victim.
Never again. Ever.

Sky, I like your style. The "knife and gun" equals deadly threat. The answer to "deadly threat" is "deadly force". In this situation I value my life over any of the perpetrators. In other circumstances would I value another's life over mine....yes. Excessive force from a 70ish on a 20 year old? Come on, what are you people smoking? I want to shake that man's hand and buy him a drink.

moonmonkey · Feb 24, 2007, 10:32 PM

This is a great example of why the rest of the developed world look down on Americans and the predisposition they have for killing people.

in civilized countries you are not allowed to murder people just because they are taking your property.

11011001 · Feb 24, 2007, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by moonmonkey

This is a great example of why the rest of the developed world look down on Americans and the predisposition they have for killing people.

in civilized countries you are not allowed to murder people just because they are taking your property.

CollinG3G4 · Feb 24, 2007, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by moonmonkey

This is a great example of why the rest of the developed world look down on Americans and the predisposition they have for killing people.

in civilized countries you are not allowed to murder people just because they are taking your property.

Murder implies premeditation, which in this case was absent.

11011001 · Feb 24, 2007, 11:10 PM

Originally Posted by CollinG3G4

Murder implies premeditation, which in this case was absent.

You are right though, murder is the wrong word to use here.

reader50 · Feb 24, 2007, 11:29 PM

You guys are drifting away from the details. Read the article more carefully. The 70-year-old broke the mugger's collarbone in a headlock. The tourists drove the mugger to the Red Cross afterwards, where the mugger was declared dead. The police declined to offer further details on the incident.

How does a broken collarbone equate to murder, or even cause unintended death? I'm thinking the senior citizen held the mugger in a headlock, as a human shield between himself and the other muggers. That would be a sensible move when the muggers are armed and the seniors aren't. One of the other muggers fired a shot or stabbed with a knive, and got his headlocked buddy.

The cops did say the dead mugger "had previous charges against him for assaults". He was experienced, and might depend on the mugging revenue as his primary job. I'm not losing any tears here.

Mastrap · Feb 24, 2007, 11:38 PM

Originally Posted by reader50

I'm thinking the senior citizen held the mugger in a headlock, as a human shield between himself and the other muggers. That would be a sensible move when the muggers are armed and the seniors aren't. One of the other muggers fired a shot or stabbed with a knive, and got his headlocked buddy.

And you know that how? You're guessing, at best.

reader50 · 01:32 AM

Correct, it's a reasonable guess. The police presumably know the details, but won't talk. Except that they called the senior's actions justified self-defense.

For a broken collarbone to turn into death, I'd think the senior would have to choke the mugger to death. The chokehold would have to continue well after the mugger lost consciousness. All the article mentions is a headlock.

A continued (and unmentioned) chokehold would not be justified self-defense. Since the people who know the details say the senior's actions were ok, that means the mugger wasn't choked to death. So unless a broken collarbone killed him, he had to die of other causes. Heart attack, stroke, guilt ... or some action by his buddies.

jokell82 · Feb 25, 2007, 12:01 AM

Originally Posted by moonmonkey

This is a great example of why the rest of the developed world look down on Americans and the predisposition they have for killing people.

in civilized countries you are not allowed to murder people just because they are taking your property.

Oh please. If someone holds a gun to your head it's not ok to defend yourself? Everyone should just roll over and take it?

grayware · Feb 25, 2007, 12:40 AM

Originally Posted by moonmonkey

This is a great example of why the rest of the developed world look down on Americans and the predisposition they have for killing people.

in civilized countries you are not allowed to murder people just because they are taking your property.

To your first claim:
Who has a predisposition to killing people in self defense?!

To your second:
And you're not allowed to in the US either. I have no right to kill you because you're taking my stuff or doing damage to my property. I do have a right to kill you if you try to or show intent to kill or inflict grave bodily injury on me or my loved ones.

SirCastor · Feb 25, 2007, 01:29 AM

Originally Posted by grayware

I do have a right to kill you if you try to or show intent to kill or inflict grave bodily injury on me or my loved ones.

This is not accurate. It is likely that you will not be prosecuted or found guilty of taking another's life in this situation. You certainly do not have the right to take anyone's life. There are, to my knowledge, only a few situations where taking a life is authorized under law:

1) Capital Punishment. (which comes after trial)
2) War

hyteckit · Feb 25, 2007, 02:51 AM

If a 14 year old year kid threatens me with a baseball bat and tries to steal my ipod, I'll shoot the bastard.

JoshuaZ · Feb 25, 2007, 03:22 AM

Its a sticky situation, but I would have to side with the seniors on this one. They defended themselves, in what most would say was acceptable force, and one of the muggers died. Its not as if the seniors pulled out guns and started shooting. While any loss of life is sad, it seems like the muggers met a match they didn't expect to be facing.

SirCastor · Feb 25, 2007, 03:37 AM

I'm sure I'm going to take flak for this, but there's a very relevant line said in "Batman Begins":
"Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding."

Why do we always manage to find a way to victimize the criminal. It's only when something negative happens to the Criminal that there's some ensuing debate. Remember when that one kid got stabbed and died because some punks wanted his iPod? No one defended the muggers then, but they didn't get hurt.

I'm having a hard time seeing why we're defending the muggers here.

Snow-i · Feb 25, 2007, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by SirCastor

I'm sure I'm going to take flak for this, but there's a very relevant line said in "Batman Begins":
"Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding."

Why do we always manage to find a way to victimize the criminal. It's only when something negative happens to the Criminal that there's some ensuing debate. Remember when that one kid got stabbed and died because some punks wanted his iPod? No one defended the muggers then, but they didn't get hurt.

I'm having a hard time seeing why we're defending the muggers here.

bleeding hearts.

I tell ya what...you don't want be killed by me? don't threaten my life, or the lives of my loved ones...then there will be no problems.

Kevin · Feb 25, 2007, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by SirCastor

Does it really matter? That person is threatening your life. Few people are going to be aware enough/ level headed enough to change the amount of force they use depending on the potential for pain/death.

It always comes down to argument of who the enemy is. I would be loathe to take someone's life, but considering that these people would not hesitate in taking my life, I would put my life ahead of theirs.

Anyone who's making the arguement that it was 'just a mugging': They had gun and a knife. The non-verbal equivalent to "If you do not give me what I want, I will kill you." It doesn't matter if the Mugger didn't really want to hurt them, they said so by the act.

I think you misunderstood me.

Kevin · Feb 25, 2007, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by moonmonkey

This is a great example of why the rest of the developed world look down on Americans and the predisposition they have for killing people.

This is good example of exaggerations and hyperbole used by someone that has a chip on his shoulder about America or Americans.

A good sign that someone is full of it. They use "The rest of the world" in their arguments. Only thing they have is dishonest rants. Not only that the article proves you wrong.

Where did this incident happen? Not in the US. Who said he was justified? Not an American.

Stop projecting your skewed "Ideals" onto the "Rest of the world"

in civilized countries you are not allowed to murder people just because they are taking your property.

It wasn't about just taking their property einstein. They held a gun and knife to them. Their life was at stake.

What part of that do you people not understand?

Kevin · Feb 25, 2007, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by 11011001

You are right though, murder is the wrong word to use here.

The right word is self defense.

nredman · Feb 25, 2007, 03:17 PM

damn, next time i get pissed at a senior for driving like an idiot i'll think twice, i dont want to get choked out

Sky Captain · Feb 26, 2007, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by moonmonkey

This is a great example of why the rest of the developed world look down on Americans and the predisposition they have for killing people.

in civilized countries you are not allowed to murder people just because they are taking your property.

And this is why criminals are over running London.
No one can fight back.

And I could give a rats-@ss what the rest of "the developed world" thinks.
It's great to see their sole representative here.

Apparently the bleeding hearts defending the actions of these thigs have never been accosted.
I got mugged and beat twice.
Both times I surrendered my wallet.
As I was trained as an Officer to do. Both times I got beat down anyway.
The third time I fough back. Hard. I beat the CRIMINAL to a pulp.
I kept beating him when he was down. I stomped and kicked him for about 8 minutes.
Excessive? No. He didn't stand back up to attack me again.
And I was exonerated by the Judge Advocate.

Now I carry a gun.

In the rest of the "developed world" you have the right to be a victim.
And apparently the rest of the "developed world" has a predisposition to becoming a victim.

Peter · Feb 26, 2007, 11:31 AM

thats a disturbing story.
and you wonder why Americans have such a sterotype against them. seriously.

Sky Captain · Feb 26, 2007, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by Peter

thats a disturbing story.
and you wonder why Americans have such a sterotype against them. seriously.

What am I supposed to do?
Hope I don't get killed?
Take the beating?

Please elaborate.
A step by step souliton.

And I don't wonder what the rest of the world thinks.
I've been to most of it. And I have my own opinions too.

Peter · Feb 26, 2007, 11:46 AM

you stomped and kicked a guy for 8 minutes, but because a judge exonerated you, its okay?

Sky Captain · Feb 26, 2007, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Peter

you stomped and kicked a guy for 8 minutes, but because a judge exonerated you, its okay?

He continued to try and take me down. I had no weapon, I was cornered.
And he had a knife which I failed to mention.

I suppose I was to jump up and down and wave my arms?
Like in Britain.

I also stuck around for the police.

The 2 jack@sses that mugged me didn't.
Please answer me why they didn't.
Please, I implore you.

SirCastor · Feb 26, 2007, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Peter

thats a disturbing story.
and you wonder why Americans have such a sterotype against them. seriously.

Which part is disturbing?
Nobody is disturbed these days when people are mugged... That's normal behavior. It's when someone chooses to stand up for themselves, that's not normal, that's not okay.

I'm still a bit surprised that a 70 year old guy overpowered a 20 year old, army or not.