Where are the Gun Rights, Second Amendment People With THIS Case?

[flashl]

Man Convicted for Shooting Teenager

A Suffolk County jury on Saturday night found a black man guilty of manslaughter for shooting of an unarmed white teenager outside the man’s house last year, ending a racially charged trial.

The jury began deliberating on Wednesday, and on Friday indicated that it was deadlocked and racked with discord. But late Saturday night, it delivered its verdict: The man, John H. White, 54, was guilty of the second-degree manslaughter charge that prosecutors had sought, and of criminal possession of a weapon. Mr. White was allowed to remain free until sentencing, when he will face a maximum term of 5 to 15 years in prison.

Mr. White was convicted of shooting Daniel Cicciaro, 17, point-blank in the face on Aug. 9, 2006. Daniel and several friends had left a party and showed up Mr. White’s house just after 11 p.m. to challenge his son Aaron, then 19, to a fight, and had used threats, profanities and racial epithets. Mr. White awoke and grabbed a loaded Beretta pistol he kept in the garage of his house in Miller Place, a predominantly white hamlet on Long Island.

DU Race/Equality Forum (flashl)

Where are the Gun Rights, Second Amendment People With THIS Case?

A bunch of white guys show up at your house after 11 p.m., cursing, calling your 20-year-old son the N-word and threatening to kill him. You take your .32 Beretta, go outside and order the mob off your property.

Instead of leaving, one of the white guys slaps the gun in defiance. What do you do?

John H. White, a resident of Riverhead, N.Y., said he knew what he had to do. On Aug. 9, 2006, White found himself and his son Aaron faced with precisely the scenario described above. Daniel Cicciaro, 17 years old, was the white kid who slapped the gun in White’s hand. White shot Cicciaro in the face, fatally wounding him.

Three days before Christmas, a jury of 11 whites and one black in Suffolk County, N.Y., found White guilty of second-degree manslaughter.

You read right. They come onto his property; threaten his child. Don't leave after KNOWING that there is a gun. One of them gets killed, and JOHN WHITE is the one who was found guilty?

...

The man in Texas kills 2 who weren't even breaking into HIS house, but his NEIGHBOR'S house...not charged.

This Black man is on HIS property, protecting HIS child, from a White mob spewing racial epithets at him....and he's been found GUILTY?

WHAT THE #*$&?

Where the hell is the National Rifle Association?
Where the hell are all those Second Amendment fanatics?
Where the hell are all those Property Rights fanatics?

Mirror On America - Read Full Text

2nd juror says she felt pressured in racially-charged shooting case

A second juror who convicted a black man of shooting a white teenager in a racially charged encounter now says she felt pressured by fellow jurors to change her vote to guilty.

Juror Donna Marshak told the New York Post she was so distraught when the verdict was read that she turned her face away so she did not have to look at John White as he was convicted of manslaughter in the Aug. 9, 2006, shooting.

LBN (Judi Lynn)

[The Traveler]

1. Is this about gun rights or is it about

the way that race influences the product of the judicial system? Do white people get a pass for the same actions that send black people do jail? Do bears shit in the woods?

[alarimer]

4. Yes a white person would never have been charged at all

"Castle Doctrine" I think it's called now. But it sounds like a clear case of self-defense. I mean, a white guy in Houston gets to kill two people at his NEIGHBOR'S house and isn't charged (at least as far as I have heard). The issue is not really the Second Amendment here. We all have a clear right to defend ourselves and our property. And most of us would not get charged for doing so. I think the main issue here is that we clearly have two judicial systems, one for white people and one for everyone else.

[TomInTib]

2. Different states, different laws.

But I cannot understand how in the world that jury convicted that father, I don't care what the laws were.

What a shame.

He was railroaded by the Judge's bs schedule.

[Didereaux]

9. ABSOLUTELY CORRECT! different states, San Fran probably would have went for the death penalty...

that last was to flush out the knee-jerkers who never bother to read beyond half the subject line. I KNOW CALIF DOESN'T HAVE AN ACTIVE DEATH PENALTY!( I think the moratorium is still in effect, nullifying the death penalaty)

[ThomWV]

3. What do you see as a gun rights question here?

[OzarkDem]

5. Good point

Will the second amendment folks be outraged at this man's prosecution when he used a gun to protect his home and family?

[Flatulo]

6. This is an outrage. If the facts are indeed as reported, it seems

to me to be a clear case of self-defense. However, different states have very different guidelines on the use of deadly force.

In Massachusetts, the property owner would have been charged regardless of race. The laws here clearly state that deadly force may not be used if there is opportunity to retreat and call the police.

My personal opinon is that the man should not have been charged.

[flashl]

7. There was an army of Horn supporters here

In this case ...

Mr. Cicciaro and associates

-- trespassed on Mr. White’s property
-- threaten death and bodily harm, they threaten to kill his son and rape his wife

And,

-- although the jury declared itself hopelessly deadlocked, the trial judge refused to let the jury go home
-- the jury was literally held hostage until it convicted Mr. White of manslaughter in the second degree

---

Where are the Horn supporters now?

[ileus]

8. Sounds to me like Mr. White did the right thing. If I was on the Jury...

As a jury member it’s your right to judge the defendant and the law as it applies to the individual situation.


Where the hell is the National Rifle Association?
Where the hell are all those Second Amendment fanatics?
Where the hell are all those Property Rights fanatics?


all of these are very good questions...I'm sadly disappointed in the NRA on this one also.

[justanaveragedude]

14. Right thing, really?

A bunch of kids show up to your house, while you are SAFELY LOCKED INSIDE, they are yelling and screaming, granted some pretty crappy stuff, but only screaming none the less. So what is the reasonable thing to do? Call the cops? NO!! why do that? You are going to go outside and start waving a gun in some kid's face. Come on, who is the adult here? Let's not pretend it was a bunch of adults in white sheets burning a cross on the man's front lawn. It was a group of drunk high school kids. This man is an idiot. Would he have been treated differently if he were white and the dead kid black? Maybe, but I bet you a year's pay that if a white guy and done exactly what he did and ended up shooting some black kid, everyone here would be on board about what a racist pig the white guy is for assuming that a group of black kids must not want to do anything less than kill him, which exactly what this guy assumed about these kids since they were white.

There was no need for this kid to die.

[avenger64]

10. Right here.

This is an outrageous verdict. Those kids came storming onto this guy's property making threats, totally over the line. There's no way this guy should get time for this. It's a race-based verdict, and a disgrace.

PS: I'm a White Southern Gun Owner.

[sandnsea]

13. It's race based all right, so is the lack of outrage n/t

[sandnsea]

11. White didn't call the police

You cannot just go shooting people. Unless you live in a state that very specifically has changed the law the way they have in Florida, you have to seriously have your life threatened before you can shoot people. Seriously. This guy was wrong. The guy in Texas was wrong.

The double standard, however, is so blatantly obviously.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

12. This is about choices and actions.

To be honest you would have to be on the jury to have a valid opinion on this case. Why didn't he stay inside and phone the police ? Why get into someone's face ? This is about bad actions. We have to many guns, but thats just my opinion.

[Edweird]

15. Ok, I'll bite. Here's where he went wrong...

1) It is against the law to possess a firearm in NY without a permit. He was charged with criminal possession, so he clearly did not have one.

2) You cannot shoot someone for challenging you to a fight or calling you names (no matter how disgusting) and expect to get away with it. Not even here in Florida, despite what some may think.

3) The manner in which he used the firearm, by showing it and threatening others with it, escalated the situation. He is responsible for that. Had the situation required the use of deadly force *before* he displayed the weapon, he would have been justified. That does not appear to be the case.

A firearm is not a "flyswatter". It does not have magical powers that repels "bad guys". It is a weapon. It is a tool. It should only be used on another human being when there is no other alternative. What happened in this situation is EXACTLY why you do not display a weapon you do not fully intend to use, and then only immediately before using it. Threatening someone with a gun is a crime. "Warning shots" are a no-no as well.

I'm not an attorney, I wasn't there, YMMV.