Higher education pays off!

[ariel]

Johns Hopkins student kills apparent burglar with sword
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Suspect died at scene; he had severed left hand and lacerations to upper body
Students confronted man in their garage, police say
He lunged at students, and one defended himself with samurai sword
updated 12:47 p.m. EDT, Tue September 15, 2009
Next Article in Crime »



(CNN) -- A Johns Hopkins University student killed an apparent burglar with a samurai sword after discovering the man in his garage, police said Tuesday.

Baltimore, Maryland, police received a phone call shortly before 1:30 a.m. Tuesday about a suspicious person, and an off-duty officer arrived at the scene with campus security, city police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said.

When authorities arrived, they heard calls for help and for police, he said. They discovered a suspected burglar with a severed left hand and severe lacerations to his upper body, Guglielmi said.

The suspect died at the scene, he said.

The man had entered a home where several Johns Hopkins students lived, Guglielmi said. Four students, one armed with a samurai sword, had confronted the suspect in the garage.

The man "lunged" at the students, and the student with the sword defended himself, severing the man's left hand and cutting his upper body, Guglielmi said.

Police did not release the name of the suspect, who Guglielmi said had a long criminal history, or that of the student.

Police questioned the three witnesses, Guglielmi said, and released them. It was not immediately clear whether all four students lived at the house, he said.

Authorities are determining whether the student will face criminal charges, Guglielmi said.

Burglars had taken two laptops and a Sony PlayStation from the students' home Monday, Guglielmi said.

The burglary suspect had been released from prison S

[fearn]

Yes, I guess he learned how to sharpen his sword well enough. Messy way to go, though, bleeding out.

[Rick]

Not worth a life; we digress .

[asomotif]

I see nothing of the burglar being armed.

What is "lunged".

Here in the Netherlands I guess the student would be in severe problems facing several years for manslaughter. Which seems right to me.

[Jim McDougall]

How does this news item help in the study of ethnographic arms? It would seem this type of contextual sensationalism is exactly what weapons control factions are looking for, and encouraging more entries with these decidedly unfortunate media items is entirely counterproductive offering nothing to the study of weapons.

As far as the news is concerned, the 'Samurai' sword is now a deadly weapon, and can be used indiscriminately in foul play!

There simply must be better things to discuss on a forum intended for the study of weapons as historical material culture, not forensics evidence in the neverending media bloodbath that feeds on these kinds of events.

Im for changing course and returning to focus on historical weapons, and letting this discussion end.

Jim

[Lew]

[QUOTE=asomotif]I see nothing of the burglar being armed.

What is "lunged".

Could have been grapping at the sword which was a poor choice somehow 4 male 20 yr olds one armed I would have ran away. I agree this is media hype at best.

Rick

If the student had a keris which jump from it's scabbard and chased the burglar than that would have been something to talk about

The burglar was a career criminal who had just been released from prison a fews days before this happened. Someone breaks into my home at 1am I will not ask if he is armed He just picked the wrong home to break into.

Rick We all collect swords,daggers,spears and clubs so if this were to happen to a forum member don't you think it could have been a similar outcome? One of the rare pitfalls of collecting and studying weapons I would think?

[KuKulzA28]

I might have done the same. Perhaps cause I am in the same age group. If I was holding a sword, and the guy knew he would die... and he still lunged... well, he is stupid. He should have expected the worst being a criminal. If I can defend myself, my property, and my hard earned possessions against someone who is a criminal, why shouldn't I? Just because some would consider it brutal does not take away from the statement's validity... cancer, drunk driver, cops, and thugs never cared for my friends' lives - why should I care about a burglar's?

If you had a weapon to defend yourself with, and the burglar lunged at you, would you drop it, and say, I don't wanna kill you, just take whatever? Crazy.

I understand though, why you guys would like discussion on this topic to end, and if the prevailing opinion is that it should be closed, so be it. I just feel that there is a lot of opinion against the sword-wielder - I can understand where he is coming from.

Anyone who's ever been in a similar situation especially at that age, would not want to back down and "bend over" so to speak.

[Jim McDougall]

Let the editorials begin!
Maybe everyone will join in and discuss what 'they would do' and all the hubris and bravado to go with it.
Now what I want to know is, how do we know it was a 'Samurai' sword....what if it was simply a Showa era military sword that was industrially produced? Would a true collector of early Samurai swords and blades grab a tens of thousands of dollar valued katana to hack away at a burgler with ?

In a life threatening situation, anything is a weapon...... and regarded as a 'weapon of opportunity'. Why not discuss all the same kinds of situations where individuals are clobbered with blunt force by hammers, crowbars or stabbed with huge butcher knives.........it would be impossible to talk about shootings, which are no less tragic or dramatic, but after all, thats just..uh, news.

So thats my perspective, why close this discussion? lets have some more chest pounding great break from talking about historical weapons.

[Rick]

[QUOTE=LOUIEBLADES]

Originally Posted by asomotif

Rick We all collect swords,daggers,spears and clubs so if this were to happen to a forum member don't you think it could have been a similar outcome? One of the rare pitfalls of collecting and studying weapons I would think?

Always remember these words:
" I was in fear for my life "

[Rich]

"samurai sword" is the media general term for any style Japanese sword. It might have been a Walmart wall hanger for all we know. Personally I prefer a 357.

Rich

[Lew]

[QUOTE=Jim McDougall]Let the editorials begin!
Maybe everyone will join in and discuss what 'they would do' and all the hubris and bravado to go with it.
Now what I want to know is, how do we know it was a 'Samurai' sword....what if it was simply a Showa era military sword that was industrially produced? Would a true collector of early Samurai swords and blades grab a tens of thousands of dollar valued katana to hack away at a burgler with ?

Jim

It could have been a dha the police would have no clue and call it a samurai sword anyway ]

[Lew]

Officer I was just oiling my 19th century wootz tulwar when I heard a strange noise coming from the garage. The buglar jump high into the air and when he came down on the blade it just sliced him in two just like those silk scarfs

[fearn]

I'm of a couple of minds on this. Part of me just wants to ask for thread to be locked (sorry Ariel), part wants to talk it out.

The big issue here is about self defense. Here's the Maryland Self defense law, according to Wikipedia.

Here are a couple of relevant paragraphs, snipped from said article (and remember, I'm not a lawyer).

Self-Defense (MPJI-Cr 5:07)
Self-defense is a defense, and the defendant must be found not guilty if all of the following three factors are present:

1) The defendant actually believed that <he> <she> was in immediate and imminent danger of bodily harm.
2) The defendant's belief was reasonable.
3) The defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend <himself> <herself> in light of the threatenend or actual harm.
<Deadly-force is that amount of force reasonably calculated to cause death or serious bodily harm. If the defendant is found to have used deadly-force, it must be decided whether the use of deadly-force was reasonable. Deadly-force is reasonable if the defendant actually had a reasonable belief that the aggressor's force was or would be deadly and that the defendant needed a deadly-force response.>

<In addition, before using deadly-force, the defendant is required to make all reasonable effort to retreat. The defendant does not have to retreat if the defendant was in <his> <her> home, retreat was unsafe, the avenue of retreat was unknown to the defendant, the defendant was being robbed, the defendant was lawfully arresting the victim. If the defendant was found to have not used deadly-force, then the defendant had no duty to retreat.>

Defense of Habitation - Deadly Force (MPJI-Cr 5:02)
Defense of one's home is a defense, and the defendant must be found not guilty if all of the following three factors are present:

1) The defendant actually believed that (victim) was committing <was just about to commit> the crime of (crime) in <at> the defendant's home.
2) The defendant's belief was reasonable.
3) The defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend against the conduct of (victim).


It's that "no more force than was reasonably necessary" clause that's keeping the sheriffs busy.

For example: did the student realize that he could have used his sword as a bludgeon? I suspect the law is different depending on whether he was trained in how to use that sword, or whether he was just lashing out, following the examples he'd seen in movies?

Conversely, the student might have tried to simply slash the burglar, and the burglar did the instinctive thing of trying to block the sword with his arm, resulting in a severed wrist and bleed-out.

I think the bottom line for all of us is to make sure that our self-defense activities are well within the laws. As Rick noted, if you don't have "I was afraid for my life" tattoed inside your eyelids, you might want to engrave it on the hilt of the sword by your bed.

Best,

F

[Lew]

Fearn

We will have to all have a questionare ready for the burglar when breaks in please anwser the following are you here only to rob? Rob and rape? Rob rape and murder. Sorry but retreating upstairs into a locked room and hope this guy was not armed and and looking to kill me is silly. There was a case my friend told me about in Illinois where this guy broke into this man home 2am inthe morning his wife and kids were upstairs so he grabbed his handgun and as he was walking down the stairs the buglar was coming up and had a crowbar in his hand so the homeowner shot and killed the guy with the crow bar . The police ended up arresting him because he did not try to retreat.

[fearn]

Hi Louie,

Here's an example. Let's say I have a large, sharp kukri near my bed. An unarmed burglar breaks in. I confront him with the bare blade. He doesn't run.

I

A) hit him hard with the flat or spine of the blade, and if he doesn't get the idea, cut him as hard as I can with the edge on the backswing, or

B) go for an immediate kill.

Depends on the situation. The one I train is A), because the state where I live doesn't let me kill burglars for being in my house, although it lets me use lethal self defense if I'm in fear for my life. That fear is the standard. If you're afraid, you're allowed to act on that fear.

Personally, I'd rather knock burglar-dude down the stairs and let the police make him walk off on two broken ankles. Saves me the angst and the cleanup bills.

That's the problem with this case. In Maryland, case-law supports the student, not statue law, and we don't know the circumstances of the scuffle. If he went after the burglar with his sword, and all the cuts on the burglar are defensive, the student commited manslaughter, not self-defense.

We just don't know what happened, despite (or perhaps because of) all the publicity this has garnered.

I'm not saying retreat, what I'm saying is know what you're allowed to do legally, and make sure your first line of defense follows the law. What you do after that is up to you.

Best,

F

[asomotif]

Here in the Netherlands you are also supposed to retreat if possible.
So even in your own house retreat should be the best option.

Well lets just hope it will not happen.
A large part of my edged weapons is mandau's and personally I don't find them very handy, especially indoors they are not my weapon of choice

Maybe I should get myself a nice Wakizashi

[t_c]

A sad story all around: An unnecessary (and apparently unintentional) death and possibly a ruined future. A diploma from John Hopkins would have served the student a lot better then felon status in the US job market. A teacher of mine once said (and I'm inclined to agree) "There is no such thing as self-defense with a knife" (or sword for that matter). Edged weapons are not tools for restraint or submission. I fear a jury will come to the same conclusion.

If I ever have an unexpected visitor I hope I have the clarity and calm to remember my friend's advice: "offer them a cup of tea." I know, crazy Buddhists, but I think he might be on to something....

[ariel]

As a matter of fact, some of the members of this Forum are, in fact, lawyers. They may explain to all of us salient points of the law (US, of course).
All of us have sharp and pointy things in our houses and many ( I would think most) do not have firearms: I do not.
Thus, if, and when, we are confronted with a similar situation, tulwars, koras and kindjals are the only means we have to defend ourselves and our families. My understanding, in the US, one does not have to retreat from an armed intruder into our house, especially at night.
When can we use deadly force? What are the legal limits we are not allowed to cross? What circumstances allow us to claim legitimate self-defense and prevail?

I ain't no joking, folks.

[M ELEY]

Content deleted...

[fearn]

Hi Ariel,

I'm NOT a lawyer, but I can tell you that the law varies by state. Every reference I've seen notes that, so I assume it's true.

As both Rick and I noted, the key words are "I am in fear for my life." I was only half joking about engraving these words on the hilt of your lethal self-defense implements. It's a good reminder for when you're supposed to use them as they were designed.

Anyway, Wikipedia has various useful links to start from:

Right of Self Defense

Self defense in the US

Castle Doctrine (This is the "man's home is his castle" concept, and deals with when you have a legal duty to retreat and when you can legally stand your ground).

As noted, the laws vary by state, not to mention by country, but this is a place to start looking up what those laws.

Best,

F

[Lew]

[QUOTE=fearn]Hi Louie,

Here's an example. Let's say I have a large, sharp kukri near my bed. An unarmed burglar breaks in. I confront him with the bare blade. He doesn't run.

I

A) hit him hard with the flat or spine of the blade, and if he doesn't get the idea, cut him as hard as I can with the edge on the backswing, or

B) go for an immediate kill.

Depends on the situation. The one I train is A), because the state where I live doesn't let me kill burglars for being in my house, although it lets me use lethal self defense if I'm in fear for my life. That fear is the standard. If you're afraid, you're allowed to act on that fear.

Fearn

If he is in your bedroom there is no where for you to retreat or if you find him in your 13 year old daughters room Btw how would you know if he is unarmed could have a knife or a gun tucked away in his pants I think the police would understand? When that adreneline kicks in at 2am don't think you would be standing there scratching your head thinking what are those Maryland state laws again? a policeman who trained people in the deadly arts once told me better judged by twelve than carried by six. So if you fear for your life and you disable him with a cut its self defense if you keep hacking at him its murder nothing is cut and dry here it all depends on the situation at that instant.

[KuKulzA28]

I don't think that it's a show of hubris and bravado to point out that you would prefer to confront the criminal rather than retreat further into your own home and hope for a merciful crime. If he stole your TV, not THAT bad... but like others have pointed out, what if he's after more than a valuable item or two? The factors and conditions go on and on. The law may want you to hide and wait to be rescued. Protecting you, your loved ones, and your property may demand that you take immediate and decisive action. I too have heard the saying "better judged by twelve than carried by six" and I definitely agree with it.

It's not a "I would do this if", it's more an issue of law and the right to live and live safely. The law is there for you usually... sometimes it isn't. The government is bigger than you... you won that fight but lost that "war" so to speak... I feel sorry for the student, I bet he was just doing what he thought necessary. Perhaps if he was a single father with a little girl or a young woman he might get into less or no trouble. Such is law.

[Andrew]

Off Topic, and I don't feel much like writing a legal treatise about US law here.