Car Owner Shoots Dead Carjacker In Qc

[Mr Lee]

I bet that guy will never car jack another car! Oh that's right he can't because he is dead. While I do not wish anyone harm, people have to learn to stop forcibly taking what is not theirs. MANILA - A suspected carjacker was shot and killed by an armed car owner in La Loma district, Quezon City on Monday night.Chief Inspector Richard Fiesta of the Quezon City Police District Station 1 identified the slain suspect as Redentor Fajardo, a resident of Barangay Subic, Baliuag in Bulacan province.Fiesta said Fajardo and three other armed carjackers forcibly took a Nissan Ford Explorer from its owner on Sta. Catalina Street, La Loma.The car owner, who requested not to be named, said he was about to drive his vehicle into their garage when Fajardo and three other gunmen appeared.He said his wife handed over to him his clutch bag containing his firearm right after their vehicle was forcibly taken. He said he chased the carjackers on board his own vehicle and killed Fajardo in a shootout. Fajardo was still slumped near the Ford's driver's seat when found by policemen. His companions were able to escape.Seized from Fajardo were a cellular phone, .45 caliber pistol, a two-way radio and a fake police identification card.Police said Fajardo's group was also involved in several carjacking incidents in Quezon City. With a report from Doland Castro, ABS-CBN NewsLink to the actual story

[TheMason]

I bet that guy will never car jack another car! Oh that's right he can't because he is dead. While I do not wish anyone harm, people have to learn to stop forcibly taking what is not theirs.

The way I read the story, the guy had his car forcibly stolen. He then got into another of his vehicles, chased down the perpetrator, and shot him dead. He was not protecting himself from being a crime victim. The crime was already over and the car stolen when he shot the carjacker. He was getting revenge, not protecting himself. Should the family of the carjacker now be permitted to come back and kill the car owner because he forcibly took a son/father/husband from them? After all, isn't a human life is worth more than a car?What if someone forcibly elbows me out of the way and takes my place in line at the checkout? Can I blow the c***sucker away? After all, that was MY place in line and I need to defend what's mine. How about if I catch one of the street urchins breaking into my yard and plucking daisies out of my flower box? Can I get my wife's gun and kneecap the little wretch to teach her a lesson about stealing?The law of the gun may seem like a good idea, but I think its just a step closer to barbarity. Edited December 13, 2009 by TheMason

[Mr Lee]

I bet that guy will never car jack another car! Oh that's right he can't because he is dead. While I do not wish anyone harm, people have to learn to stop forcibly taking what is not theirs.

The way I read the story, the guy had his car forcibly stolen. He then got into another of his vehicles, chased down the perpetrator, and shot him dead. He was not protecting himself from being a crime victim. The crime was already over and the car stolen when he shot the carjacker. He was getting revenge, not protecting himself. Should the family of the carjacker now be permitted to come back and kill the car owner because he forcibly took a son/father/husband from them? After all, isn't a human life is worth more than a car?What if someone forcibly elbows me out of the way and takes my place in line at the checkout? Can I blow the c***sucker away? After all, that was MY place in line and I need to defend what's mine. How about if I catch one of the street urchins breaking into my yard and plucking daisies out of my flower box? Can I get my wife's gun and kneecap the little wretch to teach her a lesson about stealing?The law of the gun may seem like a good idea, but I think its just a step closer to barbarity.

One thing that many people never take into account is the many times the owner of property has been killed for refusing to give up their property. I do not think a person should have to die or get shot when another individual forcibly takes their property while using a weapon capable of killing them. My friend a police officer was shot in the head by a criminal who had raped a woman and was hiding in her home when he arrived. The criminal was given life in prison because my friend survived due to the skills of the doctor and the low grade cheap bullets the criminal used to shoot him, but had my friend died then the guy would have been executed for then killing a police officer. Where do we draw the line, why does a person who uses a gun to take something have to kill another person for his life to also be taken. In this case the criminal took a womans innocence and infected her with AIDS.I have another friend in Florida who came home from shopping and was approached by a man with a gun, the guy shot him in the neck because he did not give up his property fast enough, he too luckily survived but could have died. IMO anyone who uses a weapon to take someone else's property, be it the things you described or a car as in the case we are discussing, the use of the weapon should constitute a death sentence and deadly force in response should be not only be allowed but the guy who killed him should be considered a hero for getting another piece of trash off the streets who would no doubt someday kill an innocent person.Now I would agree with you that if the guy stole the car and did not use a gun or other deadly weapon to get it then killing him would have been unfair but why did the owner have to wait until the armed car jacker shot at him or shot him to respond and shoot back. The owner knowing that the carjacker was armed caught up with him and shot him before he was able to shoot the owner. To me that is justice and no police officer had to be killed while stopping that carjacker and while unknowing he had a gun. If a person uses a gun to take property then there is a fine line as to when he would kill if a person resists and I do not think a person should have to wait until that criminal steps over that line. How do we know that this car jacker had not killed before or was not going to kill in the future or would not have killed the owner had he hesitated to give him the car. Anyway what we think does not matter because in the Philippines I am pretty sure he will not be charged for killing that guy while in the states he may have ended up in jail himself if he did not say the magic words that the car jacker pointed his gun at him when he tried to retrieve his car.Added. I do not think it should be about what is taken and I do think it should be all about how it was taken. What if a person robs you and you only have 20 pesos on you so he decides to shoot you but had you had a few thousand then he would have let you live. We can what if all day, but when a person uses a gun or other deadly weapon then they will eventually kill. Edited December 13, 2009 by Mr. Lee

[tom_shor]

I bet that guy will never car jack another car! Oh that's right he can't because he is dead. While I do not wish anyone harm, people have to learn to stop forcibly taking what is not theirs.

The way I read the story, the guy had his car forcibly stolen. He then got into another of his vehicles, chased down the perpetrator, and shot him dead. He was not protecting himself from being a crime victim. The crime was already over and the car stolen when he shot the carjacker. He was getting revenge, not protecting himself. Should the family of the carjacker now be permitted to come back and kill the car owner because he forcibly took a son/father/husband from them? After all, isn't a human life is worth more than a car?What if someone forcibly elbows me out of the way and takes my place in line at the checkout? Can I blow the c***sucker away? After all, that was MY place in line and I need to defend what's mine. How about if I catch one of the street urchins breaking into my yard and plucking daisies out of my flower box? Can I get my wife's gun and kneecap the little wretch to teach her a lesson about stealing?The law of the gun may seem like a good idea, but I think its just a step closer to barbarity.

The barbarians are already at the gates. If nothing is done then far more will end up dead. Sorry not a crumb of sympathy for the criminal from me.

[TheMason]

I bet that guy will never car jack another car! Oh that's right he can't because he is dead. While I do not wish anyone harm, people have to learn to stop forcibly taking what is not theirs.

The way I read the story, the guy had his car forcibly stolen. He then got into another of his vehicles, chased down the perpetrator, and shot him dead. He was not protecting himself from being a crime victim. The crime was already over and the car stolen when he shot the carjacker. He was getting revenge, not protecting himself. Should the family of the carjacker now be permitted to come back and kill the car owner because he forcibly took a son/father/husband from them? After all, isn't a human life is worth more than a car?What if someone forcibly elbows me out of the way and takes my place in line at the checkout? Can I blow the c***sucker away? After all, that was MY place in line and I need to defend what's mine. How about if I catch one of the street urchins breaking into my yard and plucking daisies out of my flower box? Can I get my wife's gun and kneecap the little wretch to teach her a lesson about stealing?The law of the gun may seem like a good idea, but I think its just a step closer to barbarity.

The barbarians are already at the gates. If nothing is done then far more will end up dead. Sorry not a crumb of sympathy for the criminal from me.

I agree the barbarians are at the gates. We simply disagree about who should be classified as a barbarian.

[tom_shor]

I bet that guy will never car jack another car! Oh that's right he can't because he is dead. While I do not wish anyone harm, people have to learn to stop forcibly taking what is not theirs.

The way I read the story, the guy had his car forcibly stolen. He then got into another of his vehicles, chased down the perpetrator, and shot him dead. He was not protecting himself from being a crime victim. The crime was already over and the car stolen when he shot the carjacker. He was getting revenge, not protecting himself. Should the family of the carjacker now be permitted to come back and kill the car owner because he forcibly took a son/father/husband from them? After all, isn't a human life is worth more than a car?What if someone forcibly elbows me out of the way and takes my place in line at the checkout? Can I blow the c***sucker away? After all, that was MY place in line and I need to defend what's mine. How about if I catch one of the street urchins breaking into my yard and plucking daisies out of my flower box? Can I get my wife's gun and kneecap the little wretch to teach her a lesson about stealing?The law of the gun may seem like a good idea, but I think its just a step closer to barbarity.

The barbarians are already at the gates. If nothing is done then far more will end up dead. Sorry not a crumb of sympathy for the criminal from me.

I agree the barbarians are at the gates. We simply disagree about who should be classified as a barbarian.

Near the top of the list should be those who would endanger your life by robbing you of your possessions at gunpoint. Perhaps a bit extreme that he chased the guy down but still no sympathy for a criminal.

[TheMason]

Near the top of the list should be those who would endanger your life by robbing you of your possessions at gunpoint. Perhaps a bit extreme that he chased the guy down but still no sympathy for a criminal.

I agree 100% with who should be at the top of the list. Second on the list should be anyone who decides to become judge, jury, and executioner on their own initiative. Civilized societies have the rule of law and follow it to the best of their ability. When individuals resort to vigilante justice and extrajudicial killings to handle crime that is the antithesis of civilization, or barbarity.Virtually all the problems in the Philippines boil down to lack of respect for the law and rules of society. I don't think we should be cheerleading for more of the same when it comes to dealing with crime.

[Guardian]

Near the top of the list should be those who would endanger your life by robbing you of your possessions at gunpoint. Perhaps a bit extreme that he chased the guy down but still no sympathy for a criminal.

I agree 100% with who should be at the top of the list. Second on the list should be anyone who decides to become judge, jury, and executioner on their own initiative. Civilized societies have the rule of law and follow it to the best of their ability. When individuals resort to vigilante justice and extrajudicial killings to handle crime that is the antithesis of civilization, or barbarity.Virtually all the problems in the Philippines boil down to lack of respect for the law and rules of society. I don't think we should be cheerleading for more of the same when it comes to dealing with crime.

I assure you that you will change your mind quickly if you or a loved one ever becomes the victim of a violent crime. I know many people who felt like you do and one ladies daughter was gang raped in their own home and she could do nothing about it, now she carries a gun and says she hopes to see the guys who did it in the street. Her daughter is now a vegetable who will not leave her home and locks the house down and lives in total fear. Crimes that strike close to home seems to have a way of changing peoples minds.

[tom_shor]

Near the top of the list should be those who would endanger your life by robbing you of your possessions at gunpoint. Perhaps a bit extreme that he chased the guy down but still no sympathy for a criminal.

I agree 100% with who should be at the top of the list. Second on the list should be anyone who decides to become judge, jury, and executioner on their own initiative. Civilized societies have the rule of law and follow it to the best of their ability. When individuals resort to vigilante justice and extrajudicial killings to handle crime that is the antithesis of civilization, or barbarity.Virtually all the problems in the Philippines boil down to lack of respect for the law and rules of society. I don't think we should be cheerleading for more of the same when it comes to dealing with crime.

When people resort to vigilante justice it is almost always because the rule of law is not functioning properly in the first place so people feel the need to take action themselves. This guy technically isn't a vigilante he shot the guy who robbed him it was just a little after the fact. I don't encourage people to resort to violence against criminals I just don't feel too bad about it when they do. As far as whether capital punishment works to deter crime one thing for sure THAT guy won't rob someone at gunpoint again.

[TheMason]

I assure you that you will change your mind quickly if you or a loved one ever becomes the victim of a violent crime. I know many people who felt like you do and one ladies daughter was gang raped in their own home and she could do nothing about it, now she carries a gun and says she hopes to see the guys who did it in the street. Her daughter is now a vegetable who will not leave her home and locks the house down and lives in total fear. Crimes that strike close to home seems to have a way of changing peoples minds.

You probably didn't intend your post as an insult, but it is insulting none the less. My morals, ethics, and principles are not something I abandon or compromise because terrible things happen to me or my family. When life goes wrong and bad things happen to good people, I rely on my faith to carry me through those times. If a family member or myself were victimized as you describe, I would pray for the strength and courage to face the challenge in a Godly manner that would make Him proud of me. I have faith that if man's justice is not effective, Divine justice will be. Becoming a killer myself would be the ultimate failure and a repudiation of everything I believe in and have stood for my entire life.