The Atlanta homeowner accused of shooting two teen porch pirates is now in jail

Whether he has a right to protect his property actually comes down to law. In many locales it is not legal to use lethal force to protect property.

#Freethatman {and give him some shooting lessons}

Shot in the foot and shot in the arm? Cmon brah.

Georgia has a pretty strong castle law but it might be contingent on attempted forced entry. I thought it also covered protection of property but I'm not sure on that

quote:

---

In many locales it is not legal to use lethal force to protect property.

---

He should have dragged the car through the front door.

quote:

---

Jones reported that Atlanta police say the shooting happened Thursday afternoon around 3:30 p.m. at the Villages of Cascade Townhomes, on Celeste Lane. Police say Bradford shot a 15-year-old boy in the foot and shot a second teen in the arm, and both were taken to Grady Hospital and expected to survive, according to Jones’ report.

---

Both boys took non-mortal wounds. Hopefully, they learned a fricking lesson.

quote:

---

From there, Noir framed the incident as part of a wider public mood, saying criminals are “going around stealing packages like it’s a part-time job,” while law-abiding people are told to “just accept it.”

Noir emphasized that, in his view, this wasn’t a misunderstanding. He said it was theft, and he highlighted what he saw as the most provocative outcome: “somehow, the only person in handcuffs is the homeowner.”

---

quote:

---

Noir said online commentary often frames this kind of event as a “FAFO” situation, but he stressed that he did not mean “shoot first.” He said he meant “actions have consequences,” and he argued that deterrence disappears when people can steal, laugh, post it online, and walk away with little fear of being caught.

Here’s the part that’s hard to ignore, even if you don’t like Noir’s framing: when theft feels routine and enforcement feels distant, frustration doesn’t stay polite forever.

---

quote:

---

Noir also made a point about how legal responsibility is often placed heavily on the law-abiding, while criminals are treated like “unpredictable weather.”

He said gun owners are repeatedly told they must know the statutes, consider retreat, and avoid certain actions, while offenders understand the homeowner has “everything to lose” and may believe they will face “little to nothing.”

---

quote:

---

Noir’s commentary argues the Atlanta case is the predictable result of a system that, in his view, normalizes theft and then punishes the person who finally pushes back.

Tom Jones’ reporting shows a neighborhood looking at the same facts and worrying that an argument over property could have ended in dead teenagers, with Bradford’s freedom now on the line.

Scott Minshall’s Alabama report adds a third angle: lawmakers trying to get ahead of the problem by giving police and prosecutors more leverage, especially when stolen packages can also mean stolen identities.

The fact that these stories are airing in multiple states in the same week says something on its own, because porch theft is no longer a rare oddity – it’s a routine crime that’s shaping how people think about safety at home.

And when a routine crime keeps piling up, the worst outcomes tend to come from the same place: the moment when someone decides the normal rules don’t apply anymore.

Whether you agree more with Noir’s anger or with Jones’ neighbors urging restraint, the underlying problem is the same, and it is not going away just because people are tired of talking about it.

---

That's about the most even-handed take I can imagine. I definitely land on the homeowner's side, but I respect a journalist that does more than just give lip-service to gathering all sides of a topic and then doesn't fall on any of them.

quote:

---

Shot in the foot and shot in the arm? Cmon brah.

---

Homeowner should say he winged them on purpose.

quote:

---

What does the law say? That's the only question that needs to be answered.

It's not about well he should be able to do this or that. That's the debate before the law is written.

---

Well the law saw it's OK to use lethal force if you are in reasonable fear of your life.

Does this not qualify?

Someone is trespassing on your property in broad daylight, they are entering your premises by coming onto your porch.

They are stealing from you. Do you know their intent? Do you know their intent once they are confronted committing a felony on your property? Do you know if they have a weapon or not?

The answer to all of those is NO, which means that it is reasonable to assume that they are their to harm you.

What if it's your wife home alone and this happens? Would you tell your wife not to shoot these people if they entered your domicile (your front porch?)

Death is a possible consequence to any theft. Our justice system should reflect that.

Yea he should have just said he feared for his life. It should be reasonable to assume they are armed being in third world Atlanta

quote:

---

Whether he has a right to protect his property actually comes down to law. In many locales it is not legal to use lethal force to protect property.

---

Never bring Reality into a TDPT discussion.