Kevin Monahan, 65, shot 20-year-old Kaylin Gillis after a car she was riding in with friends made a wrong turn on his property
A man was convicted of second-degree murder Tuesday for fatally shooting a young woman when the SUV she was riding in mistakenly drove up his rural driveway in upstate New York.
A jury found Kevin Monahan, 66, guilty of second-degree murder for shooting 20-year-old Kaylin Gillis on a Saturday night last April after she and her friends pulled into his long, curving driveway near the Vermont border while they were trying to find another house.
The group’s caravan of two cars and a motorcycle began leaving once they realized their mistake. Authorities said Monahan came out to his porch and fired twice from his shotgun, with the second shot hitting Gillis in the neck as she sat in the front passenger seat of an SUV driven by her boyfriend.
Good. What kind of a fucking psychopath sees a car of lost young people and decides, instead of offering directions or at worst leaving them the fuck alone, that they deserve assault with a deadly weapon?
Goddamn deranged.
A Trump voter.
Well that’s one less that can’t vote for him.
Which itself is kinda fucked up but that’s a separate issue.
Still don’t get how that doesn’t fall under taxation without representation
“No taxation without representation” is just a catchy slogan, not a legal principle. It has the same legal standing as “if the glove don’t fit you must acquit.”
taxation without representation
That’s a Declaration of Independence item, not US Constitution.
It was in reference to Britain passing the Stamp Act (and other things) charging fees on people living in what is today the United States to prop up the treasury of Britain.
What usually gets left out of the story is that the taxes were imposed in part to pay for the French and Indian War, which the colonists started. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The idea being that, felons are morally reprehensible people, and therefore cannot be trusted to vote in a “civic” manner.
The reality is corporations- and the rich people that control them- are by far the more morally bankrupt group.
not that I agree with that, per se. (though I would say it’s true of people like Bill Hwang of Archegos Capital, or Elizebeth Holmes of Theranos… Or the Koch brothers… or Trump. but the average criminal? far from it.)
100%. Disenfranchisement is absolutely encouragement to selectively legislate and enforce. All these rural areas housing federal prisons would positively loose their shit if felons could vote. Because to them that completely defeats the point of the federal prisons.
I’m sure somehow his ballot will be counted.
Trump wasn’t going to win New York anyways.
Years of “fear the other, they’re coming for you” Fox News.
An old, sweet lady was once talking to my wife about the blackout curtains in our bedroom. She says she bought some like it so “antifa couldn’t see inside” her house.
It makes me so angry that Fox News convinced her to be scared of a boogyman.
I’ve tried saying “don’t fall for those conspiracy theories”. Don’t know if it made him rethink but he sure didn’t spout any more.
I thought the end was going to be about how you should replace the blackouts with regular ones (or none at all) because how else would others be able to tell if you behave like a dignified person
Would it make you feel better to know that if it wasn’t that it would be something else?
I have been to that general area. No one choosing to live there is sane.
I think we need to be mindful that we can’t point at one media organization or “political aisle” for this type of rhetoric. @[email protected] above encapsulates it beautifully.
Some areas simply have no-good groups of people like neonazis that will go into houses and try to take them over
The fear mongering isn’t subject to particular ideologies and anyone is susceptible. These tactics are being used by nearly(edit) everyone in the political realm.
edit: just gotta say I love the downvotes with no replies. There is a middle-ground nuanced objectivity where neither “both parties are the same” or “my political side is holier than thou” apply. Go touch some grass or learn how to have an actual conversation with those you disagree with online.
The disguised “both sides” BS.
From a tankie no less.
? I stated that “both parties are the same” doesn’t apply, did I need to do the “bOTh PaRtiEs aRe ThE SaME!” for the emotional to be able to read it right?
Nah.
Someone who has been conditioned by decades of fear propaganda, and taught that his guns are the only thing standing between him and the government/immigrants/criminals/whatever the fear of the day is
Oh it’s worse than that, they were already leaving when he came out and shot them.
oh and this bullshit excuse:
He said he tripped over nails sticking up from the deck, lost his balance and the shotgun struck the deck. That, he said, accidentally caused his gun to fire at the Ford Explorer carrying Gillis.
The first shot was an accident. Obviously the second shot was to prove to them that the first one was an accident cuz if he were trying to shoot them, then he’d just shoot them. He probably tried shouting those words, but realized they were too far so he just had to show them what a great shot he was when he was trying by actually shooting one of them.
Totally innocent miscommunication.
The only thing about this I can somewhat understand is that it wasnt one car, it was two cars and a motorcycle. I would probably be a bit scared if such a big group of people suddenly show up to my rural house.
But 1. shooting them, and 2. while they were already driving away, is what makes this so deranged.
WTF is going on in your life that cars coming up your driveway would scare you? Really?!
You think that some death squad has your number and they sent the whole gang?
Some areas simply have no-good groups of people like neonazis that will go into houses and try to take them over
Some areas?
What areas?
The good questions are always buried in the thread.
I would also like to know what areas. I’ve lived in a lot of places, and never once heard of neonazis just up and taking someone’s home, certainly not anywhere like the US. Internet searches turn up nothing. Cite your sources, please.
Source? Or is this like the boogie man?
Especially when they turn around and start leaving.
I would probably be a bit scared if such a big group of people suddenly show up to my rural house.
And won’t go out even with a gun if you’re so scared, right?
Exactly
This is the nature of widespread gun ownership. Owning a gun turns every argument, every perceived wrong, every bruised ego into a potentially deadly situation. Buying a gun, “for protection,” is the dumbest fucking statement I’ve ever heard. Increasing the number of guns laying around ALWAYS creates a more dangerous environment.
How are you going to protect yourself from threats?
Can you fight?
I’m going to start by determining whether or not said “threats” are actually threats to begin with.
Because most of them aren’t. Most gun nuts (disclaimer: I could probably be defined by some standards as a gun nut myself) have this nutty pathological notion that every single person, shadow, and tiny thing that goes bump in the night is personally out to get them. Given the overwhelming majority of non-gun-nut people who do not, in fact, get got on a daily basis despite not even having a gun to defend themselves we can actually conclude that this is just unfounded paranoia.
Just saying.
Yikes, it’s crazy the mental gymnastics you’re willing to go through to avoid admitting you can’t defend yourself.
or even just yelling at kids to get off his driveway
I’m an instacart driver and at least a few times a week I get the wrong driveway but then figure it out very quickly. This shit goes through my mind every single time.
That’s just the country I live in. I pulled into the wrong driveway and I instantly wonder idly if this is going to lead to my fucking death.
Okay, sure, but have you ever even considered uparmoring your car and mounting an automatic weapon to it? It’s like people never even played Car Wars. With some armor and a SAW they could have practiced their rights, and with a .50 they probably could have cut his house in half.
I mean, gas costs will go up with the additional weight and you need additional crew members to serve the weapons, but that’s the price of freedom.
Alternatively, you could try delivering the groceries by trebuchet from the back of a flatbed truck, but the automatic weapon thing is less likely to result in them cancelling the tip.
Bro, I hate to go all American but if i could drive some twisted metal shit I would in a fucking hearbeat. And I probably wouldn’t kill that many people. Most would deserve it. Pinky promise.
Alternatively, you could try delivering the groceries by trebuchet from the back of a flatbed truck
Ok now I know you’re being facetious, because a ballista would do that job so much better.
Keep summer safe
Steve Jackson games FTW. That mofo even predicted 9/11.
ok but where? I don’t think about this where I used to live in the US, but last summer we were in rural north carolina and I did a three point turn off someones driveway and I was not relaxed
Missouri and Kansas. I live near the boarder and bounce between states all day.
It’s going to be an issue anywhere rural.
The point is that it’s scary to be a delivery driver. It’s more dangerous than being a cop.
This could be a commercial for the cyber truck, the only bulletproof instacart approved delivery vehicle.
I wrote a post on Nextdoor.com about this sort of situation. “Use of force” laws in my state, with a few easy-to-digest links and quotes.
Post basically said, “Your rights may not be what you think they are, and if you fuck up, you may find yourself in a concrete and steel box for life.”
Nothing combative, controversial, derogatory, political or non-factual. Shot down within 30-minutes for being “insulting”. Yeah. LOL, I even quoted Masad Ayoob, a world-class expert on the subject, and quite conservative if you read between the lines. Not good enough around here.
I’m a LiberalGunNut™ who studies these things. I have guns at the ready, in my home, and sometimes on my person. It behooves me to know the law.
Part of the reason I wrote that post:
A man had been seen on another man’s lot fucking about, trying to get in an empty trailer. A lot next door, not the shooter’s domicile.
Next night, the shooter setup a chair just inside the tree line and hunted. When the other man came back, he popped 5-rounds of 5.56 at him (AR-15). Hit him a time or two, guy lived.
Next day the cops question the shooter. He lies, gets his story mixed up, gets arrested for 2nd-degree attempted murder. Well, fucking obviously!
About 40% of the Nextdoor.com comments defended the shooter. To sum: The homeowner saw a man trying to break into an empty trailer, on the homeowner’s land, hid himself the next evening and decided to execute this man for trespass when he came back. Think on that. Death for breaking into an empty trailer.
I’ll tell you what my conceal-carry instructor told us, a very conservative gun nut. “If you pull your weapon, you’re shooting to kill. Whatever situation you’re trying to stop, be aware, think, is it worth 20-years, maybe life, behind bars? Because that may well be the outcome, not matter how justified you think you are in the moment.”
Honestly I think my biggest frustration with guns in America is the culture around them. When I was a kid learning about guns in scouts you didn’t get to touch one till you’d learned what felt like 12 different times what the rules are and how to be a responsible gun owner and it feels like so many people really needed that handling.
Sorry to hear you live in an area where people’s perspective on guns is that they’re entitled to attempting murder with a deadly weapon if anyone interacts with them in a way they don’t like. That wouldn’t exactly make me very comfortable with the folks I live around
I’ve often said, America doesn’t have a gun problem, America has a culture problem.
I’m 53 for reference. When I was a kid there were guns everywhere, and they were hilariously easier to get. FFS, one of my vintage shotguns was rebranded by Mossberg to be sold in Western Auto Stores. No one would bat at eye at some dude in his pickup with a rack full of long guns in the rear window.
And we didn’t have these problems.
That’s all in the past, I’m afraid.
Dude I just turned 25. If that’s true that makes me so sad… :(
I am certain that there is still firearms training in the Boy Scouts. Sadly, your average leader is probably also a MAGAT so I can’t imagine that they are teaching safety like they used to.
seems like some folks just get really excited about guns and they want a situation to use them in so bad
Nah couldn’t be that simple.
If the problem for you is that you could go to jail, rather than that someone else dies - I don’t know what to tell you.
deleted by creator
Those murderers obviously have 0 empathy for any humans beside themselves so the next best thing to convince them is to say how bad it would go for them
You don’t seem to understand the second-most important reason we have prisons: to deter people from committing crimes in the first place due to their fear of the consequences.
Deliberately misunderstanding my post? Point being, even in obvious self-defense, it can be a tricky thing. But yeah, there are very certain circumstances where I would take a life. Namely: Home invasion (while someone is home) and attacking myself or my family. I would defend a stranger, but it would have to be a clear case of “stop this or that person dies”.
In no case does property damage of theft justify a shooting.
You’re talking about people without empathy for others and who question what stops an atheist from raping and murdering if not the fear of hell.
As another Liberal gunowner with a carry permit, what nearly everyone with a defensive firearm seldom understands, is even IF it’s a “righteous shoot”, it’s going to cost well north of a $100,000 dollars to prove it in court. If nothing else, it would be financial ruin for the overwhelming majority of those people who are most vocal about self-defense that want to mentally play Rambo.
Question from someone outside the US who’s genuinely curious about why law-abiding citizens feel the need to carry guns to begin with:
If you’re aware of this, how often are you carrying a gun in the first place? When/Why?
Following what you say, there’s obviously the scenario where you have to defend your life (not your property).
On the other hand, as I see it, the victim in the article would not have benefited from a gun in the car and the odds of a shell-shocked BF turning the whole thing into an actual shootout would’ve been >0.
I’m not trying to argue crime statistics or morals here, I’m genuinely interested in a gun owner’s perspective.
I carry, (when I do carry), because I live in a very rural area of my state where cell service is poor to non-extant in most areas and law enforcement can be an hour away even IF you can call or text. And in order to buy and carry a handgun outside of a legal hunting season, you need a carry permit.
So the reason I have a carry permit is to carry outside of a hunting season, (when it is legal to carry for any hunter), because I spend a good amount of time being out and about in 10,000s of thousands of acres of forest land. And it isn’t the idealistic vision of forest you might have. There be wild critters out there that will eat you if hungry enough or attack you if you bump into them and they feel threatened. The wolves and bears and even bumping into Bambi can go south quickly if you are very unlucky, but I don’t mind any of those critters too much. Because they are mostly afraid of humans and will try very hard to avoid them if at all possible. And that might not always be possible. But what is becoming more of an issue for me is the number of cougar sightings, (and not just the ones at the local bar), and despite our local fish and game department’s years long flat statement that there are no cougars here, there is now too much photographic evidence and reports otherwise. And I personally have bumped into one of them 3 times in the last 4 years in the forest and my wife nearly hit one with her car going to work.
The only time I will have my pistol on me in town is if I’m passing through on my way to go foraging in the forest or during a hunting season. If I’m just going to town to shop or do other business, I have no need of it.
And to answer your next question - No, the sight of an openly carried handgun doesn’t bother anyone here. The knowledge of guns, and more importantly gun safety, are a part of everyday life. Children often start deer hunting and bird hunting, (under direct adult supervision), at age 11 or 12 and this includes the girls too. So firearms are viewed as tools and NOT weapons of destruction for killing other people. And oddly enough, we just don’t shoot each other out here despite there being at least one firearm in virtually every household and often multiples. Perhaps “city people” are just mentally incapable of being trusted them. Who knows…
Thanks, that’s helpful.
I made a post, as a lawyer, about some of the common law rules for self defense, five months ago, and I still get replies from people who don’t like the truth:
Deadly force is never authorized to protect property.
An intruder standing in your living room with no weapon or other outward sign of aggression is not a deadly threat and you will be charged with murder if you kill him.
People cannot handle this.
I had quoted this in my post:
“In the anti-gun Spokane newspaper, internet comments indicated that many people had the clueless idea that Gerlach had shot the man – in the back – to stop the thief from stealing his car. One idiot wrote in defense of doing such, “That ‘inert property’ as you call it represents a significant part of a man’s life. Stealing it is the same as stealing a part of his life. Part of my life is far more important than all of a thief’s life.”
Analyze that statement. The world revolves around this speaker so much that a bit of his life spent earning an expensive object is worth “all of (another man’s) life.” Never forget that, in this country, human life is seen by the courts as having a higher value than what those courts call “mere property,” even if you’re shooting the most incorrigible lifelong thief to keep him from stealing the Hope Diamond. A principle of our law is also that the evil man has the same rights as a good man. Here we have yet another case of a person dangerously confusing “how he thinks things ought to be” with “how things actually are.”
As a rule of thumb, American law does not justify the use of deadly force to protect what the courts have called “mere property.” In the rare jurisdiction that does appear to allow this, ask yourself how the following words would resonate with a jury when uttered by plaintiff’s counsel in closing argument: “Ladies and gentlemen, the defendant has admitted that he killed the deceased over property. How much difference is there in your hearts between the man who kills another to steal that man’s property, and one who kills another to maintain possession of his own? Either way, he ended a human life for mere property!”
― Massad Ayoob, Deadly Force - Understanding Your Right To Self Defense"
Yeah, that about sums it up. Think about the optics in front of a jury, your family, and probably your local community newspaper when you have to take the stand and tell the prosecutor and the rest of the court, “yes, I shot that man 7 times in the back, but he was running off with my laptop.”
But muh things!
People who feel out of control of themselves cling to control over their things. Tale as old as time
Deadly force is never authorized to protect property.
Never say never. In Texas there are some specific instances where it is, but they are narrow enough that most people probably can’t cite them offhand and they’re certainly narrower conditions than what those people think.
Texas penal code 9.42:
https://txpenalcode.com/sec-9-42/
Make what you will of “criminal mischief in the nighttime.”
Wow. Seems impossibly narrow and vague.
deleted by creator
Can I see that post please?
When people have the wrong idea in their head it’s so exhausting to change their mind. You need to treat them like delicate children. Like I believe you should debate respectfully and not be condescending, but most people are so sensitive you need to bend over backwards to bring up facts in a ridiculously delicate way. Meanwhile they’ll bring up absolute bullshit in the most rude and condescending way possible, often just leaving arguments out completely and just cussing you out. Discourse is completely broken.
And this is the type of people that our current education system spits out. Complete inability to be self-critical. Complete inability to think critically about anything.
I can’t believe in 2023 we are still in the position of having the only convenient capable way of incapacitating someone from a distance being to destroy their body.
I’m not trying to sound super anti-gun, it just seems like it’s not the right tool for the job most of the time, and it sucks that that is the choice we have to make.
Its 2024 now.
GODDAMMIT
It is.
I was really hoping we’d have the phasers from star trek by now, and we could just use the ‘stun’ setting for defense. Though, I’m sure conservative gun nuts would make a little club dedicated to only using the ‘kill’ setting on their phasers, because it’s their God given right to murder someone over inanimate objects.
You can get a CO2 stun gun that is very unlikely to kill anyone. Not fun getting hit with one either. It is an imperfect solution.
If only those kids had had enough of their own guns, this tragedy could have been avoided. Somehow. I guess. That’s how it works, right? More guns?
Yeah, everyone knows you should just shoot up the front door every time you go to visit someone, just in case you went to the wrong house
That’s what cops do, and they’re never wrong!
Don’t forget to shoot the dog too!
Shots to fire:
✅ Home owner ✅ Dog ✅ Kid with toy in hand
Cops would be proud.
Since the late 1800s, 494 MILLION firearms have been produced and sold in the US. That’s way more than one per person, including babies and toddlers.
when’s it gonna be enough I wonder?
Maybe it really isn’t about more guns, just more profits for the arms dealers? Maybe we could skip the middle-men and dead children murdered in their schools if we just pay off the arms dealers?
So guy claims he felt threatened, didn’t call cops, grabbed gun instead and expects people aren’t just going to assume he’s being a gun nut when he acts exactly like one?
Felt threatened in the time it took them to turn around. Jesus tapdancing christ on a cracker what a fucking snowflake with a hair trigger.
How does somebody like this make it through the day without meds?!?
By stroking his guns, probably.
He claimed the gun just went off when he tripped and fell. Fortunately the jury didn’t buy his defense.
I could not believe that when I read it.
Pathetic, not even capable of accepting responsibility for his own actions.
I would imagine he will not be apologizing to the family either.
I feel like castle laws would have been a better defense than that shit 😂
His hand doesnt fit the gun, if it dont fit, you must aqquit!
lol wtf
I hope he rots the rest of his life away behind bars.
Such a miserable, worthless excuse for a human being to fucking execute someone for having the wrong directions.
deleted by creator
It’s gotten to the point where firearm related murders in the US is practically natural causes, it happens so often… Whoever thought it would be a good idea to flood the country with guns is an absolute moron.
He’s not a moron. He’s a very rich psychopath.
There are a lot of those involved in US government.
It is natural causes. This is the natural and probable result of giving fragile human beings access to killing machine.
This is in no way accidental. The whole gun madness is about keeping people scared. Scared people are easier to control.
Removed by mod
Exactly. My dog just barks at people turning around in the driveway. They turn around; my dog thinks he won.
Your dog is smarter.
But what if they don’t turn around? Your dog needs a gun.
If they don’t turn around, I’d rather have my dog.
I hope you tell your dog he’s ALWAYS a winner!
Your dog obviously needs a gun.
Explain to me why the second amendment doesn’t apply to dogs.
I’ll wait.
Air bud rules.
They have four legs. No arms to bear.
deleted by creator
Look at the picture and read the article. They were already leaving. He shot the back of the vehicle.
This is one of those people who say people aren’t allowed to turn in their driveway. Guy’s nuts.
Per the NBC article, it took them an hour to arrest the guy:
When officers arrived at Monahan’s house to investigate the shooting, he refused to come out, Murphy said. Authorities spoke with him through a 911 dispatcher and in person for about an hour before he was taken into custody, according to the sheriff.
How wild is that
That sounds like good police work. They knew where the person was, went to the area, and used their words to resolve the situation. If only all cops could show this kind of restraint and patience when apprehending a suspect…
He wasn’t an unarmed black person so they couldn’t shoot him.
While police shooting black people is a problem, police not shooting white people is a lot less problematic.
I know what you’re trying to say, but man if it doesn’t sound wrong!
Understandable. This one might actually shoot back.
Dude is obviously white.
deleted by creator
Just like Waco… oh wait.
America. Yay.
Execute the motherfucker to show these fucks the barrel points both ways. Set an example. Fucking lunatics.
Oh no he won’t be able to vote for tump
Tump 4 pesident!
Wheel of Fotune
Who is radicalizing the elderly? Oh yeah, FOX News and the culture war bullshit
