15 Y/O Shot In Back After Throwing Rocks At Old Man....Can This Be Justified?

reply to post by theliamo


What do you do to prevent youngins attacking the elderly then if you take away their guns?

How else do kids learn that bad things happen when they act without respect?

reply to post by gps777

Now do you know that he meant to kill.

Do we know whether he tried to shoot him in the butt?

It doesn't matter. Anytime you pull the trigger you have to accept the fact the person may die. A shot at the butt can result in severed nerves that lead to permanent disability. A miss can lead to a punctured kidney or bladder and death. You could actually hit an artery and the person bleed out.

Any bullet hitting a body can cause death. Shooting to wound is not a defense in a shooting death.

Rule number one of gun safety is assume all guns are loaded. Rule number two is don't point at anything you aren't willing to destroy/kill.

Incase people don't get the point of why I mention the first two rules of gun safety, let me explain. It is accepted by all people responsible enough to own guns, that any bullet can kill or destroy what it hits. Warning shots, and "wounding shots," can quickly turn in to killing shots. Bullets can twist and turn inside the body to hit things we never intended. Hey, honestly, when the stress level is running high it is very likely that you will hit body parts you didn't intend on hitting. Especially if the target is moving.

reply to post by HunkaHunka

Democracy is two sheep and a wolf discussing whats for dinner... liberty is a well armed sheep.

Please tell me that you are smart enough to understand that quote has nothing to do with this situation. That is a quote about the tyrany of government when the citizen is disarmed. They were not deciding on public policy, or voting for leaders. Democracy has about as much to do with this situation as a ham sandwhich does.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


I don't know. I think if you are pelting a car, and house, restitution and community service might help. If they are repeat offenders eight or twelve weeks in boot camp might straighten them out. I sure don't see lethal force as the only teaching tool.

The problem with this situation is that people act out of emotion rather than using logic. Then the people discussing it do the same thing. It is rather sad to see the complete break down in logic regarding issues like this.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by HunkaHunka

 

Democracy is two sheep and a wolf discussing whats for dinner... liberty is a well armed sheep.

Please tell me that you are smart enough to understand that quote has nothing to do with this situation.

When the state has outlawed guns, then you have more issues than just the state to be armed against.

That is a quote about the tyrany of government when the citizen is disarmed. They were not deciding on public policy, or voting for leaders. Democracy has about as much to do with this situation as a ham sandwhich does.

It adequately describes any situation which involves community... there are always wolves in society... and there are always sheep... for there to be a balance the sheep need to be armed so that the wolves are kept in check.

It applies... oh does it apply.... You have evidently never been bullied by something other than the state.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by HunkaHunka

 

I don't know but I think if you are pelting a car and house restitution and community service might help. If they are repeat offenders eight or twelve weeks in boot camp might straighten them out. I sure don't see lethal force as the only teaching tool.

The problem with this situation is that people act out of emotion rather than using logic. Then the people discussing it do the same thing. It is rather sad to see the complete break down in logic regarding issues like this.

This isn't a problem at all... Somtimes society requires a reminder as to WHY we respect people...not out of logic but out of a visceral understanding that one is taking their life in their own hands when they act with disrespect.

How else do you expect to check those who haven't been trained by their parents properly? Sounds like you just want the state to handle that... seems to work real well in the UK doesn't it...


Real life isn't based on logic... it's based on checking of the desires and appetites... sometimes this ends in the death of someone... so be it if it reminds us why we respect in the first place.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


Actually I was the guy bullys didn't like. In school I was the one that would get in a bully's face for messing with people. It got me in trouble a couple of times. However, if I went to a principal or resource officer they took action. They knew that I didn't escelate or instigate situations. They knew I didn't make pointless complaints. If I said somebody was a problem it was handled.

People didn't bully me because I didn't stand for it. I didn't shoot people and I didn't start fights. I also didn't over react if a situation got out of hand. If somebody was mouthing off I didn't hit them in the face. If they shoved me I didn't crack their skull open. I understood the use of force and excessive force from a young age. You only meet a physical threat with the amount of force necessary to stop it. If your safety is not in immediate danger you extract yourself from the situation. If it escelates past a shove and in to simple assault you respond with enough force to stop the threat.

It is the duty of those protecting themselves not to become less than the attacker. A shove isn't met with several blows to the head with a bludjeon.

In this situation the old man could not extract himself. The proper response would have been to call the cops, take pictures, and issue a verbal warning. His physical well being was not at risk untill he went outside. He was well with in his rights to go outside and issue a verbal warning. When that did not work he should have returned to his home and called the police.

Running around killing people for pissing you off is not a proper way to act. There are wolves out there but, they aren't hiding around every corner. America is safer now than it was in the 1970's and 1980's. All you have to do is look at the FBI and CDC statistics to see this.

Wolves and predators exist. You have the right to defend yourself from those threats. However, you do not have the right to use excessive force. You also do not have the right to use lethal force unless your life is in danger, you are in fear of grave bodily injury, or you are scared of a violent sexual assault. Vandalism is not life threatening. Especially when they are aiming for your wooden front door or metal car. If they had tried to kick in his front door. Then he could have shot. They didn't though. They stood on the edge of his property and tossed rocks at structurally sound inanimate objects.

None of that changes the fact that you are taking the quote completely out of context.

reply to post by HunkaHunka

This isn't a problem at all... Somtimes society requires a reminder as to WHY we respect people...not out of logic but out of a visceral understanding that one is taking their life in their own hands when they act with disrespect.

Actually, I agree with you on this point. The old man in the OP is still a murderer, and he should still pay the price, but maybe it was worth it? Sometimes society DOES require a reminder of why we respect people. I call it unproportional response, or overwhelming response. Sometimes a minor event requires a drastic response to set a precedent.

Still, it comes with its own sacrifice. Maybe it was worth it to the old man to martyr himself for the neighborhood. Maybe this tragedy of a dead teen and an imprisoned old man will set things right in the neighborhood for an entire generation. I don't know, but it could have been worth it. It doesn't justify the action or make it less of a crime or less of a tragedy, but it may serve a purpose.

reply to post by MikeNice81

There are wolves out there but, they aren't hiding around every corner. America is safer now than it was in the 1970's and 1980's. All you have to do is look at the FBI and CDC statistics to see this.

Those statistics are extremely warped, and they have gotten better at manipulating them over the years. They cannot be trusted.

Case in point: Here in my University town a rape should be a huge headline and important information for parents and 18 year old girls thinking of moving here. Since the entire community thrives off revenue from the University, we can't have news stories and crime stats that would deter kids from coming to school here. So what to do?

From my friends in law enforcement and my personal knowledge of several women that have been attacked, I know that it happens once or twice a week on average, but the stats show only once or twice per year? When an arrest is made, or a report is filed, they file it as a lesser crime, or a non-sex crime. Then, the prosecutor amends the charges later to be more accurate. This way the crime stats look very enticing to would-be students and their parents. The FBI stats only list felony arrests. So, if the LEO makes misdeamenor arrests and a prosecutor later amends the charge, there is nothing for the FBI to list.

reply to post by HunkaHunka

This isn't a problem at all... Somtimes society requires a reminder as to WHY we respect people...not out of logic but out of a visceral understanding that one is taking their life in their own hands when they act with disrespect.

It seems real funny to me that you believe that. I never had to hear about somebody getting shot to understand why I was supposed to respect other people. I used loic to figure it out. I didn't like it when my older cousin pushed me in a mud puddle. Chances are if I didn't like it and it made me sad it would do the same to thers. SO, I didn't do it to other people. I didn't like to hurt and so I tried not to hurt others with out reason.

Yeah I did stupid things growing up and probably hurt some people emotionally without realizing at the time. However, I never intentionally set out to harm others in any way without provocation. I used critical thinking and logic to understand respect.

How else do you expect to check those who haven't been trained by their parents properly? Sounds like you just want the state to handle that... seems to work real well in the UK doesn't it...

Yeah, you know, I don't believe in excessive force or murder so I must be a statist. I bleive in meeting the threat with sufficient force to stop the threat. If I am not physically in danger then I let the judicial system handle things. I believe in law and order. If we start saying that it is okay to bypass the judicial system, and apply any amount or force we want, then order falls apart.

I own a gun and will use it in defense if it is waranted. I also own pepper spray and will use it if lethal force is not waranted. I don't believe that you must lay down and be a victim. I also do not believe that it is my right to take some one else's life just because they piss me off. That isn't teaching respect. That is instilling fear. It is the same thing that gang bangers and crooks do.

Real life isn't based on logic

It certainly isn't for everyone. This thread proves that. However, for those of us that taking being at the top of the food chain, and having rather advanced brains, seriously it is. Emotion will effect decisions, but even as far back Aristotle and Socrates it was known that acting out of unchecked emotion is unhealthy.

Logic, emotion, and sense of duty should be weighed and balanced with each decision. That was the basic jist of critical decision making in Plato's time. Are you telling me that some how we have devolved from ancient Greek standards? Are you telling me that despite thousands of years of science and phillosophy we are now more animalistic or should strive to be more animalistic?

reply to post by getreadyalready


Are statistics twisted? I am sure that at times they are. However, it is hard to twist things like the murder rate. IT is hard to twist the reasons written on death certificates. It is also hard to twist the victimization survey put out by the Department of Justice Statistics.

All indicators across the board show that the crime rate has fallen since the 1990s. Yes some towns may fudge their numbers. However, it would be hard to change every indicator across the board to effect every source of research.

I know it doesn't go well in these doom and gloom times. The truth is that you are safer now than you were in decades past. I believe a lot of that has to do with the fact that there are more armed citizens on the streets. I also believe it has a lot to do with people being taught to fight back. I remember hearing "professionals" telling people to just give criminals what they want. They stopped doing that for the most part. Now nearly every "professional" tells you that fighting back increases your likely hood of survival.

There are a lot of reasons you are safer now, and that probably deserves a thread of its own.

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


There were three young men pitted - bullying - preying upon one old man. They were throwing rocks at him and his property. If one of those rocks had hit him in the head it could have killed him. Also, as you age, falls become more of a serious issue. If he had tripped and fallen he could have broken some bones.

Now, my husband says, it would have been smarted to just shoot the three of them in their legs and put them in wheel chairs for the rest of their lives so they could never bully anyone else.

A bully, a predator is just that - a predator. Now, I am sure if these three young men had done this to your wife, your daughter, your son, your father, mother, any of your loved ones you possibly would feel differently.

I take it back, killing the 15 year old was harsh, but maybe the old guy was acting out of fear and didn't think straight. There were three of them against one of him and they were young and strong and he was old and frail.

I stated what I did out of emotional anger. I recently experienced a homeless man I use to serve dinner to being beaten to death in his sleep with a baseball bat and my first post was out of anger and hurt. I went to see him shortly before he died in the hospital and to see what another human for no reason did to him made me rethink "all life is precious" frap I have stated before.

My friend, the homeless man, was a ex Vietnam Vet, gentle, kind and intellegent. He did not deserve to die by being beaten to death. The kind of person(s) that did this to him are made of the very exact same fabric as the young men that preyed upon that old guy.

They are predators.

Question: Have you ever actually seen a person that has been stoned or beaten in person? I have.

What kind of person(s) throws rocks at old people and destorys other people's stuff they worked hard for? Will their actions escalate as time goes on? Maybe next time, they will take baseball bats and beat some old homeless person to death.

I hate bullies and predators. I distain any person that would use their strength, youth, power, money or any advantage to abuse another fellow human.

Being a predator, preying upon the weak is a mindset and should not be tolerated OR EXCUSED.

And yes, they do that in the Middle East. People are stoned to death all the time.

I once had a small rock hit me in the head and that caused a lot of bleeding and pain and that was an accident. So I know first hand what it's like to have a rock injury.

A predator, someone that would willingfully hurt someone weaker than them is a bully and not likely to change, only get worse the longer they are allowed to get away with it.

Our laws, are a joke - in and out of jail within days back on the street to prey upon someone else that is weaker.

A bully predator (not senile, just like that word) is just that a mean, vicious excuse of a human being.

That one old man did not go out and seek these three young men out. They came onto his property, ruined his property he worked hard for (most old people are on a limited / fixed income) and threatened his life.

If you and two of your friends came onto my property I would first call the police. I am lucky right now where I live they would be there within under two minutes.

But, if I lived in a place where the police were not as diligent or so far out it would take them 45 minutes to get to me, I would have shot them.

Young predators beware, this new generation of old farts is not going to take your preying upon us. We are buying guns and going to gun ranges to learn how to shoot. We are taking self defense classes. And, we will not go down without a fight.

I still maintain, good ridence, one less predator/bully in the world.

If I were on the jury I would acquit the old guy. He did not go out and look for trouble, they came to him and looked for trouble and found it.

Originally posted by girl_interrupted
I was born and raised in the South ... where you shoot first and ask questions later. Heck, my town requires homeowners to own a handgun in order to live here (we have a super small crime rate).

sounds like a neat town actually...and ya, I imagine a burgler would think twice

I'm of the opinion that if you are going to 'stupid' yourself to death then I'm not going to cry over you.

Darwin approves of your insight

I was nearly killed when a rock flew up and struck me on the head while I was mowing the lawn. I was in the hospital with a shunt in my head for over a month. I had to have multiple operations.

ouch

To an old man, seeing three or four teenage boys (and a 15 year old can be six feet tall) vandalizing his property must have been terrifying. He didn't know if they were going to start tossing Molotov Cocktails. He didn't know if they were going to break a window and gain entrance to his home.

Bingo...and biblical. Spare the rod, spoil the child. This would only esculate if left unpunished...sure, the punishment was extremely severe, but something needed to be done that would no doubt send a message across the community about harassing elderly

But I don't think the 'my baby didn't do nuthin' crap is justified either. Obviously the kid was up to something or he wouldn't have been shot. Making him a martyr is ridiculous.

The only one whom should be thinking this way is the parents...once one of their children are dead, they will always see them as an angel that passed away..but anyone else should see this little brat getting a well deserved bullet...again, killing is extreme...but as someone else pointed out, the old guy may have been aiming for the arse...but meh, he is old, his aim is off.
another reason not to mess with elders...their warning shots may accidently find your head

reply to post by ofhumandescent

There were three young men pitted - bullying - preying upon one old man. They were throwing rocks at him and his property. If one of those rocks had hit him in the head it could have killed him. Also, as you age, falls become more of a serious issue. If he had tripped and fallen he could have broken some bones.

If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry christmas.

They were NOT throwing rocks at "him." He was inside his home. They were not throwing rocks through his windows. He was in no danger. He was in no danger of falling, he was in no danger of being hit by a rock. He WAS healthy enough to GO OUTSIDE, intentionally face off with the boys, and fire a .22 revolver lethally into them!

On three occasions during that night, he went outside and confronted them. Not once did the boys strike him with a rock or their hands, or attempt to intimidate or fight him. They ran off, and then returned to bug him some more.

THE BOYS WERE NOT PREDATORS, AND THEY WERE NOT DANGEROUS!!!
The evidence of their harmlessness is in the fact that there was no property damage, and they never attempted to harm the man in any way on 3 different confrontations. More evidence in the fact that they retreated each time they were confronted. More evidence in the fact that the lethal shot hit him in the back and on public property! They were FLEEING!!

reply to post by SaturnFX

Bingo...and biblical. Spare the rod, spoil the child. This would only esculate if left unpunished...

OR... the fun would be over, the boys would move on to something else.

The boys threw rocks until they got a response, then they ran off and hid. Then they returned until they got a response, and then they ran off and hid. Then they threw rocks until he came out and murdered one of them!

Where is the imminent danger or evidence of escalation on the boys part? If escalation was their intention, why didn't they attack him on the first two occasions? If escalation and intimidation and predatory behavior and bullying were part of their plan, why did they flee? Why did they not attack or return fire? Why did the old man attempt to cover up his crime, while the boys stuck around to help their friend?

Who seems more guilty of a serious crime here? Who seems more violent and intimidating? Who seems like more of a threat to the neighborhood?

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by HunkaHunka

 

Actually I was the guy bullys didn't like. In school I was the one that would get in a bully's face for messing with people. It got me in trouble a couple of times. However, if I went to a principal or resource officer they took action. They knew that I didn't escelate or instigate situations. They knew I didn't make pointless complaints. If I said somebody was a problem it was handled.

Good for you! Glad you had a system which worked for you as opposed to turning a deaf ear to you.

Oh if we were all so fortunate.

People didn't bully me because I didn't stand for it. I didn't shoot people and I didn't start fights. I also didn't over react if a situation got out of hand. If somebody was mouthing off I didn't hit them in the face. If they shoved me I didn't crack their skull open. I understood the use of force and excessive force from a young age.

What a well balanced family you must have had to understand such a thing. Some of us are bullied not only at school, but at home as well... in a situation where there is no limits to the force. I myself had my own father attempt to kill me many a time...

Oh was I happy when cancer took him...

You only meet a physical threat with the amount of force necessary to stop it. If your safety is not in immediate danger you extract yourself from the situation. If it escelates past a shove and in to simple assault you respond with enough force to stop the threat.

Yeah, and with all the elderly actually winding up dead from chavs terrorizing them over there in the UK... I'm sure that played into the process... yet another reason why I'm happy this occurred, though sad for the family of the child.

It is the duty of those protecting themselves not to become less than the attacker. A shove isn't met with several blows to the head with a bludjeon.

It's the duty of those protecting themselves to take action as they deem necessary in reaching that goal. Once again, you don't seem to understand the cause behind this was the fact that the boy felt there would be no recourse in bullying the old man... that is the problem here, not the fact that the man shot the boy.

In this situation the old man could not extract himself. The proper response would have been to call the cops, take pictures, and issue a verbal warning.

As I mentioned... proper is rather subjective here.... from my perspective given the news reports of elderly dying due to terrorizing by chavs... I'd definitely think that phoning the authorities wouldn't matter...

His physical well being was not at risk untill he went outside.

You seem to be coming from the perspective of what could the man have done to prevent this, as opposed to what can we do to prevent the actual criminal, the boy, from doing what he was doing?

I don't understand why you are blaming the victim... the old man.

He was well with in his rights to go outside and issue a verbal warning. When that did not work he should have returned to his home and called the police.

Running around killing people for pissing you off is not a proper way to act.

Right... it may not be the best first action... but in a situation where the state is failing miserably at dealing with this... it's time to take responsibility for your self and your community... nanny state laws be damned

There are wolves out there but, they aren't hiding around every corner. America is safer now than it was in the 1970's and 1980's. All you have to do is look at the FBI and CDC statistics to see this.

Wolves and predators exist. You have the right to defend yourself from those threats. However, you do not have the right to use excessive force. You also do not have the right to use lethal force unless your life is in danger, you are in fear of grave bodily injury, or you are scared of a violent sexual assault.

Actually that's where your wrong... Florida has changed this... if someone breaks into my house in Florida I have the right to gun them down where they stand.

That's liberty.

And what happened to that boy was what we call "natural consequences".

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by HunkaHunka

 

This isn't a problem at all... Somtimes society requires a reminder as to WHY we respect people...not out of logic but out of a visceral understanding that one is taking their life in their own hands when they act with disrespect.

It seems real funny to me that you believe that. I never had to hear about somebody getting shot to understand why I was supposed to respect other people. I used loic to figure it out. I didn't like it when my older cousin pushed me in a mud puddle. Chances are if I didn't like it and it made me sad it would do the same to thers. SO, I didn't do it to other people. I didn't like to hurt and so I tried not to hurt others with out reason.

Well you weren't held upside down and beat until blood ran down your legs either were you? You never hid out in a tree all night long so your father couldnt reach you? You never had your father put arsenic in your milk or try to squish you under his own feet?

When you grow up with that... no matter how non-malicious you may be, there is no logic to contend with... only insanity and the understanding that the only thing which really matters in this world is power and influence, not right and wrong.

Now I agree, that I want all folks to play by the rules... including myself... but there is a point at which the rules no longer apply because they have become hollow... this is the time when you have only yourself to protect you because there is no authority on your side except for you.

You seem to think that all peoples are imbued with this logic you speak of....

Many of us have the same desire for justice and fairness, BECAUSE we were brought up in situations like mine. Don't ask us to be logical... because though we can understand it academically, it doesn't speak to the entirety of the situation, especially when the system is not responding in a manner which it should.

When every authority has failed you in your life... you become your own... and that's what this man did. He weighed the consequences and said "I'll do the time, but I don't really mind".

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Bingo...and biblical. Spare the rod, spoil the child. This would only esculate if left unpunished...

OR... the fun would be over, the boys would move on to something else.

The boys threw rocks until they got a response, then they ran off and hid. Then they returned until they got a response, and then they ran off and hid. Then they threw rocks until he came out and murdered one of them!

Bet the others won't do that again eh?



I guess one dead chav is worth 3 or 4 reformed ones...

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Who seems more guilty of a serious crime here? Who seems more violent and intimidating? Who seems like more of a threat to the neighborhood?

And the point.....

Who are you personally less likely to %$^$ with after hearing about this.

Grandpa may not be as patient in putting up with nonsense as you...


and that is the point

Originally posted by ofhumandescent

Question: Have you ever actually seen a person that has been stoned or beaten in person? I have.

Good Post ofhumandescent And, yes. I have seen people who had been stoned/beaten in person, and I took actions to end it.

What kind of person(s) throws rocks at old people and destorys other people's stuff they worked hard for?

Socially inept persons who find some kind of personal satisfaction or perceived group acceptance from doing such things, in my unprofessional opinion.

Will their actions escalate as time goes on?

Yes, if there are not perceivable consequences or experienced concsequences to their actions, I believe so.

I really liked your post. Thanks for sharing those thoughts with us.

Appreciative,
ET