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

reply to post by crazydaisy


I agree 99%

Only that I dont believe shooting him was justified,though that doesn`t mean I can`t understand him for doing so,there is no way to know what this man has experienced through his life with thugs either to himself or friends and family or his little to no faith in the police force and judicial system.

I have as much sympathy for those young men as I would for types of guys in those jackass movies,that get hurt as a consequence through stupidity.The difference however at least the jackasses only hurt themselves.

I have to disagree with other members here when they have stated that the old man is the aggressor here, as if harrassment/abuse isn`t a form of aggression.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
Wow, maybe you should read the thread before insulting people or impugning their character. At no point did Getready, or anybody else say the kids were heros. Neither did anyone say they were in the right.

I have read the thread,heck if getreadyalready is of good character in your mind he isn`t in mine when he has stated...............

Originally posted by getreadyalready

Who hasn't gone out and tried to annoy the grouchy old man in your neighborhood? Hell, I still do it, and I'm 37 years old now! Nobody should get shot for "vandalism."

Just for #es and giggles huh?

reply to post by gps777

I have to disagree with other members here when they have stated that the old man is the aggressor here, as if harrassment/abuse isn`t a form of aggression.

The harrassment is a form of aggression. However, the question is, what is the proper way to respond? This was clearly a case of excesive force. There were better ways to respond and he clearly jumped past all of them.

Only that I dont believe shooting him was justified,though that doesn`t mean I can`t understand him for doing so

I can agree with you on this one. I can understand him wanting to do what he did. I just can not condone his course of action.

reply to post by gps777


So, you are going to attack my character based on my honesty? Seems ironic?

And, you didn't answer the question did you. Have you never done anything as a kid that you have regretted as an adult? Aren't you glad that you didn't get killed for every mistake you made?

And you are one of the ones agreeing with

Originally posted by JonInMichigan
Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out! Throw a rock at me and I'll show you the point of a gun!

And you think a shot in the dark, in the back, on public property, of a retreating kid, is a GOOD thing to do? And my character is in question?

Originally posted by MikeNice81

The harrassment is a form of aggression. However, the question is, what is the proper way to respond?

You have already stated in great length what the proper cause of action should have been,I don`t disagree with you on it,just that not everyone knows the proper coarse they should take in any given situation,crap happens.

If this young man who lost his life didn`t think it fun to torment an elderly person all night,he`d be sleeping in his bed tonight instead of a basketball.

This was clearly a case of excesive force. There were better ways to respond and he clearly jumped past all of them.

Yep ,I also see it as one man at his wits end.

reply to post by v3_exceed


In this neighborhood, I am sure the residents would love to see police aftr 3 hrs for rock throwing, because most wont see them at all period for rock throwing teens.

reply to post by ofhumandescent
Unfortunately I cannot do volunteer work at our homeless centers, they are in bad neighborhoods I refuse to go to, under any circumstances. It really is that bad in some parts of Louisville.

reply to post by pikypiky


You call Portland. , Shivley, Smoketown pigs to respond to rock throwing.

Let me know how long your wait was, or how quickly they laughed and hung up on you.

As previously stated, the bulk of the police were at a murder scene a few blocks up the road.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


I can't disagree with you, because I don't know the neighborhood, but my experience with bad neighborhoods has been alright.

You think the police are slow to respond to "rock throwing teenagers" because they have more important business to attend to, and rock throwers, being not very dangerous, are a low priority?

I wouldn't recommend for my wife to go into a bad neighborhood and volunteer either, but I might go with her. They are only bad neighborhoods as long as we let them be.

Originally posted by getreadyalready

So, you are going to attack my character based on my honesty? Seems ironic?

Dude I wouldn`t have responded your statement in the first place.But Ok your honest yet are of the mindset that you believe everyone else is like yourself and annoy and irriate elderly men for the fun of it,well your wrong.

I find your character lacking because of it.

I was responding to this,because how can you personally be unbiase to these youngmens actions when you yourself do likewise.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
Wow, maybe you should read the thread before insulting people or impugning their character.

And, you didn't answer the question did you.

Sorry must of missed the question.

Have you never done anything as a kid that you have regretted as an adult? Aren't you glad that you didn't get killed for every mistake you made?

Hang on,to start I never did what these guys did in the slightest,I never vandalised or hurt anyone,though I never liked punks,so if a punk got some exsessive force from me and thats wrong,then your right I should be killed for it.

Happy?

Maybe you`ll grow out of it one day,hopefully.

reply to post by gps777


How do you know getready wasn't tormented by a grumpy old man when he was a child?

I do not condone picking on people. I might needle friends to get a rise, but picking on strangers just for fun is a no go in my book.

Maybe my choice of words was less than wise. Maybe I should have said, "try not to misrepresent what people say." Completely different, but maybe more appropriate.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by 19872012

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
A man has the right to protect and defend his house and his property. period.

If that dumb ass kid's mommy wasn't smart enough to teach her kid to bring more than rocks to a gunfight, that's her problem.

Now where do I send this Bail Money too?

So do you think vandalism should be punishable by DEATH? even the Iranians don't do that!

Ok found Kentucky's Castle Doctrine Law:

Kentucky Castle Doctrine Deadly Force KRS503.080 KRS 503.080 In Kentucky the castle doctrine says that 1. there is no requirement to retreat when you are threatened with deadly force or when you are defending your home from an arsonist or burglar that is attempting to commit a crime.

2. Under the castle doctrine you are permitted to use deadly force. However, just because the law permits you to use deadly force to protect yourself does not mean that you wont be prosecuted or sued anyway. Essentially here is the Castle Doctrine Statute. A short paper on the Castle Doctrine is here however this is a draft and it is not yet complete. KRS 503.080 Protection of Property (Castle Doctrine)
(1) The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary to prevent: (a) The commission of criminal trespass, robbery, burglary, or other felony involving the use of force, ...
(2) The use of deadly physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable under subsection (1) only when the defendant believes that the person against whom such force is used is: (b) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary, robbery, or other felony involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to KRS 503.055, of such dwelling; or (c) Committing or attempting to commit arson of a dwelling or other building in his possession.
(3) A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she has a right to be. Effective: July 12 2006 www.lrc.ky.gov...

Deadly force cannot be used when there is no commission of a Felony. Kentucky law also has the caveat that just because you can use deadly force doesn't mean you won't be arrested and charged for using it. An interesting wording in my opinion.

Thank you, very interesting.

reply to post by getreadyalready


One of the reports I read said a rock was thrown so hard it stuck in the poor man's door.

reply to post by gps777


I don't condone picking on weak or old people either. However, I do like to pick at a scab. Some people, young or old, are just plain grumpy and fun to mess with. It happens on ATS, it happens at my job, hell it happens in my marriage!

The old man in the OP was not a weak old victim being tormented by a violent gang. He was a very healthy, very aggressive man that went out and confronted them on public property. He was healthy and "not-scared" enough to chase them away....twice! He was healthy, and calm enough to make a pretty good shot with a .22 revolver on a running kid!

If this was a bunch of hoodlums hassling a grandma on her way home with groceries, then I would say fine, shoot em. As a matter of fact there is just such a thread with just such an argument right here on ATS!

I think I've been pretty clear that I am all for gun rights, and I exercise mine daily. I also agree with standing up for yourself, making an example of people, etc., etc. The only part that we disagree on is whether the kids were bad and the old man was justified. The kids were just kids, they weren't robbing and terrorizing. The old man had already won, they were running away, so he was not justified!

Maybe you`ll grow out of it one day,hopefully.

I hope not....it is part of my charm.

I don't like dealing in hypotheticals, but I will make a post with my interpretation of what "may" have gone down.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


I saw where you mentioned that earlier, and Iooked for it, but I couldn't find it for myself. Can you find it again? I am not opposed to changing my view if the kids were actually attempting to enter the home, or they were actively destroying the car. Everything I read was pretty vague about the rocks and the damage, and it seemed like this was mostly just noise and annoyance.

reply to post by gps777


Pure conjecture follows:

OK, grouchy, white, ex-cop or security or whatever, lives in same home he's been in for 30 years, and he has seen the neighborhood go way downhill. He isn't "racist" but he does stereotype people according to his life experience and he knows a "thug" when he sees one.

New kid, basketball star, makes some new friends just after entering his sophomore year in high school. Promising kid, decent mother, but she isn't always around because she works too much.

Kid gets invited to hang out with some of the other basketball stars. Maybe older, maybe from worse neighborhood, but he has to keep up his cred to keep his respect on the team and in the new school. It is hard being a sophomore, especially if you are getting attention from the likes of Rick Pitino.

So, first evening in new neighborhood, old white guy sees new kid with known thugs. He starts talking some junk, warns the kid away, threatens the punks, does his normal grouchy old man routine. The kids talk back, it escalates, but everyone moves on. Later that night, the teens are bored. They hit the streets and they decide to mess with the old man. They aren't trying to hurt him, they are just returning the annoying dislike.. They toss some rocks, lights come on, old man comes out, kids run. Laugh. Decide to keep it up. Third attempt, old man has had enough and comes out with his 22. Thugs are dressed in darker clothing, but new kid is in a light colored shirt. Old man points at most apparent target and gets off two shots. Realizes he killed the new kid, starts to cover his ass.

I could be way off base, sounds too much like a cliche movie script, but that is one of the possibilities to be taken from the limited information we have available. Is the shooting justified in this scenario?

A few points come to mind immediately...

(1) Why did he bring rocks to a gunfight. I mean he was not someone rioting against an oppressive system. He was the attacker of an old man.

(2) Why do these parents all say the same thing "he was a good kid" Why don't they ever say " he was a punk that got what was coming to him"

(3) Is anyone still throwing rocks at the guys house. Did his tactic work ?

reply to post by thedeadtruth


I ride a motorcycle to work everyday. I am always armed. I witness a ton of "crimes" in traffic that could cost me my life each and every day. Just today a woman ran a red light and almost killed me.

By your logic, if I start shooting them, by the end of the week, there won't be much traffic left to endanger or annoy me. I would be justified. They are commiting crimes that endanger my life, my gun and my training are legal. It is self defense. They obviously deserve it for their lack of respect for their fellow man.

If I followed the advice in this thread I would be a one man traffic destroying monster! My coworkers (the ones that survive) will love me for it. Our commute will be cut in half!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Mak Manto

 

How?

There were no reports of damage to the house or the car. No broken windows. Tell me how those rocks could have injured this man?

It doesn't matter if damage occurred or not. These kids attacked his property, and basically, also attacked him. Like I said, he was under attack. Those rocks could have hurt him. If they had broken through his window and struck him, he could've been injured.

Just because he wasn't injured doesn't mean he has the right to defend himself.

Why are you defending him? How is this kid good?

HE'S ATTACKING AN OLD MAN FOR NO REASON!

What the hell is going on in this world?! ATS, PLEASE, SOMEONE GIVE ME AN ANSWER!

Why are we going against this man! He was defending himself from kids! Get Ready, I will not take that this was some prank! This was an assault on this man! Thank God that he defended himself.

Actually if someone was trying to hit you, yes then shoot them.

I would fully support that.