Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 11:51:45 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Seriously?



Well I have read stories that say they were and others that say he was hiding when the father walked in, so, yes seriously.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 141
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 12:04:12 PM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline
The more details I hear about it, the more it sounds like the father shouldn't (and probably won't) be charged with anything. And if that's the case, it doesn't make it less tragic for the boy and his family, but not all tragedies are criminal acts.

Still too soon to say though for sure.

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 142
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 2:49:03 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

Of course, from what is known so far, it's too soon to definitively call this a murder.

yes it is
no doubt
but its not to early to call him a killer


Gee, you already have him convicted of murder in many of your posts? Or have you forgotten your statements "justification for murder" and similar statements?

And yet you seem to know exactly what was going on in his mind at the very second the trigger was pulled.


do you know what definitively means????
you have made more suppositions about what might have happened, and attacked me for putting up the other side, I think its best we dont talk anymore, because your claims are getting more and more ridiculous





Where the hell have I said anything about the situation other than what has been released by the authorities to the media?

You want to talk facts, here are the facts as released by the police to the media:

Fact: A 16 year old girl invited a boy over to her home at 2 in the morning without her parent's knowledge.

Fact: The girl's younger brother saw feet sticking out from under her bed

Fact: Father, upon discovering the boy called the fucking police, did not pull the trigger, and seemingly was content to wait for the police.

Fact: Daughter denied knowing the boy (information released by the authorities based on statements)

Fact: while waiting for police to arrive, an argument developed (If I were the boy, I would be calling daddy's little girl a liar.)

Fact: the boy moved his hands and arms for whatever reason and the father pulled the trigger. Also information released by the police to the media.

Would you mind telling me, or quoting where I substituted supposition for facts?

I mean you have all but accused the man to have some sort of temper problem or the girl would not have lied about knowing the boy. What he would have shot her if she said she knew the boy instead of him?

Please, provide some evidence that the girl wasn't lying to save her ass from being grounded or punished in a manner other than violent?

While you are at it, please, in the order of events, tell me at one point the father made the decision to kill the boy and not wait for the police? At what point did he stop being rational and make the decision to take a human life without giving a shit or provocation?

Every thing you have stated about the character of the man, his temper, his authoritarian way with his family is baseless. You have no special insight into this human being that gives you that knowledge.

Add to the fact this incident happened last week, and any reporter worth hiring would have been all over this guys past, police record, police calls to the home, Child protective services involvement with the family.

Absolutely nothing has shown up that indicates he had a violent temper.

I never said the boy deserved to be dead. I have merely pointed out that under the law, the father is guilty of nothing more than defending his home and family with the information he had, flawed as it was, because his daughter lied through her teeth.

I grew up with a father who was a drunk, had a violent temper, and spent my football games at a bar.

Did I lie to him, fuck yeah, even though I knew full well that if he found out I was in for a beating, with anything he could get his hands on.

Of course, I was a boy and a jock. All the one sided beatings stopped when I figured out I could give as good as he could. And he never raised a hand to me after I laid his ass out in the dirt with a broken jaw and out cold.

As far as raising a teenage girl, raised one of my own and three step daughters. Funny thing, they felt that I was just the guy to ask about having sex. I actually told them that the only thing I was concerned with was STD's and unwanted pregnancy. Hell, I gave em condoms when they went out on a date.

I never had the misguided belief that my daughters would not have sex because I told them not to. It is true that I always managed to clean a shotgun on the nights that they went out. Of course they went out on Friday and Saturday nights, and those also happened to be the days I went to the range, so honestly I had more than just a shotgun to clean.

The only time I ever threatened one of their boyfriends was the night that I saw one of them haul off and back handed my oldest step daughter. And it was not with a gun, I had that kid plastered against a wall and I told him in no uncertain terms if he ever hit my little girl again, I would break his neck.

I am sure that fact makes me a blood thirsty killer just waiting for the chance to kill someone on any lame excuse.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 143
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 3:29:08 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

The more details I hear about it, the more it sounds like the father shouldn't (and probably won't) be charged with anything. And if that's the case, it doesn't make it less tragic for the boy and his family, but not all tragedies are criminal acts.

Still too soon to say though for sure.

And it isn't a walk in the park for the father and the soon to be grounded for life daughter.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 144
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 3:39:45 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

Lucy and others are speaking to the tiresome ness and irrationality of it all and the tone death attitudes of gun proponents -- now most insanely demonstrated by the NRA opposing Obama's surgeon general nominee.

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 145
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:28:58 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Lucy and others are speaking to the tiresome ness and irrationality of it all and the tone death attitudes of gun proponents -- now most insanely demonstrated by the NRA opposing Obama's surgeon general nominee.

Way to stay on subject.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 146
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:37:03 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
Your trying to justify murder, jfl1961. I stated my reasons clearly, and if as a jury why I might come to the decision based on the currently evidence. If we go down your 'logic'....THEN....I can shoot anyone, at any time, for any reason, and be held to NOT ACCOUNTIBILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY. That's not a Republic, nor a Democracy, jlf1961, that's ANARACHY!

My view of Texas is the average IQ is about 82. Given that it had George W. Bush and Rick Perry as their governors. Not to mention placing so many idiot creationists on the Texas Board of Education to describe the overwhelming amount of evidence of the Theory of Evolution, Climate Change, and a host of other scientific understandings. When I think of Texas, intelligence, education or wisdom are the words I would accuse the state's population of holding as virtues. Where the life of an American is determined not based on how equal they are to all others, but, by how much more money they hold over everyone else. When Texas Legislators pass all sorts of silly and retarded laws in an effort to 'be dumber' than Arizona and Florida, doesn't fill me with much confidence that they should be taken seriously.

Maybe I happen to live in a state where this sort of shit is just not allowed. That the shooter is taken before a judge to determine if a trial is really needed nor not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
You know, I have pointed out the law in Texas a number of times on this topic, and I have yet to see anyone acknowledge that the father was acting within the law in every respect. The Texas statute covering this is pretty straight forward.


If they do not prosecute this guy, Texas is simply inviting more tragedies to its state in the future.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
The only thing that would have changed a damn thing is if the daughter had not lied and then daddy shot the kid.


Your going to blame the whole thing on the daughter? Sorry, but when you have a firearm....its YOUR RESPOSNIBILITY....its used correctly. I'm surprised I have to explain this elementary concept to a gun owner. In addition he's the ADULT. That means its his responsibility to maintain discipline and let cooler heads prevail.

If you would do the same as this dingbat, do yourself a favor, turn in all your guns now. Your clearly not responsible with that sort of power! The difference between you and me, is that I do not worship my guns like a freaking religion! They are tools. If I miss use these tools (arguably pretty powerful tools at that), I should be held fully accountable by society. Those that behave in a reckless and immature manner, make it tougher on all gun owners nationwide.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
1) A 16 year old girl invites a 17 year old boy to her home at 2AM. First, since she is a minor living at home, the parents (not the children) have the final say on who can come into the house and at what time.


Did you....NOT...FULLY....READ....the post I made? The one your commending on? Bullet Point 'B'? Or were you completely comatose during your teenage years, nor have had kids, nor have observed teenagers doing dumb and foolish things? You can babble legalities all you want, and its IRELEVANT. That's the point!

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Legally, trying to use the "he was invited" argument is invalid. The parent did not invite the boy over and the daughter did not have the legal right to invite someone into the house without her parents approval.


I'm not sure whether to laugh at the absurdity of your 'argument' here or just blast it for being dumb! Obviously you failed human psychology 101....

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
2) This part is for Lucy, and everyone else claiming the father was a violent, gun toting maniac, if daddy was a violent hot head who the girl was deathly afraid of, why the hell did he call 911 and wait for the police instead of shooting the boy outright?


Do you even bother to read your own material after you finish writing it? Just to make sure it sounds correct? I'm not trying to be a grammar or English language Nazi. I'm going to rephrase what you placed here:

"If the father was as '....violent hot head....' (your words) while the police were present in the house, would the boy have been shot to death?"

I think what your trying to ask is why he would shot the kid after the 911 call was made but before he shot the kid because he is a cool cucumber. I disagree. There exists NO JUSTIFCATION to kill someone with a firearm even AFTER you call 911, UNLESS the circumstances can be PROVEN readily. That is what keeps some nut from stepping into an Olive Garden on a packed Friday supper time and mowing them all down with his AK after dialing 911. What unbiased sources exist there that can say on legal record that the kid was '....reaching down to his waist to get something...'? The killer? The daughter who lied to protect the kid and will then protect her father from going to jail? We have only the killer's words. Just like with Michael Dunn and Zimmerman.

So what your saying is if someone mows down sixteen people with a firearm, you would defend that person's actions since they are a fellow firearm owner? Do you have any ability to understand just how silly this notion is?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
The events leading up to the shooting is as follows, as per statements to the police.
A) Boy found hiding in daughter's room, daughter lies about not knowing the boy.
B) Father calls 911 and detains the boy while waiting for police
C) An argument ensues between the boy, the daughter and the father, and it becomes heated. Now during this time, the boy is holding his hands in such a manner so as to assure gun toting crazed violent daddy does not shoot him.
D) The boy drops his hands as if to reach for something or attempted to grab the gun (reports seem to differ) and daddy pulls the trigger.


The police statement from the killer.....how convenient....eh? Is there any video showing this to be true? In this day and age, when most smartphones have video capture capabilities? None of those three had a smartphone handy?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Now Lucy, only an idiot would try to take a gun from someone who is pointing it at you (or unless it is in the movies and the hero has to do it to save a life,) especially if the person with the gun pointing at them knows that the police have been called.


Your assuming, based on NO EVIDENCE, that the boy was trying to take the gun from the adult. After all, once more stating (what is this, the 37th time mentioned?) you are accepting the killer's words without an ounce of question.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
So, lets give the kid the benefit of doubt and assume he was reaching for something innocent, like his ID or cell phone to prove to the father that he had spoken to the girl prior to coming over at 2AM.


Yeah, 'benefit of the doubt' structured in a total fantasy to justify the father's irresponsibility with firearms as being correct. How do you even arrive at this string of thinking and NOT say its full of shit?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
And one last really fucking stupid question.

If she could sneak a boy into the house, why the fuck could she not sneak out of the house?


Well geewizz Jlf1961, if you had actually....READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE....you might have been aware that the daughter was catch in the act by her little brother reporting things to their father.

Apparently you throw out facts for complete fantasy....

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Stands to reason that if she were afraid of her father, getting the hell out of the house makes a hell of a lot more sense than to be in the house with a person you are scared of.


What evidence do you have that she fears her father in that article....BEFORE...the events of the moment? Please, produce that full psych eval for us all to look through. More so, how could she prevent with perfect accuracy how the chain of events would take place? I tell you what, I'll accept that your not full of shit if you can give me the correct powerball jackpot numbers BEFORE Friday at 12:01am. Otherwise your being hypocritical of the daughter's ability to glean the future with said perfect accuracy!

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Let me guess, she could not sneak out of the house because she was chained to something? maybe her father had a gps tracking collar on her? Wait, I know, he had a extreme version of a shock collar on her that would shock the fuck out of her if she left the house or yard, like the invisible fence systems for dogs?


This section here is so fully of bat-shit crazy its not even funny. Just....LOOK....at the length and depth you will travel in your argument to justify why this could was 'right' in his action and should NOT be held fully accountability and responsible for his actions in court.


(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 147
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:45:50 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

This sounds like an open and shut case of murder or manslaughter with a deadly weapon. I'm a bit surprise those defending the father in this case really do not understand all the facts and psychology on display here. They see 'he as a gun' and 'must defend even to the most retarded level of circumstances'. So lets break this down:

A ) A teenager is shout to death for what? "The father told deputies that McCormick dropped his hands as if to grab something, so the man opened fire. The teen died at the scene." Wow, that's pretty convenient excuse. An were there any weapons on the teenager? No, of course not, it would have been justified on the part of the parent, right?

B ) Teenagers do dumb things often. Go onto Youtube.com and look up the hundreds of thousands of videos of teenagers doing dumb things that usually get them a 'free trip to the ER'. We were all teenagers at one time, and I'm sure we all did some pretty dumb stuff. Would we have done the same things at our current ages? NO. Why? Well, that's were neuroscience comes in. The human brain in the teenage years is not fully developed. It will not be fully develop until they are in their early thirties. Which is *WHY* adults usually don't do stupid things that teenagers do. We racked it up to 'experience', 'age', and 'wisdom'. No, its just our brains finally developing.

So the girl is on the spot and KNOWS she is grounded until she's 18 (and maybe beyond). So she blurts out the first thing that comes to mind. Not really intelligent or wise, right? The boy is equally 'up the river without a paddle' for finding the right words to handle the shitstorm falling on him in a diplomatic manner. Their teenagers, with raging hormones and foolish understanding of 'cause and effect'. Why do we have teenagers that get pregnant? Same thinking....

C ) The father becomes very angry about the situation. His daughter lying and this kid pulling moves on his baby daughter. However, when your a GUN OWNER, you have an even BIGGER responsibility to USE YOUR FIREARM RESPONSIBILITY. When anger became blind rage, he LOST CONTROL OF THE SITUATION. So what is 'blind rage' in medicine? Its when the front half of the brain (which controls reasoning, thinking, rationalizing, and even staying calm in a shitstorm) shuts down and forces the back half of the brain to do double duty (it controls mood, attitudes, and emotions). So the brain is already angry, but the back half of the brain does not have access to the tools/abilities of the front half. So he felt threaten, but could not determine the tactical situation (because that's covered under the front half, right?). His answer? Whip out his firearm and blast the kid at point blank range in a fit of rage.

D ) The father, KNOWS he's...SHIT UP THE RIVER. He's the father of the household. He's a gun owner. And he should know his daughter will do foolish things from time to time, because that's what teenagers do. It was his responsibility to remain in control of the situation and his temper; yet allowed both to control him. If it comes out that he has anger management problems, he's toast!

This is an issue that should go to trial. An the father will hopefully have a decent attorney to represent him. Given the evidence thus far, if I was the jury, I would say he was guilty. Not because he's a firearm owner. But because he had supreme responsibility and failed to manage that responsibility. correctly. That failure led to the death of another person. For anyone with a firearm this subject should serve as a reminder. Its understandable to be angry in a situation like this, but blind rage is not acceptable. That firearm comes with a heavy dose of responsibility to not miss use it.


You know, I have pointed out the law in Texas a number of times on this topic, and I have yet to see anyone acknowledge that the father was acting within the law in every respect. The Texas statute covering this is pretty straight forward.

The only thing that would have changed a damn thing is if the daughter had not lied and then daddy shot the kid.

So, once more, lets go over the facts, as acknowledged by the investigators assigned to the case and the authorities
making statements to the press.

1) A 16 year old girl invites a 17 year old boy to her home at 2AM. First, since she is a minor living at home, the parents (not the children) have the final say on who can come into the house and at what time.

Legally, trying to use the "he was invited" argument is invalid. The parent did not invite the boy over and the daughter did not have the legal right to invite someone into the house without her parents approval.

2) This part is for Lucy, and everyone else claiming the father was a violent, gun toting maniac, if daddy was a violent hot head who the girl was deathly afraid of, why the hell did he call 911 and wait for the police instead of shooting the boy outright?

The events leading up to the shooting is as follows, as per statements to the police.
A) Boy found hiding in daughter's room, daughter lies about not knowing the boy.
B) Father calls 911 and detains the boy while waiting for police
C) An argument ensues between the boy, the daughter and the father, and it becomes heated. Now during this time, the boy is holding his hands in such a manner so as to assure gun toting crazed violent daddy does not shoot him.
D) The boy drops his hands as if to reach for something or attempted to grab the gun (reports seem to differ) and daddy pulls the trigger.

Now Lucy, only an idiot would try to take a gun from someone who is pointing it at you (or unless it is in the movies and the hero has to do it to save a life,) especially if the person with the gun pointing at them knows that the police have been called.

So, lets give the kid the benefit of doubt and assume he was reaching for something innocent, like his ID or cell phone to prove to the father that he had spoken to the girl prior to coming over at 2AM.

Daddy, with a shit ton of adrenalin running through him reacts by squeezing the trigger. Boy dies.

Up until that boy moved his hands for whatever reason, sounds like daddy was in no hurry to put a bullet in anyone. If he was, why the hell didnt he shoot the kid first and then call 911?

And to imply he was just looking for an excuse to shoot someone doesn't wash, it is an attempt to demonize an individual who was being perfectly reasonable and trying not to shoot someone.

And if the daughter was so scared of daddy that she had to sneak a boy into the house at 2 in the morning, indicates that the daughter was too stupid for words.

And on the scared of daddy daughter argument, there is no evidence anywhere at this time that the father was an overbearing despot of a parent that ruled his home with an iron fist and violence.

So, to use a legal term, you are assuming facts not in evidence or has no support to prove the claim.

Now if you have proof that the daughter was afraid of her father, a source, please supply it.

And one last really fucking stupid question.

If she could sneak a boy into the house, why the fuck could she not sneak out of the house?

Stands to reason that if she were afraid of her father, getting the hell out of the house makes a hell of a lot more sense than to be in the house with a person you are scared of.

Let me guess, she could not sneak out of the house because she was chained to something? maybe her father had a gps tracking collar on her? Wait, I know, he had a extreme version of a shock collar on her that would shock the fuck out of her if she left the house or yard, like the invisible fence systems for dogs?


The response to this post should make it make it abundantly clear to you that anything said
by a gun owner is a lie and that the way to true understanding is to concoct a version diametrically opposed
to anything he says.(sarcasm font off)

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 148
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:50:41 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Your trying to justify murder, jfl1961. I stated my reasons clearly, and if as a jury why I might come to the decision based on the currently evidence. If we go down your 'logic'....THEN....I can shoot anyone, at any time, for any reason, and be held to NOT ACCOUNTIBILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY. That's not a Republic, nor a Democracy, jlf1961, that's ANARACHY!

My view of Texas is the average IQ is about 82. Given that it had George W. Bush and Rick Perry as their governors. Not to mention placing so many idiot creationists on the Texas Board of Education to describe the overwhelming amount of evidence of the Theory of Evolution, Climate Change, and a host of other scientific understandings. When I think of Texas, intelligence, education or wisdom are the words I would accuse the state's population of holding as virtues. Where the life of an American is determined not based on how equal they are to all others, but, by how much more money they hold over everyone else. When Texas Legislators pass all sorts of silly and retarded laws in an effort to 'be dumber' than Arizona and Florida, doesn't fill me with much confidence that they should be taken seriously.

Maybe I happen to live in a state where this sort of shit is just not allowed. That the shooter is taken before a judge to determine if a trial is really needed nor not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
You know, I have pointed out the law in Texas a number of times on this topic, and I have yet to see anyone acknowledge that the father was acting within the law in every respect. The Texas statute covering this is pretty straight forward.


If they do not prosecute this guy, Texas is simply inviting more tragedies to its state in the future.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
The only thing that would have changed a damn thing is if the daughter had not lied and then daddy shot the kid.


Your going to blame the whole thing on the daughter? Sorry, but when you have a firearm....its YOUR RESPOSNIBILITY....its used correctly. I'm surprised I have to explain this elementary concept to a gun owner. In addition he's the ADULT. That means its his responsibility to maintain discipline and let cooler heads prevail.

If you would do the same as this dingbat, do yourself a favor, turn in all your guns now. Your clearly not responsible with that sort of power! The difference between you and me, is that I do not worship my guns like a freaking religion! They are tools. If I miss use these tools (arguably pretty powerful tools at that), I should be held fully accountable by society. Those that behave in a reckless and immature manner, make it tougher on all gun owners nationwide.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
1) A 16 year old girl invites a 17 year old boy to her home at 2AM. First, since she is a minor living at home, the parents (not the children) have the final say on who can come into the house and at what time.


Did you....NOT...FULLY....READ....the post I made? The one your commending on? Bullet Point 'B'? Or were you completely comatose during your teenage years, nor have had kids, nor have observed teenagers doing dumb and foolish things? You can babble legalities all you want, and its IRELEVANT. That's the point!

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Legally, trying to use the "he was invited" argument is invalid. The parent did not invite the boy over and the daughter did not have the legal right to invite someone into the house without her parents approval.


I'm not sure whether to laugh at the absurdity of your 'argument' here or just blast it for being dumb! Obviously you failed human psychology 101....

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
2) This part is for Lucy, and everyone else claiming the father was a violent, gun toting maniac, if daddy was a violent hot head who the girl was deathly afraid of, why the hell did he call 911 and wait for the police instead of shooting the boy outright?


Do you even bother to read your own material after you finish writing it? Just to make sure it sounds correct? I'm not trying to be a grammar or English language Nazi. I'm going to rephrase what you placed here:

"If the father was as '....violent hot head....' (your words) while the police were present in the house, would the boy have been shot to death?"

I think what your trying to ask is why he would shot the kid after the 911 call was made but before he shot the kid because he is a cool cucumber. I disagree. There exists NO JUSTIFCATION to kill someone with a firearm even AFTER you call 911, UNLESS the circumstances can be PROVEN readily. That is what keeps some nut from stepping into an Olive Garden on a packed Friday supper time and mowing them all down with his AK after dialing 911. What unbiased sources exist there that can say on legal record that the kid was '....reaching down to his waist to get something...'? The killer? The daughter who lied to protect the kid and will then protect her father from going to jail? We have only the killer's words. Just like with Michael Dunn and Zimmerman.

So what your saying is if someone mows down sixteen people with a firearm, you would defend that person's actions since they are a fellow firearm owner? Do you have any ability to understand just how silly this notion is?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
The events leading up to the shooting is as follows, as per statements to the police.
A) Boy found hiding in daughter's room, daughter lies about not knowing the boy.
B) Father calls 911 and detains the boy while waiting for police
C) An argument ensues between the boy, the daughter and the father, and it becomes heated. Now during this time, the boy is holding his hands in such a manner so as to assure gun toting crazed violent daddy does not shoot him.
D) The boy drops his hands as if to reach for something or attempted to grab the gun (reports seem to differ) and daddy pulls the trigger.


The police statement from the killer.....how convenient....eh? Is there any video showing this to be true? In this day and age, when most smartphones have video capture capabilities? None of those three had a smartphone handy?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Now Lucy, only an idiot would try to take a gun from someone who is pointing it at you (or unless it is in the movies and the hero has to do it to save a life,) especially if the person with the gun pointing at them knows that the police have been called.


Your assuming, based on NO EVIDENCE, that the boy was trying to take the gun from the adult. After all, once more stating (what is this, the 37th time mentioned?) you are accepting the killer's words without an ounce of question.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
So, lets give the kid the benefit of doubt and assume he was reaching for something innocent, like his ID or cell phone to prove to the father that he had spoken to the girl prior to coming over at 2AM.


Yeah, 'benefit of the doubt' structured in a total fantasy to justify the father's irresponsibility with firearms as being correct. How do you even arrive at this string of thinking and NOT say its full of shit?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
And one last really fucking stupid question.

If she could sneak a boy into the house, why the fuck could she not sneak out of the house?


Well geewizz Jlf1961, if you had actually....READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE....you might have been aware that the daughter was catch in the act by her little brother reporting things to their father.

Apparently you throw out facts for complete fantasy....

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Stands to reason that if she were afraid of her father, getting the hell out of the house makes a hell of a lot more sense than to be in the house with a person you are scared of.


What evidence do you have that she fears her father in that article....BEFORE...the events of the moment? Please, produce that full psych eval for us all to look through. More so, how could she prevent with perfect accuracy how the chain of events would take place? I tell you what, I'll accept that your not full of shit if you can give me the correct powerball jackpot numbers BEFORE Friday at 12:01am. Otherwise your being hypocritical of the daughter's ability to glean the future with said perfect accuracy!

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Let me guess, she could not sneak out of the house because she was chained to something? maybe her father had a gps tracking collar on her? Wait, I know, he had a extreme version of a shock collar on her that would shock the fuck out of her if she left the house or yard, like the invisible fence systems for dogs?


This section here is so fully of bat-shit crazy its not even funny. Just....LOOK....at the length and depth you will travel in your argument to justify why this could was 'right' in his action and should NOT be held fully accountability and responsible for his actions in court.



He has the police report, all the debunkers have is their unshakable faith that all gun owners are just
waiting for a chance to kill.
And of course that everything they say is a lie.
Not one piece of evidence just empty rhetoric.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 149
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:51:31 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
Lucy and others are speaking to the tiresome ness and irrationality of it all and the tone death attitudes of gun proponents -- now most insanely demonstrated by the NRA opposing Obama's surgeon general nominee.

Way to stay on subject.


Actually, he is staying on topic by explaining this particular situation from a global perspective. An how this particular situation draws on the difference sides to arrive at their views on this situation towards past, current or future events.

Really a good insight of cloud....


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 150
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:54:07 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
Lucy and others are speaking to the tiresome ness and irrationality of it all and the tone death attitudes of gun proponents -- now most insanely demonstrated by the NRA opposing Obama's surgeon general nominee.

Way to stay on subject.


Actually, he is staying on topic by explaining this particular situation from a global perspective. An how this particular situation draws on the difference sides to arrive at their views on this situation towards past, current or future events.

Really a good insight of cloud....



Might be on a different thread.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 151
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:54:09 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Lucy and others are speaking to the tiresome ness and irrationality of it all and the tone death attitudes of gun proponents -- now most insanely demonstrated by the NRA opposing Obama's surgeon general nominee.

Way to stay on subject.


Cloudboy was harsh but fair...

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 152
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:56:26 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

................Actually , as pointed out earlier, thanks to her lie the father was led to believe
the situation was different than it was.
She could be tried for using her father as the weapon as it was her lie that precipitated the violence.


Does no one think that Dad couldn't tell the difference between fucking and rape??




Where they having sex when he walked in?



You have got to be kidding........ Did you miss the part where the father heard the noises. If he had said he heard his daughter screaming in terror you may have a point.

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 153
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 4:59:04 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
He has the police report, all the debunkers have is their unshakable faith that all gun owners are just
waiting for a chance to kill.
And of course that everything they say is a lie.
Not one piece of evidence just empty rhetoric.


So, lets see if I understand this....

You would automatically take the side of a gun owner whom mows down dozens of people, without question, nor hesitation, and without thought, because he's a gun owner?

That's not 'sensible gun ownership' BamaD, that's a fanatics' view on a religion! In this case, the religion is the worship of the firearm. Which is what makes gun nuts different from gun owners. Notice how the gun owners are saying this guy could be at legal fault and should be sent to trial? To allow a judge and jury to determine if there was actual fault on the part of the father?

Frankly a rather pathetic reply to my post.....


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 154
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 5:01:49 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Lucy and others are speaking to the tiresome ness and irrationality of it all and the tone death attitudes of gun proponents -- now most insanely demonstrated by the NRA opposing Obama's surgeon general nominee.


Lets see, attitudes of gun proponents?

Lets see, just because the facts don't support a charge of murder? They don't even support a charge of manslaughter.

However, if you dont believe me, how about:

quote:

Texas Self-Defense Gun Laws

Gun usage in Texas isn’t as free as people think it is. Gun owners are instructed to retreat first. It’s important to always try every effort to evade attack before using your gun, but having your gun armed and ready is not illegal while under attack.


Source

Now since the father was in his home, retreat is not an option, because of the right to protect property or family from harm.

The definition of murder in common law is:

quote:

murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. The term malice aforethought did not necessarily mean that the killer planned or premeditated on the killing, or that he or she felt malice toward the victim. Generally, malice aforethought referred to a level of intent or reck-lessness that separated murder from other killings and warranted stiffer punishment.
source

Now if you have some proof the man did in fact know the boy and felt malice toward him, you have a case for murder. The problem is the fact the boy was not killed on discovery, in fact the father called the police. Seriously a dumb move if you actually are going to kill someone.

Then you have manslaughter

quote:

the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or otherwise in circumstances not amounting to murder.


There is a case, I freely admit that, however, Texas is a castle doctrine state, thus defense of home, property, family, even the family dog can and is used for justification for the use of deadly force

So here is the situation, as stated by law enforcement authorities to the media:

A 55 year old father of at least two children discovers a 17 year old in his daughter's bedroom and she claims to not know the boy. Father has a gun drawn, but like any rational human being, he calls the cops. While waiting for the police there evidently was a discussion of some type, hence the authorities reporting an argument. The teenager drops his hands and reaches for something, according to the statements made to the authorities, and the father pulls the trigger.

The mitigating factors I highlighted and the last is the key.

The boy made a movement, the father did not know the intent (according to statements by the authorities) and pulled the trigger.

You know, if a police officer kills someone in the same circumstances, it is a clean shoot? As long as their is corroborating evidence. You know, witness statements, dash cam footage, and now, since there are some departments planning on putting lapel cameras on their officers, you wont even need a dash cam.

So you mind telling me where my attitude is tone deaf?

Hell tell me where any gun proponent said anything that places the guilt on the victim? or that it is the victim's fault, with the exception of making the mistake of moving arms and hands while facing a drawn gun, it is a tragedy of errors.

There is one person who could have prevented all of this, the daughter, simply by telling the truth. You see, if she had, there would be one hell of a doubt, and even in gun loving Texas, the man would be charged with at least second degree.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 155
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 5:01:59 PM   
deathtothepixies


Posts: 683
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD



And it isn't a walk in the park for the father and the soon to be grounded for life daughter.

I'm sure the father is distraught and the daughter traumatised but they are going to walk in the park again unlike the dead kid

He's dead remember?

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 156
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 5:05:43 PM   
MrBukani


Posts: 1920
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline
Don't you just love america? You can have the attention span of a nad, the brain of a deformed waterhead monkey and own a gun. This must be paradise. I will book a ticket straight away.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 157
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 5:07:56 PM   
deathtothepixies


Posts: 683
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

dump it all on the father
who was the second victim here.


Fucking hell!

There is only one victim here, the dead kid.

How complicated is it?



Bullshit. there are many victims in this case. What a shame you can't see that.


Ok I will accept there is more than one victim here, the people involved and the families associated with them are under a lot of stress.

But will you accept that there is a pretty fucking big drop off victimwise between being dead and alive?

You are either overplaying the still alive father and daughters anguish or vastly underplaying the value you place on the life of the dead person

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 158
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 5:20:22 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
He has the police report, all the debunkers have is their unshakable faith that all gun owners are just
waiting for a chance to kill.
And of course that everything they say is a lie.
Not one piece of evidence just empty rhetoric.


So, lets see if I understand this....

You would automatically take the side of a gun owner whom mows down dozens of people, without question, nor hesitation, and without thought, because he's a gun owner?

That's not 'sensible gun ownership' BamaD, that's a fanatics' view on a religion! In this case, the religion is the worship of the firearm. Which is what makes gun nuts different from gun owners. Notice how the gun owners are saying this guy could be at legal fault and should be sent to trial? To allow a judge and jury to determine if there was actual fault on the part of the father?

Frankly a rather pathetic reply to my post.....



I have never and I repeat never made any such statement or one that could rationally be seen as such.
Frankly an incredibly fanciful response to my post.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 159
RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... - 3/18/2014 5:21:39 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD



And it isn't a walk in the park for the father and the soon to be grounded for life daughter.

I'm sure the father is distraught and the daughter traumatised but they are going to walk in the park again unlike the dead kid

He's dead remember?

So only the dead are victims?

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to deathtothepixies)
Profile   Post #: 160
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Another shooting of an unarmed teen... Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125