15 year olds with parents that neglect to whip their ass

... What about the 15 year old son of a billionaire rather than 15 year old white trash?

 

Call me old fashioned, but I can't see myself, as a parent, doing anything other than burning the dude's house down and then putting a few in the old man.

I'd be insane on grief y'see.

 

Hence the problem of vigilantism(sp?).

 

Dio said

Tru dat Dio.

Smiley for what its worth there is my compromise. You make some valid points that I do respect but I do not agree with you as a whole. While I may not be as eloquent and well spoken as some of the theologians you may be studying up there in Canada. And I may have pushed the envelope for dramatic effect but, there may be some if only merely a small kernel of insight that you can walk away with having considered my perspective. That is if you choose to open that Pandora’s Box. I think Dio hopefully has some middle ground we can both agree on.

I just cannot resist.

Chester at least here in the states class warfare has been a successful political tool of the left and its use has affected the ideology of the general opinion very thoroughly. If the kid was the son of a rich billionaire then everyone would agree it’s the kids fault just like my analogy example of me and the project pimp daddy.

 

While I don't think either party is right in this situation, class warfare and all of that are irrelevant. There is a dead kid and an old man who will never live this down. This isn't about class, or left and right, or anything but 2 people who didn't respect each other, and were unable to connect on any kind of meaningful level. The old man saw a punk kid, the punk kid saw a cranky old man. Neither one of them acknowledged the other's humanity. You want to talk about the break-down of civil society, why weren't these 2 involved in each others lives other than to yell at each other. Instead of a neighborhood this was a group of people who held individual lives in close proximity to each other. I really think this is a case of people really seperating themselves too much from there community. The parents should have been closer with their neighbor, and should have known what was going on. The old man should have been involved in the kids life in more ways than just yelling at the kid for crossing his lawn.

It takes a village to raise a child. Where was the village?

 

Yes.

But the kid just walked across the guy's lawn. And maybe threw a few well-chosen words at the guy.

The guy, on the other hand, SHOT AND KILLED the kid.

I am astonished by everyone (apart from smurf) who is trying to defend that behaviour.

 

We should all go and rent the movie "To Kill a Mockingbird" and learn a little about civility with your neighbors.

Hold on isn't that the book Hinkley was fascinated with?

 

Unfortunately, I think some people are not seeing the gravity of the situation. A human life was lost here. The parents lost a child, the child lost a life, the man lost his respect and dignity, and all for what? I have a feeling that a stronger sense of community would have averted all of this. And that's the part that bothers me the most. None of these people care about each other. When I was a kid my neighbors cared about me, cared about my family. I played in their yards, and when I did something I shouldn't they told my parents. It was a nice little community. Now there are drug dealers hanging around where I used to live, and the only reason they can get away with it is because everyone is "minding their own business". Meaning they don't care about anyone but themselves and their own.

 

Yes. And no.

In the area I live, it used to be full of drug dealers and people minding their own business, but lately a sense of community is emerging as young families move into the area.

I know my neighbours on both sides, as well as at least four other households on our street.

And you're right dio, no one is shooting anyone.

 

It's hard to shoot someone after you've looked them in the eye and seen that they suffer the same human condition that you do.

 

That's when a tear comes to your eye, and you both start to put your gun down... and then BAM, you raise yours really quick and shoot him anyways. Realizing he suffers the same human condition that you do, he might of pulled a move like the one you just did only maybe a little while later because you pulled it off first.

 

I have respect and pity for the old guy. He appeared to have tried every sensible solution to resolve the issue with the kid. He made complaints to the parents and the police. No one did anything. The kid had no right to be on that guys 'private property'. Especially after being asked time and time again to stay off the lawn. It didnt just happen one day. The old man wasnt hiding in the bushes and the kid cut across the grass and got shot. The kid came back looking for a fight. The only problem is he brought a knife to a gun fight.

What if the kid had shot the old man? The old man tells the kid to get off his lawn and the kid shoots the old man instead.

That old guy has the right, to protect his property and himself. Its in the constitution.

Now some lame ass jury might see this as some poor kid who was going to the pharmacy to get his moms methadone, but I think once the case comes out it will show how this old man was provoked over time and felt there was no other solution.

All the kid had to do was stay away and he would still be out smoking crack today. But he didnt.

 

When I was a kid, I fucked with this old man until he lost it one day and he told me he would kill me cuase hes got nothing to lose. Sure enough I never came back in his yard to mess with him. That kid got what was coming to him!

 

I see where your logic is going phatboy. The problem is you have several assumptions that you've made that the article never stated.

You're right, the old man planned to shoot the kid when he came back. This didn't just happen one day, it was pre-meditated. Hence the reason he should be charged with 1st degree murder.

Both unreasonable assumptions. The kid probably would not have wanted to argue with a cranky old man carrying a 4/10 shotgun. Second, the news article never mentioned the kid carrying any sort of weapon, at all. He never threatened the old man with damage to life or limb.

The kid didn't shoot the old man, so this is completely irrelevant.

Which Article of the Constitution gives you the right to put 2 slugs into a kid for being on your lawn? I don't remember reading that one.

It doesn't matter if the kid was going to buy poison for the Pope, the guy shot him twice. Over his lawn. What if his homeowners association hadn't approved his plants. If they came by and removed the plants, which they have the legal right to do, would he have had the right to shoot them as well? That's assuming the old man had a homeowners association, but you get the idea. The idea that he was provoked over time and there was no other solution? Doesn't matter, he was not defending anything of nearly equal value to what he destroyed. This wasn't the government encroaching on his property, it was a neighborhood kid.

No argument about the staying away, but there are countless other ways this situation could have been avoided, the simplest way being this selfish old fuck remembering that he was part of a community, and that community was more important than his lawn.

 

Has anybody ever changed anybody's mind about anything in these forums?*

* With the SPECTACULAR exception of dio's conversion over gun laws, for which I take FULL CREDIT.

 

My own detective work on that should get at least half credit. But you were the push that got that particular stone rolling, so partial credit.

 

Dio

The article said that the old man had made numerous complaints to the parents and the police. Several times. Numerous complaints. Hence it didnt just happen one day. It had been ongoing. The kid was doing it on purpose. The article said the kid was shot when he returned to the old mans house. Not the old man went to the kids house and shot him. The knife to the gun fight was an analogy.

If you move into a neighbor hood and it has a covenance you sign a contract to abide by that covenance when you move in. They wont come over and pull plants. They put leins on your property. I know this cause a co-workers wife is on the committee in his neighborhood and that is how you get results. You warn them, you fine them, when the fine isnt paid, you put a lein on their property. If it is for an uncut yard they will send a grounds crew by to cut the grass, then bill the homeowner. You have to sign the contract when you by the house. You dont sign the covenance you dont get the house.

Yep when he came back.

14th amendment "Protection of Property and Agricultural Crops"

So what should the old man have done? He had tried approaching the parents, complained to the police and no resolution was given to him. What else could he have done? Move? Let his yard go to shit?

When do you draw the line in the sand?

 

Somewhere short, preferably a good deal short, of actually killing anybody.

 

Dont think that I want to high five the old guy for killing the kid. I dont think the kid deserved to die for being a dick to an old man.

But someone please tell me what else the old guy could do.

 

Not again, no.