|
On August 31 2011 12:51 Bobgrimly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:42 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 31 2011 12:36 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:29 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:28 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:20 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:19 Bobgrimly wrote:
If the kid died I wouldn't blame the shooter. I would blame the kids parents. My parents taught me right from wrong.
If you are stupid enough to discuss whether or not the shooter over reacted the first thing you should be discussing is how a child is not taught that throwing rocks at a moving vehicle can result in damage to not only property but to the drivers and occupants of said vehicles. Make excuses for the kid all you like. Because he is a kid is no excuse. What he was doing had potentially lethal consequences.
Lets all laugh at the dumb kid and enjoy this as it should be enjoyed. A relatively cheap lesson he learned without the help of his obviously useless parents. are you an anarchocapitalist this is a serious qustion Nope. Just believe that if you are foolish enough to analyse a random event and start making condemnations then you should start at the beginning. The kid obviously doesn't respect people or their property. Something my parents taught me. So blame the parents. If the kid wasn't being a little prick I doubt anyone would be laughing at the fact he was shot. Had he been minding his own business and was shot in the manner he was most people would be very eager to form a lynch mob for the shooter. So the problem started with the kid and his lack of respect. Hence its funny he got hurt. Stop trying to be all upset over something that is hilarious karma as many people have pointed out. you should look into it because what you're advocating is pretty much lawless vigilante justice You are a mindless troll but I am bored so I will bite. If you had reading comprehension past a 2 year old level you might be able to see I am pointing out that his parenting led to his current hospitalisation and perhaps if people taught their children respect for other people and their property, crime would be non existent. Unfortunately there are many bad parents so I guess its ok for kids to act like a delinquent and then for you to get upset when they suffer for their delinquency. Just remember next time you want to throw rocks... someone might have a crossbow or worse... a GUN. Tell your kids!!! Why are you being condescending? No amount of damage is the equivalent of hurting a child, despite the age. Believe it or not, kids know right from wrong, they just can't measure the severity. Throwing rocks at cars seems minor, it won't break the car and if the rocks were small, they wouldn't do any major damage. Do you think a child, who can't drive nor know the costs of cars or the ideas of scratching or denting is aware that rocks at cars causes severe monetary damage? Be realistic. A child's comprehension is not the equivalent of our's. The idea of "knowing right from wrong" is a broad generalization which you never refine on the finer points such as severity and depth of one's "wrongness". It's not bad parenting, it's just a lack of grasping the situation. You can't blame bad parenting all the time. Especially when the person overreacted. Just because the legitimate ways of reporting an incident or teaching a child what he is doing is wrong/discouraging isn't as strong or extensively treated to your standard doesn't mean going to the extreme is suddenly acceptable or the norm. You can and should blame parents and children. Parents take on the responsibility of raising children when they make them. They should be responsible for their actions. Until the child is of legal age or emancipated the parents should be responsible for its actions. Simple really. Just means as a parent you ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE A PARENT to your child.
Nice leap.
Blaming the parents for the irrational thinking of the child is correct.
Blaming the parents for his hospitalization is leaping.
Good try.
It's so easy to tell parents to parent properly without taking into account their situation or socioeconomic status.
|
On August 31 2011 12:53 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:51 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:42 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 31 2011 12:36 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:29 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:28 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:20 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:19 Bobgrimly wrote:
If the kid died I wouldn't blame the shooter. I would blame the kids parents. My parents taught me right from wrong.
If you are stupid enough to discuss whether or not the shooter over reacted the first thing you should be discussing is how a child is not taught that throwing rocks at a moving vehicle can result in damage to not only property but to the drivers and occupants of said vehicles. Make excuses for the kid all you like. Because he is a kid is no excuse. What he was doing had potentially lethal consequences.
Lets all laugh at the dumb kid and enjoy this as it should be enjoyed. A relatively cheap lesson he learned without the help of his obviously useless parents. are you an anarchocapitalist this is a serious qustion Nope. Just believe that if you are foolish enough to analyse a random event and start making condemnations then you should start at the beginning. The kid obviously doesn't respect people or their property. Something my parents taught me. So blame the parents. If the kid wasn't being a little prick I doubt anyone would be laughing at the fact he was shot. Had he been minding his own business and was shot in the manner he was most people would be very eager to form a lynch mob for the shooter. So the problem started with the kid and his lack of respect. Hence its funny he got hurt. Stop trying to be all upset over something that is hilarious karma as many people have pointed out. you should look into it because what you're advocating is pretty much lawless vigilante justice You are a mindless troll but I am bored so I will bite. If you had reading comprehension past a 2 year old level you might be able to see I am pointing out that his parenting led to his current hospitalisation and perhaps if people taught their children respect for other people and their property, crime would be non existent. Unfortunately there are many bad parents so I guess its ok for kids to act like a delinquent and then for you to get upset when they suffer for their delinquency. Just remember next time you want to throw rocks... someone might have a crossbow or worse... a GUN. Tell your kids!!! Why are you being condescending? No amount of damage is the equivalent of hurting a child, despite the age. Believe it or not, kids know right from wrong, they just can't measure the severity. Throwing rocks at cars seems minor, it won't break the car and if the rocks were small, they wouldn't do any major damage. Do you think a child, who can't drive nor know the costs of cars or the ideas of scratching or denting is aware that rocks at cars causes severe monetary damage? Be realistic. A child's comprehension is not the equivalent of our's. The idea of "knowing right from wrong" is a broad generalization which you never refine on the finer points such as severity and depth of one's "wrongness". It's not bad parenting, it's just a lack of grasping the situation. You can't blame bad parenting all the time. Especially when the person overreacted. Just because the legitimate ways of reporting an incident or teaching a child what he is doing is wrong/discouraging isn't as strong or extensively treated to your standard doesn't mean going to the extreme is suddenly acceptable or the norm. You can and should blame parents and children. Parents take on the responsibility of raising children when they make them. They should be responsible for their actions. Until the child is of legal age or emancipated the parents should be responsible for its actions. Simple really. Just means as a parent you ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE A PARENT to your child. you don't know anything about this kids parents
I know they couldn't teach one of their kids not to throw rocks at cars. And that is a very basic concept..... therefore they probably won't win mother and father of the year.
|
On August 31 2011 12:26 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:21 RoosterSamurai wrote:On August 31 2011 12:18 JingleHell wrote:On August 31 2011 12:09 MozzarellaL wrote:On August 31 2011 12:04 dangots0ul wrote:
I find it hard to believe that this was just one instance. For someone to get a crossbow and know where the boy was and actually hit him with the crossbow makes me think this was a reoccurring incident.
If he owned the car is that defense of property? No, because the act occurred after the act damaging property occurred, so unless the actor was under the belief that the boy was going to throw another rock at his car (unlikely, given the fact that cars travel pretty fast compared to the speed that a boy can run and/or throw a rock), defense of property is a laughable defense. Even if the actor was under the belief the boy was going to throw another rock at his car, shooting him with a deadly weapon is not an appropriate defense. Not a single US jurisdiction allows for the use of deadly force to protect property as defense to a criminal charge. Even when I was in Iraq, when the rocks could be followed by Molotov cocktails or grenades, we weren't authorized to even threaten deadly force for mere rocks. The fact that it was a crossbow certainly adds some WTF factor, but it's definitely over the top. I know if my kid was throwing rocks at cars, he'd get his ass in trouble, but if he got even threatened with a serious weapon, I'd be going after the person in the car... You would go after the person in the car, but surely you would punish your kid afterwards...Right? Obviously. Someone else's stupid actions and decisions won't take away his responsibility for his.
Good man.
|
Its disturbing how many people think this is funny.....
Apparently just because it is a crossbow its hilarious. Crossbows are actually quite common for hunting, so it is not surprising to me at all.
The shooter shot the kid knowing that he might actually kill him, how the hell can anyone be rooting for him? Sure the kid is a hooligan for throwing rocks, but he doesn't deserve to be shot by anything.
|
|
|
On August 31 2011 11:33 Rice wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 11:32 brain_ wrote:
Am I a bad person for laughing pretty hard at this story? no, I laughed out loud from the thread title alone
Man me too, usually its all serious news topics that are raised in the general forum, then i see this and i lol'ed hard.
Turns out he got shot in the abdomen, he should be fine?
|
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?
IS THIS NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?
|
On August 31 2011 12:55 Bobgrimly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:53 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:51 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:42 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 31 2011 12:36 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:29 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:28 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:20 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:19 Bobgrimly wrote:
If the kid died I wouldn't blame the shooter. I would blame the kids parents. My parents taught me right from wrong.
If you are stupid enough to discuss whether or not the shooter over reacted the first thing you should be discussing is how a child is not taught that throwing rocks at a moving vehicle can result in damage to not only property but to the drivers and occupants of said vehicles. Make excuses for the kid all you like. Because he is a kid is no excuse. What he was doing had potentially lethal consequences.
Lets all laugh at the dumb kid and enjoy this as it should be enjoyed. A relatively cheap lesson he learned without the help of his obviously useless parents. are you an anarchocapitalist this is a serious qustion Nope. Just believe that if you are foolish enough to analyse a random event and start making condemnations then you should start at the beginning. The kid obviously doesn't respect people or their property. Something my parents taught me. So blame the parents. If the kid wasn't being a little prick I doubt anyone would be laughing at the fact he was shot. Had he been minding his own business and was shot in the manner he was most people would be very eager to form a lynch mob for the shooter. So the problem started with the kid and his lack of respect. Hence its funny he got hurt. Stop trying to be all upset over something that is hilarious karma as many people have pointed out. you should look into it because what you're advocating is pretty much lawless vigilante justice You are a mindless troll but I am bored so I will bite. If you had reading comprehension past a 2 year old level you might be able to see I am pointing out that his parenting led to his current hospitalisation and perhaps if people taught their children respect for other people and their property, crime would be non existent. Unfortunately there are many bad parents so I guess its ok for kids to act like a delinquent and then for you to get upset when they suffer for their delinquency. Just remember next time you want to throw rocks... someone might have a crossbow or worse... a GUN. Tell your kids!!! Why are you being condescending? No amount of damage is the equivalent of hurting a child, despite the age. Believe it or not, kids know right from wrong, they just can't measure the severity. Throwing rocks at cars seems minor, it won't break the car and if the rocks were small, they wouldn't do any major damage. Do you think a child, who can't drive nor know the costs of cars or the ideas of scratching or denting is aware that rocks at cars causes severe monetary damage? Be realistic. A child's comprehension is not the equivalent of our's. The idea of "knowing right from wrong" is a broad generalization which you never refine on the finer points such as severity and depth of one's "wrongness". It's not bad parenting, it's just a lack of grasping the situation. You can't blame bad parenting all the time. Especially when the person overreacted. Just because the legitimate ways of reporting an incident or teaching a child what he is doing is wrong/discouraging isn't as strong or extensively treated to your standard doesn't mean going to the extreme is suddenly acceptable or the norm. You can and should blame parents and children. Parents take on the responsibility of raising children when they make them. They should be responsible for their actions. Until the child is of legal age or emancipated the parents should be responsible for its actions. Simple really. Just means as a parent you ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE A PARENT to your child. you don't know anything about this kids parents I know they couldn't teach one of their kids not to throw rocks at cars. And that is a very basic concept..... therefore they probably won't win mother and father of the year.
Unfortunately, not every 16 year old kid is going to abide by everything his/her parents tell them. Just letting you know 
|
On August 31 2011 12:53 deathserv wrote:
I was amused by this as well, but as a law student, I also acknowledge that what occurred was potentially attempted murder depending on the sequence of events... I suppose that I shouldn't be surprised at the depths of stupidity in our country sometimes...
I agree, throwing rocks at moving cars is potentially attempted murder.
|
On August 31 2011 12:55 Bobgrimly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:53 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:51 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:42 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 31 2011 12:36 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:29 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:28 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:20 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:19 Bobgrimly wrote:
If the kid died I wouldn't blame the shooter. I would blame the kids parents. My parents taught me right from wrong.
If you are stupid enough to discuss whether or not the shooter over reacted the first thing you should be discussing is how a child is not taught that throwing rocks at a moving vehicle can result in damage to not only property but to the drivers and occupants of said vehicles. Make excuses for the kid all you like. Because he is a kid is no excuse. What he was doing had potentially lethal consequences.
Lets all laugh at the dumb kid and enjoy this as it should be enjoyed. A relatively cheap lesson he learned without the help of his obviously useless parents. are you an anarchocapitalist this is a serious qustion Nope. Just believe that if you are foolish enough to analyse a random event and start making condemnations then you should start at the beginning. The kid obviously doesn't respect people or their property. Something my parents taught me. So blame the parents. If the kid wasn't being a little prick I doubt anyone would be laughing at the fact he was shot. Had he been minding his own business and was shot in the manner he was most people would be very eager to form a lynch mob for the shooter. So the problem started with the kid and his lack of respect. Hence its funny he got hurt. Stop trying to be all upset over something that is hilarious karma as many people have pointed out. you should look into it because what you're advocating is pretty much lawless vigilante justice You are a mindless troll but I am bored so I will bite. If you had reading comprehension past a 2 year old level you might be able to see I am pointing out that his parenting led to his current hospitalisation and perhaps if people taught their children respect for other people and their property, crime would be non existent. Unfortunately there are many bad parents so I guess its ok for kids to act like a delinquent and then for you to get upset when they suffer for their delinquency. Just remember next time you want to throw rocks... someone might have a crossbow or worse... a GUN. Tell your kids!!! Why are you being condescending? No amount of damage is the equivalent of hurting a child, despite the age. Believe it or not, kids know right from wrong, they just can't measure the severity. Throwing rocks at cars seems minor, it won't break the car and if the rocks were small, they wouldn't do any major damage. Do you think a child, who can't drive nor know the costs of cars or the ideas of scratching or denting is aware that rocks at cars causes severe monetary damage? Be realistic. A child's comprehension is not the equivalent of our's. The idea of "knowing right from wrong" is a broad generalization which you never refine on the finer points such as severity and depth of one's "wrongness". It's not bad parenting, it's just a lack of grasping the situation. You can't blame bad parenting all the time. Especially when the person overreacted. Just because the legitimate ways of reporting an incident or teaching a child what he is doing is wrong/discouraging isn't as strong or extensively treated to your standard doesn't mean going to the extreme is suddenly acceptable or the norm. You can and should blame parents and children. Parents take on the responsibility of raising children when they make them. They should be responsible for their actions. Until the child is of legal age or emancipated the parents should be responsible for its actions. Simple really. Just means as a parent you ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE A PARENT to your child. you don't know anything about this kids parents I know they couldn't teach one of their kids not to throw rocks at cars. And that is a very basic concept..... therefore they probably won't win mother and father of the year.
my parents taught me a lot of thing that i disobeyed as a teenager because i was influenced by alternative peer groups or whatever
society is pretty complex when it comes to forming value systems it's not just a top down Parent->Child system, there are more things involved. the whole method by which people can get groomed into crime despite what their parents may or may not believe has a few explanations. look up differential association
|
On August 31 2011 12:44 Spacekyod wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:40 nemo14 wrote:
If you've never seen a crossbow in action then you probably have no way of conceiving exactly how deadly a loosed bolt is. I have watched deer take one through the heart/lungs and be dead before their legs even gave out, and I can tell you that what the guy in the car did was just as bad as any attempted murder with a firearm. If that bolt had landed six inches higher the kid would be IN THE GROUND right now.
You all just think it's funny because you don't connote a crossbow with dramatic death like you do a gun. How about getting hit in the head with a rock while you're driving 40mph?
What about it? Are you defending the shooter?
I'd understand your sentiment if the person in the car had pulled over, bent the kid over his knee, and given him a sound spanking, but that is worlds away from assault with a deadly weapon. Anyone who thinks that shooting a child is a justifiable method of disciplining him needs to step back and reassess their ideas about how to teach proper judgement.
|
On August 31 2011 12:58 Tektos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:53 deathserv wrote:
I was amused by this as well, but as a law student, I also acknowledge that what occurred was potentially attempted murder depending on the sequence of events... I suppose that I shouldn't be surprised at the depths of stupidity in our country sometimes... I agree, throwing rocks at moving cars is potentially attempted murder.
It was.... self defense.
I think maybe the medic from TF2 was there, you never know what his Crusader's Crossbow can do.
|
Hi everyone,
I have been reading over these forums now for some time, though I never bothered to sign up to post anything here. As a website for Starcraft enthusiasts it absolutely gets top marks, but I could never get past the reputation these forums have.
This will be my first post, and it wouldn't terribly surprise me if I discover that it's my last. I thought these forums were populated by intelligent people because of the nature of the often thought provoking content in the news that is posted and discussed here on a daily basis. I have to wonder though; I am utterly baffled at the overwhelming response either validating this reprehensible act, applauding the marksmanship, or making light of the situation. Firing a crossbow at a child from a car (moving or otherwise) for any reason is the height of callous negligent irresponsibility. What do you really know about the child? What if the child bled to death? What if the bolt missed and killed someone enjoying a morning stroll? Is this really the way we have been bred to respond to this type of behavior? Is it normal to suggest this is karma? What does it say about us when we look upon this as justice served or find it funny in any way?
DoctorHelvetica and Chargelot, I am thankful for people like you.
|
On August 31 2011 12:54 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:51 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:42 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 31 2011 12:36 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:29 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:28 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:20 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:19 Bobgrimly wrote:
If the kid died I wouldn't blame the shooter. I would blame the kids parents. My parents taught me right from wrong.
If you are stupid enough to discuss whether or not the shooter over reacted the first thing you should be discussing is how a child is not taught that throwing rocks at a moving vehicle can result in damage to not only property but to the drivers and occupants of said vehicles. Make excuses for the kid all you like. Because he is a kid is no excuse. What he was doing had potentially lethal consequences.
Lets all laugh at the dumb kid and enjoy this as it should be enjoyed. A relatively cheap lesson he learned without the help of his obviously useless parents. are you an anarchocapitalist this is a serious qustion Nope. Just believe that if you are foolish enough to analyse a random event and start making condemnations then you should start at the beginning. The kid obviously doesn't respect people or their property. Something my parents taught me. So blame the parents. If the kid wasn't being a little prick I doubt anyone would be laughing at the fact he was shot. Had he been minding his own business and was shot in the manner he was most people would be very eager to form a lynch mob for the shooter. So the problem started with the kid and his lack of respect. Hence its funny he got hurt. Stop trying to be all upset over something that is hilarious karma as many people have pointed out. you should look into it because what you're advocating is pretty much lawless vigilante justice You are a mindless troll but I am bored so I will bite. If you had reading comprehension past a 2 year old level you might be able to see I am pointing out that his parenting led to his current hospitalisation and perhaps if people taught their children respect for other people and their property, crime would be non existent. Unfortunately there are many bad parents so I guess its ok for kids to act like a delinquent and then for you to get upset when they suffer for their delinquency. Just remember next time you want to throw rocks... someone might have a crossbow or worse... a GUN. Tell your kids!!! Why are you being condescending? No amount of damage is the equivalent of hurting a child, despite the age. Believe it or not, kids know right from wrong, they just can't measure the severity. Throwing rocks at cars seems minor, it won't break the car and if the rocks were small, they wouldn't do any major damage. Do you think a child, who can't drive nor know the costs of cars or the ideas of scratching or denting is aware that rocks at cars causes severe monetary damage? Be realistic. A child's comprehension is not the equivalent of our's. The idea of "knowing right from wrong" is a broad generalization which you never refine on the finer points such as severity and depth of one's "wrongness". It's not bad parenting, it's just a lack of grasping the situation. You can't blame bad parenting all the time. Especially when the person overreacted. Just because the legitimate ways of reporting an incident or teaching a child what he is doing is wrong/discouraging isn't as strong or extensively treated to your standard doesn't mean going to the extreme is suddenly acceptable or the norm. You can and should blame parents and children. Parents take on the responsibility of raising children when they make them. They should be responsible for their actions. Until the child is of legal age or emancipated the parents should be responsible for its actions. Simple really. Just means as a parent you ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE A PARENT to your child. Nice leap. Blaming the parents for the irrational thinking of the child is correct. Blaming the parents for his hospitalization is leaping. Good try. It's so easy to tell parents to parent properly without taking into account their situation or socioeconomic status.
The amount of money you make or the culture you are brought up in might mean life is hard. It doesn't mean you have to be stupid. It doesn't mean you HAVE to be a criminal. Those are choices.
Maybe the kid runs with the wrong crowd. Maybe the parents aren't to blame and tried vigorously to teach him the potential repercussions of throwing rocks at cars and how he could cause an accident or someone might shoot him with a gun. Maybe now he understands what they tried to teach him. Odds are its a lesson he was never taught and now has to learn it for himself. And if he was never taught they are to blame for his current situation.
|
On August 31 2011 12:58 Tektos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:53 deathserv wrote:
I was amused by this as well, but as a law student, I also acknowledge that what occurred was potentially attempted murder depending on the sequence of events... I suppose that I shouldn't be surprised at the depths of stupidity in our country sometimes... I agree, throwing rocks at moving cars is potentially attempted murder.
it was in a neighborhood usually on residential streets the speed limit is around 25 MPH the size of the rock or the speed of the car was never mentioned you're grasping at straws trying to compare it to a crossbow shot
|
On August 31 2011 12:54 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:51 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:42 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 31 2011 12:36 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:29 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:28 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:20 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:19 Bobgrimly wrote:
If the kid died I wouldn't blame the shooter. I would blame the kids parents. My parents taught me right from wrong.
If you are stupid enough to discuss whether or not the shooter over reacted the first thing you should be discussing is how a child is not taught that throwing rocks at a moving vehicle can result in damage to not only property but to the drivers and occupants of said vehicles. Make excuses for the kid all you like. Because he is a kid is no excuse. What he was doing had potentially lethal consequences.
Lets all laugh at the dumb kid and enjoy this as it should be enjoyed. A relatively cheap lesson he learned without the help of his obviously useless parents. are you an anarchocapitalist this is a serious qustion Nope. Just believe that if you are foolish enough to analyse a random event and start making condemnations then you should start at the beginning. The kid obviously doesn't respect people or their property. Something my parents taught me. So blame the parents. If the kid wasn't being a little prick I doubt anyone would be laughing at the fact he was shot. Had he been minding his own business and was shot in the manner he was most people would be very eager to form a lynch mob for the shooter. So the problem started with the kid and his lack of respect. Hence its funny he got hurt. Stop trying to be all upset over something that is hilarious karma as many people have pointed out. you should look into it because what you're advocating is pretty much lawless vigilante justice You are a mindless troll but I am bored so I will bite. If you had reading comprehension past a 2 year old level you might be able to see I am pointing out that his parenting led to his current hospitalisation and perhaps if people taught their children respect for other people and their property, crime would be non existent. Unfortunately there are many bad parents so I guess its ok for kids to act like a delinquent and then for you to get upset when they suffer for their delinquency. Just remember next time you want to throw rocks... someone might have a crossbow or worse... a GUN. Tell your kids!!! Why are you being condescending? No amount of damage is the equivalent of hurting a child, despite the age. Believe it or not, kids know right from wrong, they just can't measure the severity. Throwing rocks at cars seems minor, it won't break the car and if the rocks were small, they wouldn't do any major damage. Do you think a child, who can't drive nor know the costs of cars or the ideas of scratching or denting is aware that rocks at cars causes severe monetary damage? Be realistic. A child's comprehension is not the equivalent of our's. The idea of "knowing right from wrong" is a broad generalization which you never refine on the finer points such as severity and depth of one's "wrongness". It's not bad parenting, it's just a lack of grasping the situation. You can't blame bad parenting all the time. Especially when the person overreacted. Just because the legitimate ways of reporting an incident or teaching a child what he is doing is wrong/discouraging isn't as strong or extensively treated to your standard doesn't mean going to the extreme is suddenly acceptable or the norm. You can and should blame parents and children. Parents take on the responsibility of raising children when they make them. They should be responsible for their actions. Until the child is of legal age or emancipated the parents should be responsible for its actions. Simple really. Just means as a parent you ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE A PARENT to your child. Nice leap. Blaming the parents for the irrational thinking of the child is correct. Blaming the parents for his hospitalization is leaping. Good try. It's so easy to tell parents to parent properly without taking into account their situation or socioeconomic status.
Good point, but overdone in my opinion.
Kids will be kids regardless of the parenting.
Parents cannot continuously babysit their children.
A more normal response to a kid throwing a rock at your car would be to go to the child's parents, and then that behavior would be corrected.
I doubt even the best socioeconomic status would stop a kid from being a kid as well.
|
On August 31 2011 12:26 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:23 Myrddraal wrote:On August 31 2011 12:10 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:05 MaestroSC wrote:
Who else thinks it should be mandatory for all drivers to carry crossbows in their cars from now on for self-defense?
I hope the guy makes a youtube video and dresses up as a masked robin hood "To vandals, all I have to say, is I'm watching and always ready!"
Glad the kid didnt die. but im glad he learned his lesson in probably the COOLEST way i have ever heard about. the lesson he learned is that it's ok to use deadly force to protect your property against children like with most cases when adults are violent with children they aren't learning not to perform the behavior that caused the violent reaction but they are internalizing the idea that using violence is acceptable in the first place If you wanna throw down life lessons like this and actually be taken seriously, maybe you should use some punctuation and sentance structure. Also seems like you are taking the responses in this thread way too seriously. you could also respond to my point instead of being upset that i don't use conventional "sentance structure" i tend to write in a stream of consciousness style? it's become a habit over the last few months i'm perfectly capable of writing formally but i choose not to it's pretty serious the implication that people so readily believe violence (particularly against a minor) is an acceptable solution in pretty much any case is disturbing to me
I never said I was upset, I just think that people would take you more seriously, if that is what you are after.
Also I don't really see the point in responding to your actual point in this case since you were responding to a comment that was clearly a joke.
|
On August 31 2011 13:00 Bobgrimly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:54 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 31 2011 12:51 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:42 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 31 2011 12:36 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:29 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:28 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 31 2011 12:20 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On August 31 2011 12:19 Bobgrimly wrote:
If the kid died I wouldn't blame the shooter. I would blame the kids parents. My parents taught me right from wrong.
If you are stupid enough to discuss whether or not the shooter over reacted the first thing you should be discussing is how a child is not taught that throwing rocks at a moving vehicle can result in damage to not only property but to the drivers and occupants of said vehicles. Make excuses for the kid all you like. Because he is a kid is no excuse. What he was doing had potentially lethal consequences.
Lets all laugh at the dumb kid and enjoy this as it should be enjoyed. A relatively cheap lesson he learned without the help of his obviously useless parents. are you an anarchocapitalist this is a serious qustion Nope. Just believe that if you are foolish enough to analyse a random event and start making condemnations then you should start at the beginning. The kid obviously doesn't respect people or their property. Something my parents taught me. So blame the parents. If the kid wasn't being a little prick I doubt anyone would be laughing at the fact he was shot. Had he been minding his own business and was shot in the manner he was most people would be very eager to form a lynch mob for the shooter. So the problem started with the kid and his lack of respect. Hence its funny he got hurt. Stop trying to be all upset over something that is hilarious karma as many people have pointed out. you should look into it because what you're advocating is pretty much lawless vigilante justice You are a mindless troll but I am bored so I will bite. If you had reading comprehension past a 2 year old level you might be able to see I am pointing out that his parenting led to his current hospitalisation and perhaps if people taught their children respect for other people and their property, crime would be non existent. Unfortunately there are many bad parents so I guess its ok for kids to act like a delinquent and then for you to get upset when they suffer for their delinquency. Just remember next time you want to throw rocks... someone might have a crossbow or worse... a GUN. Tell your kids!!! Why are you being condescending? No amount of damage is the equivalent of hurting a child, despite the age. Believe it or not, kids know right from wrong, they just can't measure the severity. Throwing rocks at cars seems minor, it won't break the car and if the rocks were small, they wouldn't do any major damage. Do you think a child, who can't drive nor know the costs of cars or the ideas of scratching or denting is aware that rocks at cars causes severe monetary damage? Be realistic. A child's comprehension is not the equivalent of our's. The idea of "knowing right from wrong" is a broad generalization which you never refine on the finer points such as severity and depth of one's "wrongness". It's not bad parenting, it's just a lack of grasping the situation. You can't blame bad parenting all the time. Especially when the person overreacted. Just because the legitimate ways of reporting an incident or teaching a child what he is doing is wrong/discouraging isn't as strong or extensively treated to your standard doesn't mean going to the extreme is suddenly acceptable or the norm. You can and should blame parents and children. Parents take on the responsibility of raising children when they make them. They should be responsible for their actions. Until the child is of legal age or emancipated the parents should be responsible for its actions. Simple really. Just means as a parent you ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE A PARENT to your child. Nice leap. Blaming the parents for the irrational thinking of the child is correct. Blaming the parents for his hospitalization is leaping. Good try. It's so easy to tell parents to parent properly without taking into account their situation or socioeconomic status. The amount of money you make or the culture you are brought up in might mean life is hard. It doesn't mean you have to be stupid. It doesn't mean you HAVE to be a criminal. Those are choices. Maybe the kid runs with the wrong crowd. Maybe the parents aren't to blame and tried vigorously to teach him the potential repercussions of throwing rocks at cars and how he could cause an accident or someone might shoot him with a gun. Maybe now he understands what they tried to teach him. Odds are its a lesson he was never taught and now has to learn it for himself. And if he was never taught they are to blame for his current situation.
Okay, yeah. You're talking beyond your own knowledge.
Chicago School of Sociology, see what's up and then come back :3!
What you are saying now is nonsensical and borderline rambling.
|
you see people can't really admit they like the idea of vigilante justice/shooting a kid with a crossbow without looking like sociopaths so they made up conclusions that were never mentioned like the car going 40MPH + or the rock being huge and chucked right into the windshield and other ridiculous "could have" situations that didn't happen
what DID happen is a kid got shot in the stomach with a crossbow for committing a potentially dangerous act of vandalism (not enough information provided in the article for any of you to determine how dangerous the rock thrower was) and although what the kid did was wrong and he should be prosecuted that is no excuse for the driver taking justice into his own hands and using deadly force
|
i don't get it. throwing rocks at a car from a bridge is wrong. but how in in anyway can it justify a passenger to have a weapon ready to shoot to kill? crossbow or not, it could easily have been an assault rifle. so it shouldn't make a difference.
the kid did wrong, but how can you see an adult in a car ready to kill? (an armed crossbow is as deadly as any other firearm).
please give more information since the op lacks it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
