| Forum Index > Closed |
|
TwoToneTerran
United States8841 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:16 Fission wrote: Rationalize what? The fact that I find it funny? I don't need to rationalize that - I simply find it so. Going to murder someone with silly string, I hope I have everyone in this thread's support. | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
Then I read that no one was injured, and felt better about myself. | ||
|
Flanagan
United States166 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:16 TwoToneTerran wrote: The problem is the people in this thread -- and there are plenty -- going "The kid deserved what he got!" and applauding the man's decision to attempt to murder a child. Stop trying to rationalize it. Laughing at a guy using a crossbow for anything because you're disconnected from the situation is okay. Rooting for this kind of thing to happen is not. PS: he wasn't travelling at highway speed, read the article. I think people see it differently because the kid isn't actually dead... they get the idea that Oh! An adult actually did something on their own without calling the police about a kid vandalizing MY cars! Awesome!... ... if that kid were dead, it'd be a whole different story with different opinions, and the chance of death was, however improbable, still possible... Part of me is saying good job, but I'd never want to actually wish someone else harm for doing something stupid like throwing a rock at a car. | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:18 iCanada wrote: At first, I laughed really hard... the story is just so absurd. Then I felt like a horrible person, because I just laughed at two incidents that could kill people. Then I read that no one was injured, and felt better about myself. Have a crossbow bolt stuck into your abdomen after it was projected from a moving vehicle is most definitely an injury. Probably a very painful one too. | ||
|
RajaF
Canada530 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:16 Mr. Wiggles wrote: How does a crossbow change the morality of siding with the shooter? What if he had a sword? A machete? A switchblade? A pistol? What if he had gotten out of his car and strangled the child with a rubber chicken? There were plenty of people in this thread saying things like "The kid got what was coming to him", or that he "deserved" it. The absurdity of the weapon, or humour that you find therein, doesn't change the fact that the shooter assaulted a minor with a deadly weapon. Siding with the shooter has nothing to do with what weapon he used, as he still meant to cause grievous harm and possibly death to the child. There were plenty of people laughing that the kid was injured, and arguing that it was right and commendable that he was injured, and that the shooter should be lauded for his efforts. His choice of weapon doesn't change his actions, and doesn't change what people represent when they side with the shooter and commend him. (I'm also not commenting on the people who find the situation absurd, or funny. I don't really care about them. I'm talking about the people I was arguing with, who in fact did applaud the efforts of the shooter, whose actions remain the same, regardless of weapon) Well, if you're gonna talk about intent, what motive did the kid have to throw rocks at moving cars? Did he not know what he was doing? Or maybe the kid was trying to cause grievous harm and possibly death to his victims. | ||
|
Fission
Canada1184 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:17 TwoToneTerran wrote: Going to murder someone with silly string, I hope I have everyone in this thread's support. You have my support. I hope that the news article reads "Boy taunts other boy on internet regarding boy throwing rocks at car and getting crossbowed, gets garroted by silly string", and I hope it spawns a thread as idiotic as this one. | ||
|
TidusX.Yuna
United States239 Posts
| ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:19 overt wrote: Have a crossbow bolt stuck into your abdomen after it was projected from a moving vehicle is most definitely an injury. Probably a very painful one too. Well obviously, but seriously hurt I mean. Like the kid isn't in serious condition in the hospital. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
 I know we like to think we are more "civilized" then people of the past but we really aren't. We just have greater technology but human behavior will always comedown to careless disregard for others (when you look at humanity as a whole). | ||
|
LRObot
United States153 Posts
Feelgood story TBQH. | ||
|
Theovide
Sweden914 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:17 HereticSaint wrote: The response from "people like you" would be exactly the same if he went and beat the shit out of the kid. You're wrong and yes, if there was a kid who was constantly throwing rocks at my car and the parents weren't making serious progress to stop it and paying for any and all repairs to my car including potential time lost from work and having to deal with that bullshit I would beat the snot out of the kid. Also, a child with a gun is still a person with a gun just like a child with a rock is still a person with a rock. Maybe he shouldn't be using weapons, or would it have been better if I started chucking rocks back at his head? I'm sure you never did anything stupid at all when you where a kid? Fact is it wouldn't suprise me if you've done a lot of stupid still as a grown up, being that you still seem to reason as a kid. If a kid was throwing rocks at me, or at a car that I had, then I'd go to his parents, and if that didn't work, I'd go to the police. To beat the crap out of the kid or throw rocks back, that's what someone would do who still thinks as a 8 year old. Also I'm kind of disgusted with all people here saying the crowbowman is a hero, as it ended up now one could say that the kid should suit itself (lets not think about the fact that he probably has gone through some real shit in his life to start behaving like this). But the shooter could by no way have any idea that he wouldn't hit the kid on someplace else, giving the kid life long injuries or even killing him. For me, this is a story of a kid who's remarkably stupid, getting hurt by a grown up who is way more stupid and who should be jailed up. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
The title did made me laugh a little =) | ||
|
DizzyDrone
Netherlands629 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:04 towers wrote: Vigilante justice is wrong, crossbow or rock. And honestly if I had to choose between the two wrongs, I would rather be neighbors to a kid who throws rocks at cars then be a neighbor to an adult who shoots kids with a crossbow. Get some perspective people. Here's some perspective; http://www.depers.nl/binnenland/57622/Mogelijk-misdrijf-bij-ongeluk-Best.html (Dutch article) In this case a woman died because idiots like this kid were throwing rocks from a fly-over. This is not a unique case, I could probably find you a dozen similar ones where people in the car got injured in the past few years. I don't know if the guy was aiming to kill, but the article also doesn't mention what size rocks the kid was throwing either. As far as I'm concerned both should have been arrested. | ||
|
Rostam
United States2552 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:22 Slaughter wrote: Crazy story, I mean its just weird as hell....A crossbow? Really who has that just sitting in their car. I guess its the same kind of crazy person who would shoot at a freaking kid for throwing rocks. Damn people are crazy. I know the kid was being an asshole for doing that (plus it could cause a crash) but seriously? Way to crazily overreact. I'm just thinking "why?" Why throw rocks at cars (seriously even as a kid I knew that doing that was both assholish and dangerous) and Why would it be worth possibly killing someone over? The kid deserved a scolding/punishment from his parents not a crossbow bolt to his chest. WTF is with people I know we like to think we are more "civilized" then people of the past but we really aren't. We just have greater technology but human behavior will always comedown to careless disregard for others (when you look at humanity as a whole).I'd like to think the kid would deserve more than a scolding from his parents for recklessly endangering the lives (and property) of others for his own amusement, but maybe that's just me. Anyway, odds are the guy is not crazy and just seriously overreacted for whatever reason. Yes, he deserves to punished to the fullest extent of the law, but I don't think making a bad decision in the heat of the moment makes him some kind of a deranged psychopath. | ||
|
Bobgrimly
New Zealand250 Posts
If the kid hadn't been doing anything wrong no one would be laughing. Moral of the story. Do wrong things and when it backfires people will laugh. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:19 RajaF wrote: Did I say that the child should be absolved from any guilt in throwing rocks at cars?Well, if you're gonna talk about intent, what motive did the kid have to throw rocks at moving cars? Did he not know what he was doing? Or maybe the kid was trying to cause grievous harm and possibly death to his victims. On August 31 2011 14:54 Mr. Wiggles wrote: In fact, I'm pretty sure I said the opposite. I think he should be charged with whatever illegalities he was committing. His actions shouldn't give you the right to attempt to murder him, however.In general, people aren't trying to absolve the child from any sort of guilt. He is an idiot for throwing rocks at a car, and would hopefully get charged for doing something illegal. Stating that the guy who shot the child with a crossbow is despicable and grossly over-reacted is not the same as saying that the child shouldn't have gotten in trouble for throwing rocks. So, we get back to the original argument of the thread. If someone is doing something illegal, that has the potential to harm you or others, or cause damage to property, are you entitled, and in the right, to take violent counter-measures against them? If you saw someone speeding down the road, or driving erratically in a way which had the potential to cause harm to you or other drivers, would you get out of your car and shoot them if you were both stopped at the same red light? This basically comes down to the question of whether you would allow and engage in vigilantism, or not. If you think the shooter is in the right, then you agree with said vigilantism, but also with the use of disproportionate violence in the administering of it. I'm also going to bed now, so don't expect any answers from me for several hours. | ||
|
fortheGG
United Kingdom1002 Posts
On August 31 2011 15:28 Bobgrimly wrote: Its funny. If you do something wrong and suffer a consequence it is funny to other people. Doesn't matter how severe the consequence, other people like to see wrong doers suffer. If the kid hadn't been doing anything wrong no one would be laughing. Moral of the story. Do wrong things and when it backfires people will laugh. I don't think anyone would laugh if they ran him over with the car. The only funny thing is that they used a crossbow. The kid probably deserved what he got seeing as he isn't dead or seriously injured (I'm sure they'd report that if he was). | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
| ||
|
Megakenny
Canada829 Posts
| ||
|
Wartortle
Australia504 Posts
honestly i think the rock throwing is more dangerous, people die from that all the time. what are the chances of killing a kid with a cross bow out of a moving car, less id say. | ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
PiGosaur Monday
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Online Event
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Online Event
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
