|
On August 31 2011 12:14 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:11 Tektos wrote:On August 31 2011 12:07 Enervate wrote:
How can you side with the crossbow guy? The kid could have been seriously hurt or killed. Wtf is wrong with you people? The driver could have been seriously hurt or killed by the kid throwing rocks. Wtf is wrong with you? On August 31 2011 12:08 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On August 31 2011 12:01 Tektos wrote:
The kid was throwing rocks at PASSING CARS. People have died from rocks throw by shithead little kids hitting their car.
The people trying to pass this kid's actions off as "meh, just damaging property no big deal" need to seriously re-evaluate the risks involved at throwing rocks at moving vehicles.
I'm sure if the story was "Boy throws rocks at car, driver dies" your reactions would be a whole lot different, wouldn't they?
If a kid is going to endanger my life and the life of other innocent people, he deserves to be shot in the stomach with a crossbow. People who speed endanger the lives of others on the road. People die from people who speed and/or run red lights in their vehicles. So, if I see someone speeding and am stopped at the same red light as them, I should be able to pull a gun, hop out of my car, and shoot them? "If they're going to endanger my life and the lives of other innocent people, they deserve to be shot in the stomach with a gun" That sound about right? I was being dramatic, get over it. The kid deserves sever punishment but obviously not getting shot. I posted that before you said you were being dramatic. If you aren't serious about what you're saying, then don't say it in the first place, because it makes you look silly. Also, people aren't saying that the actions of the child aren't reprehensible, just that shooting him with a deadly and potentially lethal weapon is in no way a suitable response.
Tone doesn't transfer too well through text. I didn't think anyone would honestly believe I thought it was justifiable to shoot someone with a crossbow over it and hence would understand the tone with which I said that.
On August 31 2011 12:16 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:15 Tektos wrote:On August 31 2011 12:13 Shorty90 wrote:
Pretty sickening that people are actually defending the shooter. -.- Pretty sickening that people are actually defending the kid who endangered people's lives by throwing rocks at moving vehicles. -.- You've already invalidated your point by claiming you were only being dramatic. Either stop the drama, or stop contradicting yourself.
I have no invalidated my point nor have I contradicted myself. The kid's actions were absolutely beyond stupid, he deserves severe punishment.
|
On August 31 2011 12:18 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +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?
|
What the fuck teamliquid? Do you not realize how easily that kid could have been killed if the shot was off by a little? You guys really think that shooting a deadly weapon at someone because they threw a rock at a car is ok? Really; the fuck guys....
|
On August 31 2011 12:15 Gamegene wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 12:14 GypsyBeast wrote:
this is some old school justice, im sure that kid will be a super mannerd kid now or traumatized. Show nested quote +Pretty sickening that people are actually defending the kid who endangered people's lives by throwing rocks at moving vehicles. -.- HE'S A KID. HOLY SHIT. We all know throwing rocks at people is a bad thing! We're not saying it's okay! We're saying don't do it but if you see someone doing it IT'S NOT FUCKING OKAY TO GET A CROSSBOW AND SHOOT THEM CAUSE IT'S NOT A GOOD THING (and you'll probably miss anyways)! Stop deluding yourself! I'm fairly certain the majority of the posters don't think that AT ALL.
At any distance a kid could throw a rock, you can be pegged spot on by a crossbow.
Honestly, i much rather see it as a sling-shot, not something so impactfull.
In any case the kid could easily take off and what a pain in the ass would it be to have a car full of scratches and dents without justice.
Ill pat on the back any "lil shit got what he deserved" posts, but dont go seriously pegging jerks, ok guys?
|
On August 31 2011 12:18 Amui wrote:
In just this case, I support the guy who shot the crossbow. Normally shooting a potentially lethal weapon at people isn't a good thing, but this kid needs to learn what karma is. In this case since the kid didn't sustain life-threatening injuries, I hope the crossbow guy gets away.
In no way do I support using crossbows on miscreants though.
Shooting a intentionally lethal weapon at a kid is okay if you're trying to teach a lesson?
WTF?! holy shit?! what?!
That's most certainly NOT OKAY. AT ALL. omg. What kind of lesson does that teach?
"Oh yeah you shouldn't throw rocks but if you see some other kid throwing a rock start aiming potentially lethal projectiles at him and hope you don't kill him!"
You fucking get out of the car, calmly go up to the kid and tell him that it is wrong to do such a thing and tell his parents. I don't know something a little more mature than just sh-
I'm sorry but this should be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.
|
hahahahhahahahahah. Defintiely the funniest thread title this year.
|
United States6531 Posts
I read the entire thread, and could not believe that people like DocH and Haemonculus were the minority. It's appalling that the crossbow user is actually getting support from anyone; firing a quarrel at a child is fucked up, and is up there with the biggest overreactions ever.
That said, I also thought the story itself was fucking hilariously random and bizarre, and I gut-laughed for about two minutes. But despite the grotesque humor of the incident, at the end of the day, the fact remains that a child (remember, children are not yet fully capable of sound judgment) throwing rocks was shot by an adult using a potentially lethal weapon. That can NEVER be condoned, no matter how "awesome" the shot was.
|
On August 31 2011 12:10 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
The side of me that's tired from seeing so many kids get away with shit like this is laughing and celebrating but the other rational side is telling me that it's quite a disproportionate response to something like that.
I suppose that the kid won't ever throw rocks at cars again given what happened though.
I'm leaning towards the attitude of thanking the driver for doing it but wishing that he did it some other way such as grabbing the kid and getting his parents to pay for whatever hundreds or thousands of dollars in damages that the kid caused. The punishment that his parents'll dish out will impact the kid almost as much without causing possible death.
|
I just can't help but laugh every time I look at TeamLiquid and I see this headline.
I have friends who, while in highschool, engaged in shooting a BB gun at moving vehicles, and they cracked several windshields. I would have been upset had they been shot with a crossbow, naturally. However, I was disappointed to hear about them vandalizing property, so... I really don't know. Both are clearly incredibly dumb. Shooting a crossbow at kids is over the top though.
|
Well, this is just... special. I mean, kids who throw rocks at cars are assholes and deserve punishment, but I imagine crossbows are not what people think about when they think of such a punishment.
A little overboard. Still, a bit funny of a situation and one kid that will never throw rocks at a car again (probably).
|
On August 31 2011 12:01 Tektos wrote:
The kid was throwing rocks at PASSING CARS. People have died from rocks throw by shithead little kids hitting their car.
The people trying to pass this kid's actions off as "meh, just damaging property no big deal" need to seriously re-evaluate the risks involved at throwing rocks at moving vehicles.
Pretty much what I was coming to say.
No, it wasn't OK to shoot him, but maybe the shooter felt it was justified self defense..? Bit hard to make a judgement without knowing the exact circumstances. Someone also said in the comments on the article that the 'kid' was 16, so not exactly a child.
|
|
|
On August 31 2011 12:23 Myrddraal wrote:Show nested quote +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
|
lol who has a crossbow in the car
|
Ahaha :D Well done  But seriously: This is not ok. You can t shoot people with a crossbow.... but it s pretty epic :D
|
On August 31 2011 12:21 RoosterSamurai wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
On August 31 2011 12:22 Gamegene wrote:
"Oh yeah you shouldn't throw rocks but if you see some other kid throwing a rock start aiming potentially lethal projectiles at him and hope you don't kill him!"
If you see another kid throwing a rock start aiming potentially lethal projectiles at him?
Potentially lethal projectiles, as in rocks?
|
Shooting a kid, or anybody, with a weapon is unacceptable if it isn't justifiable self defense but honestly I'm not surprised just like most everybody here. The child was endangering the lives of the drivers he was assaulting and he put himself in a bad position and suffered consequences for it. I feel no sympathy for the kid.
Being "just a kid" is no excuse for being a total idiot.
|
At first I kind of thought it was funny, but no, its just sick. How many of us did this sort of shit when your kids? Not necessarily stoning a car [I did that though] but just general shenanigans? Boys are rough, you adventure about and screw around and get in trouble. Disgusting to think that that kind of "trouble" can involve someone attempting to murder them...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
