Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

Drunk teen killed


  • Please log in to reply
395 replies to this topic

#91    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,311 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:15 PM

View PostCrimsonKing, on 18 March 2013 - 08:04 PM, said:

I agree the teen did not deserve death and usually one should always identify the target

An example of not so clear thinking

Say its 3 am and one has been asleep for an hour or two then hears something break or someone stumbling around in their house.All lights are off and there had been rumors of people running around doing all kinds of bad things in the neighborhood recently.What are you going to do?

Keep in mind you have no clue if the person is armed or not with no lights on.Do you cut the light on or start asking questions to give away your location,never know this person could be armed and a better trained shot than even yourself.This situation should not be judged by anyone with so few facts given,none of us were there and the article wasnt very informitive.

Absolute understand that. he must have been a very good shot to shoot him with no lights on and manage to kill him outright, someone who is very well trained i would imagine, but not trained enough to evaluate the situation, someone scared and yes, panicked. to tell the truth, I would panic too at that time in the morning if an intruder broke into my house, whether I could compose myself to be able to aim a gun and shoot him dead without saying anything first is another story.

But as you say, not enough info, so i will take it that the home owner got woken up at 3am from his sleep, got up and got his gun and shot the intruder dead in the dark with out trying to  scare him off or even just shooting at his leg.


#92    Insaniac

Insaniac

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,091 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:26 PM

View PostThanato, on 18 March 2013 - 08:12 PM, said:

People react very differently when their enemy has a weapon and all they have is there fists. Using a firearm is as cowardly as using a sword, or a knife, or a hammer. All of these are tools, it is up to the user to define there use.

And it's nationally accepted that swords are defensive weapons, knifes are kitchen utensils, and hammers, I think, are offensive weapons. They all have very specific uses.

And again, firearms are offensive weapons.

I agree with the rest of your post, Thanato.

Edit: By hammers I was thinking of battlehammers, not a sledgehammer which is a demolition tool.

Edited by Insaniac, 18 March 2013 - 08:31 PM.


#93    Glorfindel

Glorfindel

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 253 posts
  • Joined:18 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The answer to 1984, is uhhh... 1812?

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:30 PM

I wonder if we compared crime statistics on break and enters, if most are due to intoxicated accidents, or if most are related to theft, assault or murder... Im gonna go ahead and guess the latter... Anyone who would start asking questions like "are you armed" is going to get exactly what coming to them, unfortunately, and if the person has a spouse or kids in the house, not defending with force is by far the cowardly action.

View PostInsaniac, on 18 March 2013 - 08:26 PM, said:

And it's nationally accepted that swords are defensive weapons, knifes are kitchen utensils, and hammers, I think, are offensive weapons. They all have very specific uses.
So a kitchen knife is a utensil but a hammer is an offensive weapon? I dont understand how a hammer is not a tool yet a knife is. There is no logic to that assessment.

Edited by Glorfindel, 18 March 2013 - 08:31 PM.


#94    Michelle

Michelle

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 18,025 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tennessee

  • Eleanor Roosevelt: Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:35 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 18 March 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

I do not know about those campsites roaming with bears, so you tell me, how many bears are killed each year by campers and how many campers are killed each year by bears?

Are you still contemplating scuba diving in the shark infested waters? personally I have never tried it myself, but would really advice you not to do it.

please understand my point, you are wanting to go into the bear territory and yet you feel you have the first right to be there and shoot it if it gets near you? I can not get my head round that?  protect your own home my all means, shoot the intruder even if he is not armed if it makes you feel more secure, but come on, you want to go to someone elses territory and shoot the occupant if ti gets near you?  I assume the bears are not armed so the camper with the gun has the advantage?

Anyway, if you got any stats on the amount of deaths by bears on regular campers each year, it will give me some idea of the severity of the situation within these official camping sites, and the number of bears shoot too. thanks.

Where do you get these twisted ideas? Very few campers or hikers have been hurt or killed by bears and almost no bears are shot by the average person. Maybe once every couple of years you will hear about a bear that has become a severe problem and they will try and relocate them farther away from the city. If it keeps coming back, and is still a menace, officials will put it down. And by the way, my house stands at the edge of the city, bordering park property, for over a hundred years and the only thing I have to do is go into my yard to get into "bear territory". How many fish, has your boat, that you live on, been killed by your propellor? You have no right invading their territory. Apparently, if your boat has a motor you have no idea what kind of damage you've done to the wildlife. Certainly more than I do walking through the woods.

I have scuba dived with sharks, they aren't a problem. I can assume, by your responce, you are generally scared of the animals we inhabit the earth with?

People who enjoy enteracting with nature will do just that. But, all of a sudden, we who do are now the bad guys for the simple reason we have a gun....whether we use it or not.


#95    Insaniac

Insaniac

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,091 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:37 PM

View PostGlorfindel, on 18 March 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

I wonder if we compared crime statistics on break and enters, if most are due to intoxicated accidents, or if most are related to theft, assault or murder... Im gonna go ahead and guess the latter... Anyone who would start asking questions like "are you armed" is going to get exactly what coming to them, unfortunately, and if the person has a spouse or kids in the house, not defending with force is by far the cowardly action.

If you stand there like a complete fool, of course you're going to die.

And given the circumstances, it's probably a wise idea not to immediately fire at the intruder, as it could start a firefight, getting you, your spouse and your kids killed.

*I think* In this scenario, any rational person would've taken cover, demanded an explanation first and fired if necessary.


#96    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,311 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:40 PM

View PostCollateral Damage, on 18 March 2013 - 08:11 PM, said:

The child being unarmed is something we can now verify after the situation has ended. That's coming from a completely different perspective than to when it had been occurring. The homeowner had absolutely no idea whether or not the intruder was armed and it was most likely dark in the house at the time. Why put your own life in danger for that extra few seconds just to verify whether or not this intruder was dangerous? In those seconds the homeowner could have easily been the one to be killed in his own house, had he followed what you've suggested, had the child been armed. This lad was breaking into a house he had no business in, whether aware of his actions or not, underage drinking doesn't excuse his actions. This is something we're going to agree to disagree on. One thing I'm sure we can agree on is being this is a tragedy and may the poor child rest in peace.

edit: typo
The home owner obviously knew how to use a gun, but i am going to change my stance on this in defense of the home owner, had his intentions been to shoot the intruder and kill him there and then in the dark, then this would surely be an insult to a trained gun man who knows how to use his gun and knows how to evaluate a situation in when having to fire, as it is clear the home owner DID NOT evaluate it. So i will say that the homeowner fired in the dark at a target and got "lucky" as it turned out to be the perfect shot....I would imagine as a rule only a trained gun man would not need the lights on to shoot to kill and only a trained person would have known whether to try and evaluate the situation first, so I will say I fully understand this homeowners reaction, he was not trained in shooting a target dead in the dark because this kind of training would have to include some form of evaluation process on the target you are shooting on whether it is armed or not.
The owner shot in the dark and instead of injuring him, he killed him.


i will quote this bit too because I do feel that if people are worried about this and resort to shooting dead intruders on the spur of the moment panic... in the dark at 3am in the morning, then SURELY they should make sure all their windows are secure, unless someone can come back and say the window was smashed in by the lad, i take it the window was easy to open for the heavily drunken teen........"All lights are off and there had been rumors of people running around doing all kinds of bad things in the neighborhood recently."


#97    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,311 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:50 PM

View PostGlorfindel, on 18 March 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

Anyone who would start asking questions like "are you armed" is going to get exactly what coming to them, unfortunately,


The homeowner only needed to watch for a few seconds to see that the lad was rat ar$ed, but ok, he didn`t do that, fine, but KILL him? why not shoot him in the leg, FCOL the owner was a good shoot as he could shoot at his target in the dark and kill him outright.

Has any of you seen a really drunk person before, they are not difficult to spot. Please do not say  it was dark though, cos it did not affect the owners shooting skills.


#98    Collateral Damage

Collateral Damage

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 260 posts
  • Joined:30 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In midst with the Sands of Time.

  • "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything."

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:00 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 18 March 2013 - 08:50 PM, said:

Please do not say  it was dark though, cos it did not affect the owners shooting skills.
How can you assume the man's shooting skill? This report fails to specify the type of gun used. For all were know it may have been a shotgun. In which case spreads when fired making the target an easier hit.

Undated letter by President J.F.K. said:

   "War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today."

  "The nation which forgets its defenders will be itself forgotten."

#99    pallidin

pallidin

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,099 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:08 PM

Don't let drunk "friends" drive a drunk person "home"  :passifier:


#100    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,311 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:09 PM

View PostMichelle, on 18 March 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

Where do you get these twisted ideas? Very few campers or hikers have been hurt or killed by bears and almost no bears are shot by the average person. Maybe once every couple of years you will hear about a bear that has become a severe problem and they will try and relocate them farther away from the city. If it keeps coming back, and is still a menace, officials will put it down. And by the way, my house stands at the edge of the city, bordering park property, for over a hundred years and the only thing I have to do is go into my yard to get into "bear territory". How many fish, has your boat, that you live on, been killed by your propellor? You have no right invading their territory. Apparently, if your boat has a motor you have no idea what kind of damage you've done to the wildlife. Certainly more than I do walking through the woods.

I have scuba dived with sharks, they aren't a problem. I can assume, by your responce, you are generally scared of the animals we inhabit the earth with?

People who enjoy enteracting with nature will do just that. But, all of a sudden, we who do are now the bad guys for the simple reason we have a gun....whether we use it or not.

I have never had the pleasure of swimming with sharks and envy you, would i try it? yes and have absolute respect for the fact that it is their territory.
The twisted idea came from you. you do respect nature, i know that, it was the point about shooting a bear or boar in their environment to defend yourself which got to me, it is their environment and they should not be killed by an outsider, if they appear as a threat then get out of there, we do not have the right to kill them, its their home. If you want to go camping or swimming in their home, fine, but don`t threaten to shoot them.
As it stands you have pointed out they are not a threat at all as very few campers have been hurt or killed by bears, so really threatening to shoot one was not called for....I just took it as another " we would because we can".
Your love of nature is not far behind mine, but I do not live near bears or boars, our animals are different. I do on the other hand live on a boat and make my own heating and light and show every bit of respect for the wildlife around me. I live within nature and it means a lot to my survival, sorry, i just don`t do the "we would because we can" thing, but even though it came across that way, I take it you did not actually mean it to appear like that, but hey! you know me, I pick up on all these things, its healthy. :D

peace


#101    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,311 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:23 PM

View PostCollateral Damage, on 18 March 2013 - 09:00 PM, said:

How can you assume the man's shooting skill? This report fails to specify the type of gun used. For all were know it may have been a shotgun. In which case spreads when fired making the target an easier hit.
You are right, i do not know what gun he used, it doesn`t say. So if it had been a shotgun, we can take it that he was intending to kill him with no intentions of just firing a shot to either scare him or main him?
I suppose he did not need a light on, let alone ask "who`s there" or even wait to see that the lad was rat ar$ed and was not pointing a gun at him , let alone have a gun in his hand, before shooting the living daylights out of him.

We do not even know the actually state of the drunk lad really even though his friends took him home and he did not realize it was not his house before climbing through the window, because I have seen my husband come home drunk many a night and trust me, I KNOW he is drunk by the way he is not standing up straight, do nto even need a light on to establish that!


#102    Glorfindel

Glorfindel

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 253 posts
  • Joined:18 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The answer to 1984, is uhhh... 1812?

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:28 PM

View PostInsaniac, on 18 March 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

If you stand there like a complete fool, of course you're going to die.

And given the circumstances, it's probably a wise idea not to immediately fire at the intruder, as it could start a firefight, getting you, your spouse and your kids killed.

*I think* In this scenario, any rational person would've taken cover, demanded an explanation first and fired if necessary.

Or maybe they will simply know your position and open fire well youre trying to get an explanation (as if someone breaking in by accident is sooo common), maybe its just the fact that someone shouldn't have to take cover in their own private property. I just find it incredibly naive to think anyone in there right mind is going to start asking questions to an intruder instead of reacting. Not reacting is how you end up shot or disarmed, making the other occupants in the house vulnerable. And if you can tell if someone is drunk by how theyre standing, so what??! Criminals dont drink or do drugs? B&Es are very often related to acquiring drug money. This is an accident, the same way when someone dies in a car accident. Blaming the home owner is ridiculous and demonstrates naivety and lack of life experiences on those who point the finger at the home owner.

Edited by Glorfindel, 18 March 2013 - 09:28 PM.


#103    Mr.United_Nations

Mr.United_Nations

    hi

  • Member
  • 9,304 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:33 PM

View Postpallidin, on 18 March 2013 - 09:08 PM, said:

Don't let drunk "friends" drive a drunk person "home"  :passifier:
:passifier:


#104    Insaniac

Insaniac

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,091 posts
  • Joined:11 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:34 PM

View PostGlorfindel, on 18 March 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

Or maybe they will simply know your position and open fire well youre trying to get an explanation (as if someone breaking in by accident is sooo common), maybe its just the fact that someone shouldn't have to take cover in their own private property. I just find it incredibly naive to think anyone in there right mind is going to start asking questions to an intruder instead of reacting. Not reacting is how you end up shot or disarmed, making the other occupants in the house vulnerable. And if you can tell if someone is drunk by how theyre standing, so what??! Criminals dont drink or do drugs? B&Es are very often related to acquiring drug money. This is an accident, the same way when someone dies in a car accident. Blaming the home owner is ridiculous and demonstrates naivety and lack of life experiences on those who point the finger at the home owner.

With wrong decisions come consequences. Somebody is to blame. In this case, the drunkard wasn't a threat. He thought he was entering his own ******* house, and he got shot by a gun-toting nut who prefers to shoot first and that's it. Can't ask a corpse what it's intentions were.

Bottom line: Guns are too dangerous to be given to home owners. Only Hunters should be allowed to use guns.


#105    Sweetpumper

Sweetpumper

    Heatseeker

  • Member
  • 11,962 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Avengers Tower

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:39 PM

View PostInsaniac, on 18 March 2013 - 09:34 PM, said:

Bottom line: Guns are too dangerous to be given to home owners.

They are not 'given' to home owners. They are bought with hard earned money, just like their homes are.

"At it's most basic level, science is supposed to represent the investigation of the unexplained, not the explanation of the uninvestigated." - Hunt for the Skinwalker

"The ultimate irony of the Disclosure movement is that it deeply distrusts officialdom, while simultaneously looking to officialdom for the truth." - Robbie Graham Silver Screen Saucers




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users