Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, what if the brother is lying about the number of break-ins?
No problem?
If they lie about the number of break-ins, then that tells me they will lie about what really happened when and how those kids/young adults died.
Just say you are on the side of the burglars....That would be more honest.
Why the heck would the old guy tell the truth about the events, which will undoubtedly get him life in prison....and lie about the number of break ins. Find some other drum to beat.
The kids were burglarizing the man's home....There is no mystery. Read the articles that have been posted. From what some folks are saying, I think there are proubibly a few people that knew about how many times this guys house was robbed. He was targeted. He had money, prescription drugs and weapons....drug users were robbing him to support their habits. I can understand his anger...But, I cannot condone the needless excessive force....then again, I don't live alone in an isolated area...It is all too sad and senseless to comprehend.
When you use "likely" in a sentence written to establish your argument, one should dismiss said argument as a sorry attempt to bull**** the reader while making up crap as you go along producing a classic strawman argument.
There are countless cases of criminals suing victims for injuries inflicted on them by those victims. So it is not "making crap up".
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
So I repeat:
The more I think about this the more I am at a loss to understand how anyone with a shred of humanity can defend this much less take the time to post their rationalizations over and over again. I don't see it, I don't understand it, it just doesn't makes any sense.
Repeating yourself doesn't offer any added credibility to your opinion than it had the first time you stated it.
But one thing is for sure ... if you disagree with me, I'm most likely on the right track.
Repeating yourself doesn't offer any added credibility to your opinion than it had the first time you stated it.
My point is so blatantly obvious that it doesn't require any justification.
Quote:
But one thing is for sure ... if you disagree with me, I'm most likely on the right track.
What a wonderful piece of schadenfreude it would be if we were in a burning building and you chose not to head to the exit because I said it was to the right. (although even I wouldn't allow you to be that stupid.)
Just say you are on the side of the burglars....That would be more honest.
Why the heck would the old guy tell the truth about the events, which will undoubtedly get him life in prison....and lie about the number of break ins.
For one thing, we don't know IF the guy is telling the truth about what really happened. There were three people in that house that night - and two of them aren't talking.
What I am against is someone who could so brutally MURDER two people who he has already put out of commission and who are no threat to him. What I am against is someone who could, in cold blood, blow the brains out of a young woman whom he has already rendered helpless.
What I am against is someone who could shoot one person, move the body, and casually wait to shoot the other.
What I am against is someone who could brutally and in cold blood MURDER two people and then live in the same house with the bodies for 24 hours, presumably going on about his business, watching t.v., eating meals, sleeping.......
I wish they would string the f****r up and use him as an example for all of you here on City Data who are supporting, and in some cases, cheering his actions.
ovcatto said it very well - that the lack of humanity being shown by some on this thread is extremely disturbing.
Let me sus it out for you. This liberal tolerance has led to intolerable life where criminals are coddled, and their victims punished. Had the man shot the intruders and just wounded them, he'd have likely found himself sued for damages. That's how insane this liberal la la land has become.
But it's just fine for a police officer to taser to death someone for a traffic violation ... because tasers are non-lethal ... even though they kill people, which usually is labeled death unrelated to the 50,000 volts shot through the person's body 10 times.
Everything is now upside down. And that's the real problem. Labeling burglars as "kids" is part of this brave new world of double think.
Oh boy, you just had to say the L word didn't you? Did you notice that some of the people who are against this man's actions are conservative? This has squat to do with politics. We're just goin' round and round here. Lethal force is not the argument. The execution aspect of it IS. Anyone who thinks that it is perfectly fine to put a gun muzzle to someone's chin, pull the trigger after they are clearly incapped and no longer logically deemed a threat is disturbing to say the least. The snapped argument/poor old man doesn't pass the sniff test either ... he clearly had the upper hand after the initial volley. He was completely rational.
The burglars were kids..17 years old is a kid in this country. Fact. Ok, so the other one was 18 if you want to get technical. Calling them kids is apt because that is what they were, regardless of their actions.
So, what if the brother is lying about the number of break-ins?
No problem?
If they lie about the number of break-ins, then that tells me they will lie about what really happened when and how those kids/young adults died.
Since we are playing "what ifs",....."what if" the brother is telling the truth?
BTW,..the man's brother is not part of the equation. The thieves broke into a man's house and ended up losing their lives. The proximate cause of their deaths was their own actions.
"...kids/young adults"? They were C R I M I N A L S. Let's stop with all the PC crap and identify them by their actions.
From what I understand, there is only one burglary that is on record as having been reported.
What happened with the other S E V E N? Why is there no record of those having been reported?
If there is no record of them having been reported, then the fact that the killer's brother says E I G H T burglaries occurred means nothing.
Doesn't matter. It could have been the first. All indications are that they broke into his home. I can't defend his actions after the initial confrontation - he was wrong - but they were in his home. They have a history of drug abuse. Druggies are crazy - even pretty ones with expensive smiles.
Since we are playing "what ifs",....."what if" the brother is telling the truth?
BTW,..the man's brother is not part of the equation. The thieves broke into a man's house and ended up losing their lives. The proximate cause of their deaths was their own actions.
"...kids/young adults"? They were C R I M I N A L S. Let's stop with all the PC crap and identify them by their actions.
"Kids/young adults" and "criminals" are not mutually exclusive terms, you realize? They were kids. Apparently, not so bright, but they should not have been executed once they posed no threat to the homeowner. As a matter of fact, you should be calling the homeowner a C R I M I N A L, too, since he unlawfully executed two people who could no longer hurt him. That's called "murder", and it's a bit of a higher felony than burglary.
"Kids/young adults" and "criminals" are not mutually exclusive terms, you realize? They were kids. Apparently, not so bright, but they should not have been executed once they posed no threat to the homeowner. As a matter of fact, you should be calling the homeowner a C R I M I N A L, too, since he unlawfully executed two people who could no longer hurt him. That's called "murder", and it's a bit of a higher felony than burglary.
The "kids" would still be alive if they had not committed a crime. They died as a result of their own choice,...the choice to break the law. If the "kids" were old enough to break into a home to steal, then they were old enough to know right from wrong.
I'll not judge the homeowner..... that is a job for the jury. If the man is guilty, he will be punished. I didn't walk in his shoes for 64 years, nor did I suffer repeated break-ins.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
