How far would you go to protect your vehicle?
How far would you go to protect your vehicle?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,237418,00.html
I can not say that I would go as far as shooting some teenagers for egging my truck, and the real way to deal with this problem is now illegal (a good butt whoopin in the parking lot in front of his friends), but I would be pretty ticked off if my truck got egged, especially while I was driving down the street.
I will say I am sorry this woman lost a son, but she is also at fault for raising a misfit that would deface others property and that she should be blaming herself also in this.
I can not say that I would go as far as shooting some teenagers for egging my truck, and the real way to deal with this problem is now illegal (a good butt whoopin in the parking lot in front of his friends), but I would be pretty ticked off if my truck got egged, especially while I was driving down the street.
I will say I am sorry this woman lost a son, but she is also at fault for raising a misfit that would deface others property and that she should be blaming herself also in this.
The problem is worthless parents if you ask me. Kids learn respect from seeing it. If they don't see it at home, they will grow up to be worthless little punks like these that should have been out getting a job to earn money to go to school so the rest of us don't have to spend the rest of our lives supporting thier broke butts. I wouldn't shoot them, but it would be hard not to rub their faces in some grass in the ditch until the law showed up.
I own NOTHING that would be worth murdering some child for. yes i would be madder than a wet hen, but this was flat out murder. A 14 yr old is a CHILD, and behaving childishly is not a capitol crime. If we could expect mature decisions from 14 yr olds, they would be allowed to drive, drfink and vote. As a society we know that a child doestn have the maturityto make good choices all teh time.
I did much worse as child myself, dont think that made me a "misfit" worthy of being killed.
I am not defending the kid,what he did was wrong, but get real.. killing him for throwing an egg at your car? Whoever the shooter was deserves to get hammered if they find him.
wonder if this is going to get locked or bumped to teh allpolitics.net......
I did much worse as child myself, dont think that made me a "misfit" worthy of being killed.
I am not defending the kid,what he did was wrong, but get real.. killing him for throwing an egg at your car? Whoever the shooter was deserves to get hammered if they find him.
wonder if this is going to get locked or bumped to teh allpolitics.net......
said his grandmother, Gayle Shiner, 65, of Fork Union, Va.. "We hoped he would date and marry and have children, and of course all of that was ended because of somebody's stupidity."
it's hard to define the 'somebody' who is at fault here.
it's a crazy world.
edit: here's what i thought the thread was about:
i leave my key in my truck at work (run back & forth between buildings)
but my wife will NOT let me leave the checkbook in the armrest
it's hard to define the 'somebody' who is at fault here.
it's a crazy world.
edit: here's what i thought the thread was about:
i leave my key in my truck at work (run back & forth between buildings)
but my wife will NOT let me leave the checkbook in the armrest
well, the thread is not political in anyway, and I was just curious as to how far you would go to protect your personal property.
Never did I say the kid deserved to be killed, yes it is murder, but he did deserve to have his tail whooped like my dad would have done. Heck, my dad would have let the guy who owned the truck beat me, that is how I was brought up.
I still think the group were misfits, cause they were up to no good. They might have been good kids, but at the time, they were misfits, defacing anothers property.
Never did I say the kid deserved to be killed, yes it is murder, but he did deserve to have his tail whooped like my dad would have done. Heck, my dad would have let the guy who owned the truck beat me, that is how I was brought up.
I still think the group were misfits, cause they were up to no good. They might have been good kids, but at the time, they were misfits, defacing anothers property.
you know, i did those things as a kid, i am sure my sons will do things like that too. i really like my truck and belongings, but would never go so far as to cause injury, just scare them alittle, like follow them home, ensure they see you know where they live(so you can talk to the folks). I hate irate parents show up at my parents' door, and i am sure the same will happen several years from now.
Trending Topics
The kid should have had his rearend wore out with a switch from a good elm tree. If his parents would have done it when he was younger he would be alive today. Shooting someone over egging a truck is ridiculus. The only way I would shoot someone over my truck is if they tried to steal it via armed robbery.
Well, all I can say is that just because the kid is 14 is not an excuse for not knowing any better. Recently, we had our farm broke into. Let me explain, first they did catch the ones who did it; second they were 2 boys and a girl (17, 16 and 14). The 17 and 16 year olds had 4 prior felony arrests/convictions each. When they were arrested they both had weapons on them and all 3 were carrying electronic tasers. They cut 4 locks, tore the side off our barn, hot wired 2 ATV's, cut 3 heavy duty chains and drove off on the ATV's. After that they proceeded to completely destroy the ATV's by running them into trees, setting one on fire and started taking parts off the other. I would have shot them if I had caught them. Killed them, no but they would have wished they were dead. I now have a bill of close to $20K out of my pocket to repair and replace the damage they did. Their parents are useless. They told the police to leave them in jail. The police said they will get out AGAIN and next time probably hurt someone.
So, don't be fooled by the age. If a 14 year old is able to do the things they did to our property (knowledge of how to cut locks, hot wire ATV's, tear the side off a barn to gain entry, carry a weapon etc) he is old enough to be treated as an adult.
It's sad that it ended in the kid being killed but don’t be fooled by their age.
So, don't be fooled by the age. If a 14 year old is able to do the things they did to our property (knowledge of how to cut locks, hot wire ATV's, tear the side off a barn to gain entry, carry a weapon etc) he is old enough to be treated as an adult.
It's sad that it ended in the kid being killed but don’t be fooled by their age.
If some kid had egged my truck you can rest assured that not only would I whip his butt I'd take him home and whip the parents butt for letting their dumb son of a gun 14 year old out at midnight and for not teaching him right from wrong. The shooter most definately was not justified in anyway and he should get the full penalty of the law for cold blooded murder. I've got some other opinions on this subject but I'll keep them to myself.
Relative to JHeiser's situation - the following is from the Texas Penal Code:
Rusty
§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
While the law might say he was justified it doesn't mean that he was morally. I live in Texas and I'm all for shooting people if it the occasion calls for it but this occasion didn't call for shooting a 14 year old kid who just needed a little discipline in his life.

Rusty


