News Junkie: Elderly woman shoots bully, no charges!

[Les Awesome]

DAMN KIDS STAY OFF GRANNYS LAWN

 

[theSovietConnection]

So verbal abuse is enough justification to shoot children?

Does freedom of speech not apply to children, who can be shot for being mouthy?

I know it's not quite as simple as that, but it does seem a bit extreme to shoot a child, even if he was being a bastard.

I hope she was a crack shot and was aiming for his shoulder, because if not she's extremely lucky. Six inches out and she could have hit him in the head or chest.

Actually it says in the article she had been hit by a brick in the chest already, meaning this becomes assault, and the freedom of speech argument goes out the window.

"I was terrified," the South Shore resident tells the Chicago Tribune. "The young man hit me in the chest with a brick. After a year of harassment, that was the straw that broke the camel's back."

Anyways, am I the only one who thought of this picture when I read about this?

 

[ecoho]

So verbal abuse is enough justification to shoot children?

No. But the bricks the kid was throwing are potentially lethal. Probably the key reason no charges are being filed against granny.

This precedent should make all future riots a lot easier to deal with. If children can be justifiably shot for throwing bricks, then the police should have no trouble opening up on adults throwing any object that is considered potentially lethal.

People should think long and hard about whether they want to be shot the next time their favourite sports team loses a game.

um ok im not sure if your just trolling or if you beleave this so im going to asume you actualy think this way and answer acordingly. Ok heres the maijor differance the woman was ealderly witch ment in he 70s at least so even a brick to her leg or arm could kill her. Next rioters can be shot if they are useing weapons that are as leathal as this brick was to this woman(in the case of the woman this would be the equivilent to a gun) Now as to if she would have killed him out right by "missing" as you say and killing him there are a few things you should understand if he was on her property he falls under the "make my day" laws of her state i have no idea what those might be were she lives but in my state if anyone comes on your property without premission and refuses to leave you can use leatthal force on them and kill them and not be charged. if your not from the US then i could see how you might be confused.

BTW i beleave she did miss and was aiming for his head

I don't really have much to say about any of this thread,
but I am surprised that all of you seem so okay with someone shooting a kid.
Even if he was harassing her, she couldn't call the cops, contact the parents or anything?
Opening fire on someone shouldn't be your first reaction to everything.

if you read the artical it was her last resort the police would do nothing about it so she did. this is called poetic justice

 

[Canid117]

Well I guess the little idiot learned a lesson from all of this.

 

[Dexiro]

I expected to come here saying that shooting someone is too extreme, but fuck that the bully deserved it.

Smashing the windows and shouting abuse at a helpless old lady for over a year? I'm glad she got revenge.

 

[Infernai]

..Granny must have used VATS xD

 

[Mr.Gompers]

Attention people: CHILDREN. ARE. EVIL. Alright, some children are evil, not all. Yet you seem to automatically assume that young = innocent. This is not true.

Also, if someone is on my property attacking me, I would consider their right to life forfeit.

 

[MasterOfWorlds]

If she really did believe the boy had a demon in him like one of the other posters has said a few times now, she would get off with a "Not guilty be reason of mental disease or defect." In layman's terms, she didn't see what she was doing was wrong and she couldn't comprehend the consequences of her action.

Here's the thing, you throw a brick at a house, that's vandalism. You HIT them with a brick, that's assault with a deadly weapon. Believe it or not, you CAN kill someone with a brick, especially an older woman.

Her mental state aside, and looking at the straight legality of the situation. If the boy was on her property and throwing a projectile into her house while she was inside, she is justified in using equal force. That means assault with a deadly weapon, which, unless something huge changed recently, guns fall into that category.

Now, looking at the morality of the situation. Sure, she could have handled it differently. You had a child who, unless the child in question suffered from some sort of mental disease or diffect or was influenced by drugs, booze, etc etc, he knew right from wrong. He might have not been raised well, or grew up in a rough part of town, or whatever, but the fact still remains that he broke the law and harrassed an older woman.

Morally speaking, should she have let the child continue to throw potentially lethal objects at her without taking any action other than calling the police? This is a good example of the "It takes two to tango." type policy that a lot of schools have taken.

You're not allowed to defend yourself because violence is wrong, period, the end. Please tell the next person who's afraid to defend themselves in school or on the streets, or in their own HOME's family that they were a good boy or girl and didn't resort to violence when they're hospitalized or killed.

Someone attacks you, you are allowed to use enough force to ensure that they stop. He was throwing bricks, she threw lead. Both are potentially deadly, but neither were. They both got hit, and they'll both recover. He'll probably never bother her or anyone else again. She'll probably never have to shoot anyone again because they'll know not to mess with her.

I think the situation resolved itself nicely.

 

[Home-Skillet]

So verbal abuse is enough justification to shoot children?

No. But the bricks the kid was throwing are potentially lethal. Probably the key reason no charges are being filed against granny.

This precedent should make all future riots a lot easier to deal with. If children can be justifiably shot for throwing bricks, then the police should have no trouble opening up on adults throwing any object that is considered potentially lethal.

People should think long and hard about whether they want to be shot the next time their favourite sports team loses a game.

um ok im not sure if your just trolling or if you beleave this so im going to asume you actualy think this way and answer acordingly. Ok heres the maijor differance the woman was ealderly witch ment in he 70s at least so even a brick to her leg or arm could kill her. Next rioters can be shot if they are useing weapons that are as leathal as this brick was to this woman(in the case of the woman this would be the equivilent to a gun) Now as to if she would have killed him out right by "missing" as you say and killing him there are a few things you should understand if he was on her property he falls under the "make my day" laws of her state i have no idea what those might be were she lives but in my state if anyone comes on your property without premission and refuses to leave you can use leatthal force on them and kill them and not be charged. if your not from the US then i could see how you might be confused.

BTW i beleave she did miss and was aiming for his head

I don't really have much to say about any of this thread,
but I am surprised that all of you seem so okay with someone shooting a kid.
Even if he was harassing her, she couldn't call the cops, contact the parents or anything?
Opening fire on someone shouldn't be your first reaction to everything.

if you read the artical it was her last resort the police would do nothing about it so she did. this is called potetic justice

I'm going to go out on a limb & assume you meant 'poetic'.
I still find shooting people a little extreme, but I guess I'm not 21st century enough.

 

[MagicMouse]

The parents are the ones who should be shot.

I wonder if the Granny was aiming for the shoulder...thats impressive.

 

[ecoho]

So verbal abuse is enough justification to shoot children?

No. But the bricks the kid was throwing are potentially lethal. Probably the key reason no charges are being filed against granny.

This precedent should make all future riots a lot easier to deal with. If children can be justifiably shot for throwing bricks, then the police should have no trouble opening up on adults throwing any object that is considered potentially lethal.

People should think long and hard about whether they want to be shot the next time their favourite sports team loses a game.

um ok im not sure if your just trolling or if you beleave this so im going to asume you actualy think this way and answer acordingly. Ok heres the maijor differance the woman was ealderly witch ment in he 70s at least so even a brick to her leg or arm could kill her. Next rioters can be shot if they are useing weapons that are as leathal as this brick was to this woman(in the case of the woman this would be the equivilent to a gun) Now as to if she would have killed him out right by "missing" as you say and killing him there are a few things you should understand if he was on her property he falls under the "make my day" laws of her state i have no idea what those might be were she lives but in my state if anyone comes on your property without premission and refuses to leave you can use leatthal force on them and kill them and not be charged. if your not from the US then i could see how you might be confused.

BTW i beleave she did miss and was aiming for his head

I don't really have much to say about any of this thread,
but I am surprised that all of you seem so okay with someone shooting a kid.
Even if he was harassing her, she couldn't call the cops, contact the parents or anything?
Opening fire on someone shouldn't be your first reaction to everything.

if you read the artical it was her last resort the police would do nothing about it so she did. this is called potetic justice

I'm going to go out on a limb & assume you meant 'poetic'.
I still find shooting people a little extreme, but I guess I'm not 21st century enough.

lol sorry for the missspell ill fix that and no shoting people realy should be your last resort like it was for her. so dont feel bad that you have a higher tolerance for bull shit it kinda makes you a better person.

 

[willsham45]

too write too...that guy is not going to be smashing in any windows any time soon. That is a great case of defence, that is fine.
Forget age if you are old enough to do what you are old enough to face the concequences

 

[crazypsyko666]

We don't know where the kid was throwing the bricks. We don't know if granny was hit. Stop being such a fucking troll trying to escalate things.

If the granny was hit, it would be too late for "Self defense", right ?

I don't know. It really depends from person to person, just like young people. The real difficulty is recovering from injuries at that age. When a kid gets injured, he's over it in a month or two, when an elderly person gets injured, it can take months, and then it hurts for years after that.

 

[deckai]

"The young man hit me in the chest with a brick. After a year of harassment, that was the straw that broke the camel's back."

I'm on the old Lady's side. (At least with the informations I have so far). A brick to the chest is capable of killing someone, especially if you are a senior. Also, what do you think the police would do? Send him to his parents... do you really think after a whole year of harassment the boy would suddenly stop harassing her? Although the use of a gun may seem a bit drastic, but the woman was terrified and maybe scared to death.

I have absolute no sympathy for this boy, i really hope he learned his lesson.

 

[Dfskelleton]

Dude, that granny is hardcore.

 

[SimuLord]

So verbal abuse is enough justification to shoot children?

Does freedom of speech not apply to children, who can be shot for being mouthy?

I know it's not quite as simple as that, but it does seem a bit extreme to shoot a child, even if he was being a bastard.

I hope she was a crack shot and was aiming for his shoulder, because if not she's extremely lucky. Six inches out and she could have hit him in the head or chest.

And since the kid's so poorly parented that he thinks it's acceptable to throw bricks through the windows of old ladies, maybe granny should cap the boy's mom next. Maybe the dad, but I suspect he's nowhere to be found in this story.

In a world (cue Don LaFontaine) where bullies can drive people to distraction or suicide with no repercussions, one woman had to DRAW THE LINE.

Coming soon to a theater near you, Stop! Or My Grandma Will Shoot!

 

[Jimbo1212]

USA USA USA!