News Junkie: Elderly woman shoots bully, no charges!

[zombays]

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.

I´m pretty sure that vandalism is more serious than non-lethally shooting the vandal.

 

[Yureina]

This news made me smile. That kid got what he deserved.

 

[Woodsey]

I'm embarrassed by the number of people that seem to believe that shooting someone is a justifiable response to being bullied.

If you're capable enough to take aim and shoot someone in the shoulder then you're capable enough to pick up the phone and call the police, tell a family member or tell a neighbour about the bullying/abusive behaviour.

If it was that easy then there'd be no more herassment in any neighborhood.

The problem with neighborhood herassment, especially by teenagers, is that there's little to nothing that the police can do about it; they're not really breaking the law and when the cops do finally show up, the troublemakers will simple run home where their parents can cover for them. Then when the cops leave they can gather up again and continue intimidating passer bys.

And it's these same kind of kids that like to throw rooftiles of highway overpasses or through the windows of incoming trains.

And yet it's still better to attempt appropriate action instead of shooting some stupid kid.

 

[Serenegoose]

So, this has been going on for a year. Where the hell were social services? They must be godsdamn relieved nobody has noticed their utterly conspicuous absense for the last year, and now that she's gone and shot the kid nobody thinks of asking where the authorities who are supposed to be responsible for this child are, since obviously the parents are incapable or unwilling to intervene. That's the real story here.

 

[SuperCombustion]

I hope this example carries, anyone pisses you off, put a cap in them.

 

[PrimoThePro]

It's like that time the father went to his daughters wedding, only to be beaten to death by a bunch of kids who were trying to look cool in front of girls.

Got a link to that story? I wouldn't say no to giving that a read.

Sure thing. There was a thread on this site for it, but it has 404'd. Luckily I bookmarked the article.

That's a fucked up story. A little hard to believe, but it happened so there you go. Man. Thanks for the link.

Oh ya, the whole thing made me furious. I really don't understand what went through those kids' heads, and why the girls didn't stop them. It proves that every single person there was okay with killing that poor old man.

 

[Ninonybox_v1legacy]

that'll teach them youngens some respect

 

[Fallen-Angel Risen-Demon]

What? That's stupid! If I went around shooting everyone who did that I would've shot hundreds, possibly thousands of people. This is unjustifiable, especially seen as though it was a kid. And newsflash, kids do stupid things without thinking about it. She should of called the police and have him sent to juvie.

It wasn't a "stupid thing", it had been happening for a year!

As far as i'm concerned, her aim was off.

Someone terrorises an old lady for a year, they deserve what they get, as they clearly have no sense of compassion or understanding. Prissy little "humans shouldn't be hurt, everyone is speshul" space cadets need a few lessons in real life.

There is a difference between hurt and killed. He's 12 years old. Not saying he shouldn't be hurt, but being shot is overkill.

Some people shouldn't be allowed to live. This kid is one of those people.

Ugh, you are one of those people. Everyone has a right to live, taking that away or saying someone doesn't deserve it puts you in the same catagory as Nazis to me. And he was a kid, a stupid kid who would of wised up after time in juvie. Shooting him was unnessisary, Granny should of gone to the cops. If it had been happening for a year then why didn't she go earlier? Violance is never needed and should always be avioded. For only weak minds turn to violance in times of need. There is always another way.

She did go to them. They hit her with a brick. They could have killed her. And not everyone deserves to live.

Then the police should be serverly punished or even fired, disregard of duty caused this.
And everyone has the right to a life, the opposite thought is what caused WW2 and countless other wars.

 

[Tanis]

Good.

Time to teach kids some lessons.

 

[Enemy Of The State]

Excellent! Go granny!

 

[Darkauthor81]

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.

I think the difference here is a question of where the attack took place. Legally, a man's (or woman's) home is still their castle. If someone is on your property without your permission, a good number of their rights have already gone away. If they're actively assaulting you at the same time, you're pretty much okay to kill them where they stand.

That said, it says no charges have been filed. I know if my kid were doing that and got themselves plugged, I wouldn't press charges on the old lady either. Doesn't mean I wouldn't have the option.

- J

Unless the cops see the perp do it then there's not a whole lot they can do. After a year of living in fear all that nice cold reasoning you have vanishes when that brick hits your chest and you think the next one's coming for your head.

Since when did this country start clinging to the belief that criminals are some how victims and don't deserve the punishment they bring down on themselves.

And where was the little bastard's dead beat parents in all this?

 

[lacktheknack]

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.

You're under stress, all your windows are blown, some ass is screaming insults and chucking bricks at your house with the intent of hurting you. You're a good shot with a pistol that's nearby, you know you won't kill him.

Your response?

 

[Fallen-Angel Risen-Demon]

What? That's stupid! If I went around shooting everyone who did that I would've shot hundreds, possibly thousands of people. This is unjustifiable, especially seen as though it was a kid. And newsflash, kids do stupid things without thinking about it. She should of called the police and have him sent to juvie.

It wasn't a "stupid thing", it had been happening for a year!

As far as i'm concerned, her aim was off.

Someone terrorises an old lady for a year, they deserve what they get, as they clearly have no sense of compassion or understanding. Prissy little "humans shouldn't be hurt, everyone is speshul" space cadets need a few lessons in real life.

There is a difference between hurt and killed. He's 12 years old. Not saying he shouldn't be hurt, but being shot is overkill.

Some people shouldn't be allowed to live. This kid is one of those people.

Ugh, you are one of those people. Everyone has a right to live, taking that away or saying someone doesn't deserve it puts you in the same catagory as Nazis to me. And he was a kid, a stupid kid who would of wised up after time in juvie. Shooting him was unnessisary, Granny should of gone to the cops. If it had been happening for a year then why didn't she go earlier? Violance is never needed and should always be avioded. For only weak minds turn to violance in times of need. There is always another way.

She did go to them. They hit her with a brick. They could have killed her. And not everyone deserves to live.

Then the police should be serverly punished or even fired, disregard of duty caused this.
And everyone has the right to a life, the opposite thought is what caused WW2 and countless other wars.

Do you think they could afford to fire a
bunch of cops? New ones have to be tested and trained for a while. Also, if everyone has the right to life, does that mean that if someone were to say,
drop a nuke on NYC you'd say they should live? What if someone shot you in the gut and raped your entire family in front of you and then killed them all
and left you alive? Would you campaign for his right to life? Would you support a man who tortured you and everyone you love? We have a name for that.
Stockholm Syndrome.

If someone was to commit such crimes against my family I would not persue revenge. Revenge helps with nothing and will consume anybody who trys to commit it. I would seek a fair trail under the laws of my country, England. If the accused is found innocent I accept the courts desision and move on with my life and build a new future for myself. I would not dwell on the past, for that is who I am. A pacifist.

 

[Section Crow]

He got what he deserved

maybe granny was a bit extreme but throwing bricks at a house cause you lost a sport game is just plain stupid, at least murder your stress pig or something

 

[Corialos]

I'm on the old girl's side here. What was she going to do, throw bricks back? Let's face it, that'd just be pitiable.
Hell, what would have happened if the kid hadn't grown out of it, and started bringing more and more friends to vandalise her property and assault her? He already had one buddy there, and the more people he invites to the little party increases the chance of a brick striking the woman somewhere lethal.
So yes, shooting was justified. What were you expecting, a stern telling off?

Lets assume the cops didn't show up in this case. I'm sure if the kid started bringing 3, 4, 5 friends along, the cops would respond or SOMEBODY would notice. Why did the cops ignore someone who was so loved in the neightborhood?

And if you notice the window in the news article, she was part of the neighborhood watch

Just because somebody would've noticed, doesn't necessarily mean that they would do anything. You remember the Kitty Genovese case back in '64? Personally, I think that the old woman was in the right. Self defense is self defense, after all. Broken glass all around you with potentially fatal projectiles (i.e., bricks) being thrown at you? Are you honestly saying that you wouldn't fight back?

While I do agree that shooting the child is a bit extreme, considering that guns are weapons and are specifically designed as tools of death (Gun Ownership 101: "Never point the gun at a person unless you intend to shoot them, and never shoot unless you intend to kill."), I still think that little brat learned his lesson and got what was coming to him. Personally, I'm surprised she didn't do something sooner, considering that this went on for a year.

 

[elbowlick]

"Shit, Granny's packing!"

"Everyone and their mum is packin' round here!"

 

[Stone Wera]

Why does a granny have a gun?

Your granny doesn't?