News Junkie: Elderly woman shoots bully, no charges!

[johnman]

"Dam I was aiming for his head!"

 

[Mr.Mattress]

On the one hand, that kid was being a dick and the Old lady has every right to defend herself and her home. On the other hand, she shot at him... Which is a bit extreme, don't you think?

Why don't we say "They were both in the wrong" and just let both of them off the hook?

 

[Starke]

I'd like to remind you folks we used to hang and stone people.

In some places we (humans) still do. The Taliban just stoned their first victim in nine years.

Escalation is never apropos as a rule, she should have been charged with assault with a deadly weapon, then given the lightest sentence.

It doesn't work that way. The statutes in most state define exactly what someone can be charged with. Putting her in prison for five years wouldn't have done jack shit, and politically would have been suicidal. Try getting reelected when you've got newsapaper headlines reading "DA charged 87 68 year old grandmother for defending herself from attacker."

But this was justified, we all know it was, and social law as most of us (who I'm sure were rather unpopular in schools) know, responds with massive force.

More an application of formal and informal law, really.

 

[crazypsyko666]

Because she's A) old and B) a woman, of course she's the real victim.

The little prick deserved to be punched, but shooting at him is a bit of an overreaction.

She should've used a bean-bag round. I don't understand the use of actual bullets for home defense, unless the attacker is using lethal weapons themselves.

Serves him right, though. I wish I could shoot more pricks my age.

So your saying that people should use non-lethal rounds for self-defense. Exactly why? These people are choosing to come into your home to threaten you into giving them your belongings with force, what about that entitles them to any ounce of consideration on your part? what about that entitles them to force you to buy rarer, and more expensive bullets, just so that when you defend your life from thier threats, they don't die. If someone is robbing you/ chucking bricks at you, your life is on the line, i see no reason why they deserve to risk less for choosing to attack you.

Because murder, assault, battery are not minor offenses. Does that make any sense to you, or do you not know how bad prison is?

 

[The Austin]

That's how life works. Someone breaks your stuff, you have the right to defend yourself.

 

[Starke]

Shit, even the grannies have guns in the States?!

It's fuckin' Chicago. The goddamn Rottweilers are packin'.

 

[Bilbo536]

That's just natural selection. If you're a big enough dumbass to piss someone off for no good reason to the point where they get this pissed off, you're gonna get attacked and it's your own fault. Nature will take it's course and you might get hurt or even killed. And that's the way it should be.

 

[zehydra]

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.

he was breaking her windows and throwing bricks. That's not exercising free speech...

 

[thenumberthirteen]

Well i think she should be charged with something. No matter ho hard she had been taunted shooting somebody is not an acceptable way to deal with it.

 

[Sir Strange Of The House Lycan]

The first thing which came to mind:
[HEADING=1]HENRIETTA BROWN[/HEADING]

 

[sunburst]

If I shot someone in self defense, I would get tried as an adult and thrown in jail. Regardless of what the bully did to me.

Your profile says you live in Vermont. Is that accurate? If so, your state law guarantees you the right to use lethal force in defense of both your person and your property. You should try actually knowing what you're talking about before saying things like this. It usually helps.

It's regrettable that a young kid was shot. I don't know all the details so I can't say whether or not the lady was in the right. It's entirely possible she and her neighbors have overstated the continuing crimes of the kid and it's entirely possible there were several less violent options she had yet to try. It's also entirely possible there weren't any other options besides ignore the person chucking bricks at you. The only things I know for sure is that everyone instantly demonizing the lady for defending herself without all the information is naive at best. People need to learn that things in the real world don't always have a perfect solution that leaves everyone happy and unharmed.

 

[Reaper195]

My faith in humanity is slowly being restored. Pure win for the day!

 

[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.

 

[Jadak]

.. Why am i not suprised?

Its just wrong.

Which part? Everything about this seems fairly appropriate to me.

 

[PhiMed]

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.

You're comparing (supposedly) physically fit police officers who "signed up for the job" to an old lady who's trying to mind her own business. It's not the same thing. It's not the same ball-park. It's not even the same sport. If you don't realize that, then I guess there's no talking to you.

For the record, part of the reason no charges were filed is because the entire neighborhood was elated that someone did something about this little turd. Pretty much everyone in the entire neighborhood offered to serve as a character witness on her behalf, so prosecutors realized that there was no point in pressing charges. They'd never get a conviction, and they'd end up looking like the king assholes of the world for harassing an old lady who lives alone and just wanted some relief from this little sociopath.

Also, people who start riots because their sports team loses kind of deserve to be shot, or at the very least sterilized so their profound stupidity cannot be passed on to future generations.

 

[spartan231490]

I'd like to remind you folks we used to hang and stone people.

Escalation is never apropos as a rule, she should have been charged with assault with a deadly weapon, then given the lightest sentence.

But this was justified, we all know it was, and social law as most of us (who I'm sure were rather unpopular in schools) know, responds with massive force.

charged with assault for a lethat weapon? how many times does it have to be said, IT WAS SELF DEFENSE, WHICH IS PERFECTLY MOTHER F-ING LEGAL.

 

[spartan231490]

On the one hand, that kid was being a dick and the Old lady has every right to defend herself and her home. On the other hand, she shot at him... Which is a bit extreme, don't you think?

Why don't we say "They were both in the wrong" and just let both of them off the hook?

She wasnt in the wrong, she took the only means she had of stopping him, and thereby protecting her own life.

 

[PhiMed]

On the one hand, that kid was being a dick and the Old lady has every right to defend herself and her home. On the other hand, she shot at him... Which is a bit extreme, don't you think?

Why don't we say "They were both in the wrong" and just let both of them off the hook?

Because she's right. What other method did she have at her disposal? A woman pushing 70 vs. a teenage male? Anything short of potentially lethal force would just piss him off. His buddies are probably going to come back for her later anyway, but at least she got a good shot in.

 

[spartan231490]

Because she's A) old and B) a woman, of course she's the real victim.

The little prick deserved to be punched, but shooting at him is a bit of an overreaction.

She should've used a bean-bag round. I don't understand the use of actual bullets for home defense, unless the attacker is using lethal weapons themselves.

Serves him right, though. I wish I could shoot more pricks my age.

So your saying that people should use non-lethal rounds for self-defense. Exactly why? These people are choosing to come into your home to threaten you into giving them your belongings with force, what about that entitles them to any ounce of consideration on your part? what about that entitles them to force you to buy rarer, and more expensive bullets, just so that when you defend your life from thier threats, they don't die. If someone is robbing you/ chucking bricks at you, your life is on the line, i see no reason why they deserve to risk less for choosing to attack you.

Because murder, assault, battery are not minor offenses. Does that make any sense to you, or do you not know how bad prison is?

Self-defense is legal

 

[The Funslinger]

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.

Did you read the article? He taunted her for a year, smashed her windows and hit her in the chest with a brick. He obviously didn't care if she was badly injured. Honestly, after a certain point, after having all the chances to stop and say sorry, a nice big bullet wound is what some people deserve. Personally, I hope she hit the sad git in his wanking arm...