Hero to me, psycho to society

[buckeye45_73]

Im fine with the guy in jail, its definately overkill, but when you break in to someones home, there may be consequemnces.

My Question on pre meditation is how is it pre meditation, if youre expecting someone to rob you?

 

[Katzndogz]

Whose the degenerate? The Home invader or the home defender?

The defender is always going to be the degenerate. The criminals have rights and defenses.

What it is, is that criminals have an occupational hazard when they rob homes. They assume the risk that the homeowner will be armed and not inclined to be understanding. It's not much different than those who want to strip copper from live power lines and get electrocuted.

[MENTION=33658]Katzndogz[/MENTION]

We're in Beta-Male society babe. Just look at the "office/cubicle-hell" that most Americans live in today. The wimps have taken over, and that's why society is in a constant state of decay. The productive bread-winner is no longer valued.

That's true. Although it doesn't last long. As soon as a stronger people smell wimpiness, they move in. Then the decision. Do you fight for the wimps who hate you for fighting or join the stronger people and throw the wimps out?

The world is not nearly as clear cut as it used to be. At one time a homeowner wouldn't have been bothered with a trial because he successfully defended his home. After all, it wasn't this twosome's first rodeo. They had robbed before. They had robbed this man's home before. If he had held them for the police, they would have been back for another go as soon as they could. Once a place has been burglarized, it's a sure bet that the ones who did it will be back. Usually in a short time. To do it again. They get to feeling secure.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Whose the degenerate? The Home invader or the home defender?

Neither have anything to be proud of. And none here are heroes.

Which is worse? Well .... murder is certainly worse than breaking and entering.

If his intentions were off because of mental illness or PTSD,
that is different if he did not have normal control how he reacted.

If their intentions were off because of the effects of "drug use by choice"
on the adolescent brain, that is something that could be helped.

At that point, they both seem equally off. They both needed help,
didn't get it in time, and everyone paid the price for it.

Regardless how we judge either side, the level of mental instability
is where intervention was needed to prevent bad decisions from going any further.

After bad decisions are made, everything else is "after the fact."
Anything could go wrong, especially when dealing with mental instability.

This is really a wake up call, not to take those things for granted.
But to make sure everyone gets help who has issues like this,
and not wait for things to go wrong to seek help. We take too much for granted.
Until we see cases like this and wonder "why couldn't this be prevented."

Lot of really good points here.
There are no heroes and there are no winners here.

 

[Katzndogz]

Neither have anything to be proud of. And none here are heroes.

Which is worse? Well .... murder is certainly worse than breaking and entering.

If his intentions were off because of mental illness or PTSD,
that is different if he did not have normal control how he reacted.

If their intentions were off because of the effects of "drug use by choice"
on the adolescent brain, that is something that could be helped.

At that point, they both seem equally off. They both needed help,
didn't get it in time, and everyone paid the price for it.

Regardless how we judge either side, the level of mental instability
is where intervention was needed to prevent bad decisions from going any further.

After bad decisions are made, everything else is "after the fact."
Anything could go wrong, especially when dealing with mental instability.

This is really a wake up call, not to take those things for granted.
But to make sure everyone gets help who has issues like this,
and not wait for things to go wrong to seek help. We take too much for granted.
Until we see cases like this and wonder "why couldn't this be prevented."

Lot of really good points here.
There are no heroes and there are no winners here.

The question is, how can we get people accepting of being victims and not mind so much?

 

[buckeye45_73]

If his intentions were off because of mental illness or PTSD,
that is different if he did not have normal control how he reacted.

If their intentions were off because of the effects of "drug use by choice"
on the adolescent brain, that is something that could be helped.

At that point, they both seem equally off. They both needed help,
didn't get it in time, and everyone paid the price for it.

Regardless how we judge either side, the level of mental instability
is where intervention was needed to prevent bad decisions from going any further.

After bad decisions are made, everything else is "after the fact."
Anything could go wrong, especially when dealing with mental instability.

This is really a wake up call, not to take those things for granted.
But to make sure everyone gets help who has issues like this,
and not wait for things to go wrong to seek help. We take too much for granted.
Until we see cases like this and wonder "why couldn't this be prevented."

Lot of really good points here.
There are no heroes and there are no winners here.

The question is, how can we get people accepting of being victims and not mind so much?

Well the left poves criminals, im not sure why, but damn do they make them coddled. I have no care for them,especially violent ones...once they comit a violent crime, its open season imho. In this caee though it was a couple of stupid kids. They knew better and it ended bery badly for them.

the funny thing is liberals would say anyone who runs into detroit with a shirt that says ****** gets whats comming to them, but only in cases like that. Even though thats not near breaking into someones home.

to liberals saying ****** is on par with armed robbery, murder, slavery, segregation, ect

 

[nodoginnafight]

If his intentions were off because of mental illness or PTSD,
that is different if he did not have normal control how he reacted.

If their intentions were off because of the effects of "drug use by choice"
on the adolescent brain, that is something that could be helped.

At that point, they both seem equally off. They both needed help,
didn't get it in time, and everyone paid the price for it.

Regardless how we judge either side, the level of mental instability
is where intervention was needed to prevent bad decisions from going any further.

After bad decisions are made, everything else is "after the fact."
Anything could go wrong, especially when dealing with mental instability.

This is really a wake up call, not to take those things for granted.
But to make sure everyone gets help who has issues like this,
and not wait for things to go wrong to seek help. We take too much for granted.
Until we see cases like this and wonder "why couldn't this be prevented."

Lot of really good points here.
There are no heroes and there are no winners here.

The question is, how can we get people accepting of being victims and not mind so much?

I don't understand what you are asking - is it how to prevent these things? How do we reduce the rage of crime victims?

By preventing crime. By arresting and convicting people and giving the convicted a punishment that fits the crime. IMHO.

Sad thing is, this guy could have guaranteed that in this case. But he opted to give 'em the death penalty for breaking and entering. And now he's gonna speed the rest of his life in jail.

No winners and no heroes here.

 

[emilynghiem]

If his intentions were off because of mental illness or PTSD,
that is different if he did not have normal control how he reacted.

If their intentions were off because of the effects of "drug use by choice"
on the adolescent brain, that is something that could be helped.

At that point, they both seem equally off. They both needed help,
didn't get it in time, and everyone paid the price for it.

Regardless how we judge either side, the level of mental instability
is where intervention was needed to prevent bad decisions from going any further.

After bad decisions are made, everything else is "after the fact."
Anything could go wrong, especially when dealing with mental instability.

This is really a wake up call, not to take those things for granted.
But to make sure everyone gets help who has issues like this,
and not wait for things to go wrong to seek help. We take too much for granted.
Until we see cases like this and wonder "why couldn't this be prevented."

Lot of really good points here.
There are no heroes and there are no winners here.

The question is, how can we get people accepting of being victims and not mind so much?

Hi Katz: In working for years to address this issue, I find it goes deeper than I thought.

I thought with education, training and experience, anyone could grow to appreciate the amount of work and investment it takes to exercise equal ownership.

Now I find it isn't enough to own your own home, nonprofit, business or school.

Some people have been victimized so much, and so used to being powerless,
I think they would have to own their own CITY or township and not pay taxes except to their own entity, BEFORE they would trust they would not "lose the property anyway."

They would still need on-hands training to manage the whole system of resources going in, out and around to develop the community, in order to experience the full concept before they would feel "EQUAL" and NOT under the control of others.

But they would not even trust enough to invest in setting up such a program
for training UNLESS they own the land as a city it is on, so it is not under any
other controlling interest or govt that could just change the laws to claim taxes
are owed and take it away.

This is truly disturbing to discover.

But it explains why so many people will NOT invest in ownership of homes and businesses.
They are so used to and afraid of "government" controlling everything anyway,
they just assume the government is the default, so they keep trying to use
their party politics to have some say in this government bureaucracy controlling everything.

To be equal and free, they'd have to be completely independent and
own everything and manage it themselves to understand what that even means.

And that's not even offered as a choice!

They are even too afraid to push for this, but are waiting for govt to give it to them.
So that's why it isn't happening.

Very sad and sick.

I thought I could just organize teams to set up campuses and district for teaching these skills, and it would solve the problem with unequal education and access.

But NOW I find that isn't even good enough. People might invest that much work if they were guaranteed they run the district themselves, outside any other govt entity. But no one I know is willing to invest if it means competing with local govt over taxes and control.
It would have to be completely free of that, or people are too scared. I only met 1-2 people who were pushing like me to organize local land ownership and property management, both Black women leaders, running into the same "fear of property ownership" because of
govt controls.

Once people feel like subordinate subjects to government, everything else is perceived in that context where people are not equal but "those in power" will always control the laws.

Reminds me of the elephants brought up from youth with a tether on their ankle
restraining them to a post. And once they get used to not being able to walk very far, much less being able to run free, you can remove the post. And just keeping the tether
on the ankle prevents them from breaking off and running free, because they assume they are restrained.

I really thought this could be resolved.

But if people are SO stuck in victim mentality, nobody will support arguments to
set up independent district for teaching people ownership of land and laws,
then maybe we are stuck with the government we've got. So sad, sick and sorry!

 

[Katzndogz]

Lot of really good points here.
There are no heroes and there are no winners here.

The question is, how can we get people accepting of being victims and not mind so much?

I don't understand what you are asking - is it how to prevent these things? How do we reduce the rage of crime victims?

By preventing crime. By arresting and convicting people and giving the convicted a punishment that fits the crime. IMHO.

Sad thing is, this guy could have guaranteed that in this case. But he opted to give 'em the death penalty for breaking and entering. And now he's gonna speed the rest of his life in jail.

No winners and no heroes here.

Whatever was done to these two to make them stop committing crimes in the past didn't work. Arresting and convicting people who commit crimes doesn't work. We have the highest recidivism rate in the world. Going to jail is part of the cost of doing business. Criminals rely on unarmed people and people who really don't want to kill them. "you won't hurt me. You'll go to prison for life if you do." That's part of the way they think. The best way to stop this kind of crime, from clueless opportunists looking for a soft target is to create uncertainty. They don't know who is armed. They do know that whoever shoots them will get away with it. They don't know what's a hardened target. That open door may have an arsenal behind the door. Now you have low level criminals thinking twice about what they do.

There really is no other way. In order to make any meaningful inroads on the level of criminal activity, you really have to convince people not to commit that crime in the first place.

 

[ogibillm]

your things are not worth anyone's life.

 

[emilynghiem]

I don't understand what you are asking - is it how to prevent these things? How do we reduce the rage of crime victims?

By preventing crime. By arresting and convicting people and giving the convicted a punishment that fits the crime. IMHO.

Sad thing is, this guy could have guaranteed that in this case. But he opted to give 'em the death penalty for breaking and entering. And now he's gonna speed the rest of his life in jail.

No winners and no heroes here.

I would say Yes to preventing crime.i
I believe in Restorative Justice approaches that hold wrongdoers accountable for consequences, corrections and restitution.

Many of same approaches for preventing crime by addressing criminal illness, addictions, abuses, etc. can provide for corrections and restitution to victims and society as part of the rehab and recovery.
This would help people recover faster, and stop this destructive tendency to pit offenders against crime victims because of the legal system. Defending interests should never be at the expense of others.
But solutions should be sought that address all problems and are fair to all people involved affected.

Merely punishing people afterwards does not cure or prevent the cause of criminal behavior. Restitution as part of the resolution and recovery can help crime victims.

I believe that by holding wrongdoers (or their legal guardians) responsible for costs of crime and damages, there would be greater deterrence and accountability instead of passing costs to lawabiding taxpayers who didn't commit the crimes but foot the bill.

Instead of complaining about why taxpayers are charged more for health care, we should be picking apart the wasteful spending on prisons and prosecution, hold wrongdoers s accountable for paying back costs to the public for their crimes, and use those resources for effective medical and mental health treatment to solve problems on the prevention side.

 

[deltex1]

He was a liberal....creating a retirement plan for himself.

 

[emilynghiem]

your things are not worth anyone's life.

Obviously people's desire for security and control
is enough to kill people over.

This is why the death penalty doesn't deter killing for people who think this way.
They would sooner kill others or die themselves,
rather than face prosecution or punishment at all.
Once they lose freedom to get away, life doesn't matter anyway, they might as well be dead.

If someone would rather die anyway than give up control to authorities,
how is the death penalty going to matter to them?

 

[OKTexas]

He took out the trash.

You're wrong on this one, they came in, he shot them, he was good to go at that time because he used only the force necessary to stop the threat. Where he committed a crime was when he executed the already downed teens, there is no justification for that.

 

[zeke]

No good reason?

They broke into his house. More than once. They won't do it again.

My House is a Thug Free Zone.

Your house is a free zone of a lot of things; common sense, intelligence, a little decency etc.
Hey, I missed your answer yesterday about the number of people that you have shot and killed. Did you respond?

 

[emilynghiem]

Whatever was done to these two to make them stop committing crimes in the past didn't work. Arresting and convicting people who commit crimes doesn't work. We have the highest recidivism rate in the world. Going to jail is part of the cost of doing business. Criminals rely on unarmed people and people who really don't want to kill them. "you won't hurt me. You'll go to prison for life if you do." That's part of the way they think. The best way to stop this kind of crime, from clueless opportunists looking for a soft target is to create uncertainty. They don't know who is armed. They do know that whoever shoots them will get away with it. They don't know what's a hardened target. That open door may have an arsenal behind the door. Now you have low level criminals thinking twice about what they do.

There really is no other way. In order to make any meaningful inroads on the level of criminal activity, you really have to convince people not to commit that crime in the first place.

Hi Katz: How about holding them to pay restitution proportionally to the damages and
crimes they commit?

So instead of "just going to prison" (which has limits, once you kill X number of people and get either life or death, this doesn't distinguish if you killed even more people because you are already at the maximum) why not pay a certain cost of prosecuting each crime, and paying restitution for each person.

Wouldn't that deter people from killing additional people or committing additional crimes?

What if ALL citizens were required to sign financial and legal agreements, upon turning 18 and becoming a legal citizen, that for any premeditated crime, either the person or their legal guardian agrees to the financial cost of prosecution, damages, legal costs, and restitution. And TEACH people what these costs are for prisons and courts, instead of dumping them on taxpayers.

And for premeditated crimes abusing a firearm, the person agrees to forfeit citizenship and accept deportation to supervised work-study programs until the sentence and restitution is paid off; where applicants on the waiting list for immigration can receive a guest visa to work for the length of that person's sentence.

What if we rewarded citizens who agree to obey laws and work productively?
And people who violate laws with premeditated crimes, especially abusing weapons,
could lose their citizenship?

NOTE: with this case, and presumably most cases, the mental health issues would mean requiring treatment instead. By screening people for mental and legal incompetence, most cases of criminal or mental illness could be caught and treated in advance.

Someone would have to accept legal and financial responsibility for such persons,
so we don't have lost populations revolving through the mental health and prison systems, getting released without stable support, going back and forth, at taxpayer expense.

We should be addressing this issue at the same time as public health and insurance.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Hey, I missed your answer yesterday about the number of people that you have shot and killed. Did you respond?

Why would anyone rob my house when I'm seen (from the street) cleaning my shotgun in the brightly lit window at night?

llololololol

I thank my lucky stars that I've never had to. Try the liberals that live houses over with their "Hillary 2016 signs" and "Still Bush's Fault"

Seriously, "Still Bush's Fault" is one of their signs...

 

[George Costanza]

No good reason?

They broke into his house. More than once. They won't do it again.

What if they were trespassing in his back yard? What if they were walking by outside and yelled an insult at him while he was sitting on the porch? What if they had written a letter to the editor he didn't like?

Shooting and killing them would most certainly prevent any of these things from ever happening again.

 

[George Costanza]

Seriously, "Still Bush's Fault" is one of their signs...

Seriously - Bush (Dubya) did a huge amount of harm to an awful lot of people - harm that is still being felt today.

 

[whitehall]

I wouldn't call him a hero. He was a victim who lived in fear when the police seemed powerless to deal with teenagers who burglarized his home. When the shit hit the fan he acted out of fear and frustration and anger. I pity the guy.

 

[pvsi]

I agree with most of what your saying. But since they were unarmed I don't think any shooting was self defense. I'm sure if he let them know he was home and armed they would have run away fast.

Maybe he should have posed naked and chased them away with a rubber dildo.

Maybe, pvsi, he and those teens needed a friend like you
to teach them right from wrong in advance,
BEFORE their confrontation ended this way.

There were too many things that went wrong.

It is good you do not judge the man, pvsi.

Maybe he would have listened to someone like you who respected him.
This could have been resolved another way, if he had
even ONE FRIEND he could have asked for advice
who could have counseled him in better ways.

This serves as a lesson that we need to resolve issues
and factors in advance, and never let them go on,
escalating and culminating into disasters waiting to happen.

Quite possibly, but what is done is done. now the question goes to the kind people who feel sorry for the "kids" who "made a mistake" and got shot by the old man, and the question is this: could we be kind enough to forgive an old senile man for one mistake and let him live out the rest of his days in freedom? after all we all make mistakes and unlike the mistakes by the "KIDS" which were NOT their first mistakes (they did it before), it WAS the first mistake an old gentleman did like this. So how about we learn to forgive and forget. give an old man another chance at life since his days are numbered anyway, or do we only forgive the "kids"?