Boy, 7, dies in apparent tresspass shooting

[RoloMather]

n/m

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: maxster
BOOM HEADSHOT!

Someone beat you to it.

 

[RoloMather]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: maxster
BOOM HEADSHOT!

Someone beat you to it.

Nope, don't think so. Not that exact phrase, which has its own special connotation. Anyways, upon reflecting, that statement is withdrawn.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Raduque
I think my sarcasm was too subtle for you, captain anti-suv. Just for the record, the 7-y/o wouldn't have even had to be ON my property for me to have shot him. That's what scopes are for.

:roll:

Scopes are for people who suck. as;dlfkjasd



The people in the article look like a couple of meth addicts. My parents are in their 60's and they still look younger.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Finalnight

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Here are my questions:
1) WERE they trespassing?
2) Is it legal in that municipality to use deadly force against tresspassers?

It sure as fuck shouldn't be. Trespassing on someone's land isn't justification enough to kill someone IMO.

Throw the book at these two wastes of human flesh.

I have never heard of any US jurisdiction that allows deadly force against trespassers absent some other extenuating circumstance, ie poaching, stealing cattle, breaking and entering, other felonies, national security facility, etc.

Most states require you to be in mortal danger before you can fire.
Some states have the force with force law, where you can use force to defend a possession or prevent someone from fleeing.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Most states require you to be in mortal danger before you can fire.
Some states have the force with force law, where you can use force to defend a possession or prevent someone from fleeing.

LOL

That bitch thought he could get away from me. I showed him!

 

[RoloMather]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Finalnight

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Here are my questions:
1) WERE they trespassing?
2) Is it legal in that municipality to use deadly force against tresspassers?

It sure as fuck shouldn't be. Trespassing on someone's land isn't justification enough to kill someone IMO.

Throw the book at these two wastes of human flesh.

I have never heard of any US jurisdiction that allows deadly force against trespassers absent some other extenuating circumstance, ie poaching, stealing cattle, breaking and entering, other felonies, national security facility, etc.

Most states require you to be in mortal danger before you can fire.
Some states have the force with force law, where you can use force to defend a possession or prevent someone from fleeing.

In TEXAS you can shoot trespassers.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: Reckoner
Gotta love Texas

Don't think those two inbreds are representative of the greater population of Texas. Most of us would've actually verified they were trespassing before we shot them.

Oh I'm sure they're representative of many people in Texas and that's a fine distinction you made there.

So, if the 7 year old was on your property you would have shot him? Man, I'd fucking love to live there...:roll:

I think my sarcasm was too subtle for you, captain anti-suv. Just for the record, the 7-y/o wouldn't have even had to be ON my property for me to have shot him. That's what scopes are for.

:roll:

I recommend we just nuke your site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure your stupid doesn't spread.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes
Yeah they messed up pretty bad. I'm not against people protecting their property with deadly force, but use a little fucking common sense. There's no good reason to shoot some kids that aren't doing anything threatening even if they are on your property. Technically they might have been able to get away with that, but since the family wasn't even on his property the couple is probably screwed. Hopefully when this goes to court they throw the book at them.

I am all about 2nd Amendment rights, and especially for people shooting up pukes who try to break into their homes.


But #1: The family was on a well known off road track.

This dumbass couple could at least figure that out.

#2: There were several small people. Unless the couple thought it was the attack of the midgets, there would be no reason to open fire...even if midgets were attacking.

#3: The reason for opening fire for protecting "the levee" was unfounded because this is not a time of crisis in Texas, and this is simply vigilante justice gone extremely bad.

I think the wife should be locked up for life, the assclown with the gun should get the chair.

Or be strung up.

Originally posted by: se7en

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

WTF!!! If they have criminal records then how would they obtain a gun? :shocked:

Same way as every other criminal. . . .

yeah seriously, what kind of a naive question is that? How old are you Jules?


Unless you're being sarcastic...

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

I recommend we just nuke your site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure your stupid doesn't spread.

California: Land of humorless dumbfucks.

 

[Billyzeke]

Originally posted by: Reckoner
Gotta love Texas

Hey, there are lunatic crack and meth heads in every state.

Too bad the victims weren't armed to try and defend themselves from these idiots.

At least in Texas they will probably get the chair.

 

[alkemyst]

there is a yahoo like that in my brother's community. He lives next door to a common field area that he insists is his property and runs people off it.

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: Raduque
I think my sarcasm was too subtle for you, captain anti-suv. Just for the record, the 7-y/o wouldn't have even had to be ON my property for me to have shot him. That's what scopes are for.

:roll:

Scopes are for people who suck. as;dlfkjasd

.

I've read about him. A sniping God among men. I have bad eyes, though. Doubt I could make out a target at typical ranges without a scope.

 

[Anubis]

BOO YAH

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Anubis
BOO YAH

I love that sign. My cousin also has one that says something like "This home is protected by Smith & Wesson Security" and there's a little gun drawn under it. It's so cute!

 

[Finalnight]

Originally posted by: RoloMather

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Finalnight

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Here are my questions:
1) WERE they trespassing?
2) Is it legal in that municipality to use deadly force against tresspassers?

It sure as fuck shouldn't be. Trespassing on someone's land isn't justification enough to kill someone IMO.

Throw the book at these two wastes of human flesh.

I have never heard of any US jurisdiction that allows deadly force against trespassers absent some other extenuating circumstance, ie poaching, stealing cattle, breaking and entering, other felonies, national security facility, etc.

Most states require you to be in mortal danger before you can fire.
Some states have the force with force law, where you can use force to defend a possession or prevent someone from fleeing.

In TEXAS you can shoot trespassers.

Negative:

§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

 

[d33pt]

http://www.zukikrawlers.com/showthread.php?t=23638

check out this crazy thread. more crazy trigger happy hicks.

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: TheChort

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: SneakyStuff

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: QueBert

Sucks the boy died, but at least he was he had a SHOT to go off-roading before he died.

You should be ashamed of yourself. A young boy died.

But, but but... When somebody dies it's a tradition for ATOTers to make the worst joke at the expense of the dead person. EVERY death thread goes like this! I should feel ashamed, but I just want to fit in here

Its a little different when a 7 year old kid gets shot in the head while spending the day with his family.

but there was an obvious pun in what happened, all ATOT cares about is finding the lame pun. I have seen other threads where children died and jokes were made.

Don't worry, you're in the right here. I don't know why these other two posters aren't familiar with this tradition. Pun on!

I just did it to see what would happen, I always make a fuss about these threads and the disgusting comments people makes to try and be funny. Apparently the one time I decide to play along, the rest have miraculously stopped being disrespectful when people die

I GIVE UP!

im all for those awefull puns. but in a situation where a 7 yr old is murdered i think its in bad taste.

Seriously. This thread needed a pun, like I need a hole in the head.

Winnar!


I'd like to see these two hanged.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: Reckoner
Gotta love Texas

Don't think those two inbreds are representative of the greater population of Texas. Most of us would've actually verified they were trespassing before we shot them.

Oh I'm sure they're representative of many people in Texas and that's a fine distinction you made there.

So, if the 7 year old was on your property you would have shot him? Man, I'd fucking love to live there...:roll:

I think my sarcasm was too subtle for you, captain anti-suv. Just for the record, the 7-y/o wouldn't have even had to be ON my property for me to have shot him. That's what scopes are for.

:roll:

Scopes on a shotgun? nice.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: RoloMather

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: maxster
BOOM HEADSHOT!

Someone beat you to it.

Nope, don't think so. Not that exact phrase, which has its own special connotation. Anyways, upon reflecting, that statement is withdrawn.

Did you change your name half way through a conversation :|

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: Reckoner
Gotta love Texas

Don't think those two inbreds are representative of the greater population of Texas. Most of us would've actually verified they were trespassing before we shot them.

Oh I'm sure they're representative of many people in Texas and that's a fine distinction you made there.

So, if the 7 year old was on your property you would have shot him? Man, I'd fucking love to live there...:roll:

I think my sarcasm was too subtle for you, captain anti-suv. Just for the record, the 7-y/o wouldn't have even had to be ON my property for me to have shot him. That's what scopes are for.

:roll:

Scopes on a shotgun? nice.

You can get some nice range with slugs.

 

[RoloMather]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: RoloMather

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: maxster
BOOM HEADSHOT!

Someone beat you to it.

Nope, don't think so. Not that exact phrase, which has its own special connotation. Anyways, upon reflecting, that statement is withdrawn.

Did you change your name half way through a conversation :|

I was like WTF is Plasma talking about. Then I scrolled up and look. I didn't even notice that olds changed my name to something else in his quote. Thanks for pointing it out. Very ninja of oldsmoboat.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: Raduque
I think my sarcasm was too subtle for you, captain anti-suv. Just for the record, the 7-y/o wouldn't have even had to be ON my property for me to have shot him. That's what scopes are for.

:roll:

Scopes are for people who suck. as;dlfkjasd

.

I've read about him. A sniping God among men. I have bad eyes, though. Doubt I could make out a target at typical ranges without a scope.

Ironically, since I had my eyes "fixed" with PRK, I can't use a scope anymore because my close-focus vision is screwed out to about 4-5". Good thing I never bought and mounted that scope on my Mauser I was contemplating for years.

 

[ViviTheMage]

Originally posted by: QueBert
FIRST WITH ATOT DEATH PUN!!!!

Sucks the boy died, but at least he was he had a SHOT to go off-roading before he died.

did I do that right? Was I offensive + lame + unfunny enough?

You tried too hard. you have to be subtle about these things.

 

[Pegun]

May they rot in jail. This is the sort of bullshit that give's gun owners a bad name and sparks irrational lawmakers to try to make gun ownership illegal

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Pegun
May they rot in jail. This is the sort of bullshit that give's gun owners a bad name and sparks irrational lawmakers to try to make gun ownership illegal

Looks like they'll rot whever they are. I've seen Crazy Hick movie characters that looked better than them.