Hmm

[jagec]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: FoBoT
and if the surviving criminal can be locked up longer with this strategy , then it is correct

Dangerous ground. This is the sort of reasoning that sees 18-year-olds serving 5-year jail sentences for getting BJs from their 17-year-old girlfriends.

yes, that is illegal, do the crime, do the time

OK, now you're just trolling.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: OdiN
Fuck him. Hang him from a tree.

They're coming out of the woodworks. You just had yourself a rootin tootin klan meeting about this matter? That was the verdict?

What the hell are you talking about, dumbass?

Hang the criminal from a tree. Hell...that's better than he deserves after participating in bashing that guys head in. Perhaps he should have his head bashed in the same way, but that would cost the taxpayers more money.

Oh, and STFU you racist prick. Good job coming in here and assuming that I'm only saying something because the dumbass criminal fuckstick happens to be black. I don't give a shit if he's purple and pink, hang the fucker.

If you knew a thing or two about American history, you'd understand why "hang him from a tree" has different implications than "put him in the chair" or some other method of execution. Even "hang him from the gallows." But "hang him from a tree" when referring to a black guy is a really, really dumb thing to say.

What else you gonna hang someone from? There are trees everywhere.

Anyway, I'd say shoot him, but you can re-use rope and it doesn't cost as much as a bullet.

You can't be this clueless... The government would use a gallows and the criminal would die instantly. Lynch mobs use trees.

 

[sandorski]

They were fleeing? Home owner should be charged. Perhaps not with Murder, but he was clearly using excessive force in the situation.

 

[woodie1]

Originally posted by: sandorski
They were fleeing? Home owner should be charged. Perhaps not with Murder, but he was clearly using excessive force in the situation.

ROTFLMAO!

 

[narcotic]

Originally posted by: sandorski
They were fleeing? Home owner should be charged. Perhaps not with Murder, but he was clearly using excessive force in the situation.

Did you even bother reading the f***ing link? Let me give you a little cliff's:

"Edmonds' stepson, Dale Lafferty, suffered brain damage from the baseball bat beating he took during the melee. The 19-year-old lives in a rehabilitation center and can no longer feed himself. "

Enjoy your dinner.

 

[Unheard]

Originally posted by: sandorski
They were fleeing? Home owner should be charged. Perhaps not with Murder, but he was clearly using excessive force in the situation.

You'll have to forgive him. No one gets robbed or beaten in Canada because gun control is so tight up there.

 

[FallenHero]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: OdiN
Fuck him. Hang him from a tree.

They're coming out of the woodworks. You just had yourself a rootin tootin klan meeting about this matter? That was the verdict?

What the hell are you talking about, dumbass?

Hang the criminal from a tree. Hell...that's better than he deserves after participating in bashing that guys head in. Perhaps he should have his head bashed in the same way, but that would cost the taxpayers more money.

Oh, and STFU you racist prick. Good job coming in here and assuming that I'm only saying something because the dumbass criminal fuckstick happens to be black. I don't give a shit if he's purple and pink, hang the fucker.

If you knew a thing or two about American history, you'd understand why "hang him from a tree" has different implications than "put him in the chair" or some other method of execution. Even "hang him from the gallows." But "hang him from a tree" when referring to a black guy is a really, really dumb thing to say.

What else you gonna hang someone from? There are trees everywhere.

Anyway, I'd say shoot him, but you can re-use rope and it doesn't cost as much as a bullet.

You can't be this clueless... The government would use a gallows and the criminal would die instantly. Lynch mobs use trees.

As well as pitch forks and torches.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: Unheard

Originally posted by: sandorski
They were fleeing? Home owner should be charged. Perhaps not with Murder, but he was clearly using excessive force in the situation.

You'll have to forgive him. No one gets robbed or beaten in Canada because gun control is so tight up there.

I'm glad that two of them died (I think I'm a little out there for saying that), but you're not supposed to take the law into your own hands, supposedly.

 

[Kirby]

Yes they deserve to die and I hope they burn in hell.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: narcotic

Originally posted by: sandorski
They were fleeing? Home owner should be charged. Perhaps not with Murder, but he was clearly using excessive force in the situation.

Did you even bother reading the f***ing link? Let me give you a little cliff's:

"Edmonds' stepson, Dale Lafferty, suffered brain damage from the baseball bat beating he took during the melee. The 19-year-old lives in a rehabilitation center and can no longer feed himself. "

Enjoy your dinner.

Moot.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: OdiN
Fuck him. Hang him from a tree.

They're coming out of the woodworks. You just had yourself a rootin tootin klan meeting about this matter? That was the verdict?

What the hell are you talking about, dumbass?

Hang the criminal from a tree. Hell...that's better than he deserves after participating in bashing that guys head in. Perhaps he should have his head bashed in the same way, but that would cost the taxpayers more money.

Oh, and STFU you racist prick. Good job coming in here and assuming that I'm only saying something because the dumbass criminal fuckstick happens to be black. I don't give a shit if he's purple and pink, hang the fucker.

If you knew a thing or two about American history, you'd understand why "hang him from a tree" has different implications than "put him in the chair" or some other method of execution. Even "hang him from the gallows." But "hang him from a tree" when referring to a black guy is a really, really dumb thing to say.

What else you gonna hang someone from? There are trees everywhere.

Anyway, I'd say shoot him, but you can re-use rope and it doesn't cost as much as a bullet.

You can't be this clueless... The government would use a gallows and the criminal would die instantly. Lynch mobs use trees.

But then you gotta build a gallows, and that costs money. This turd isn't worth that. Trees are free.

 

[Captante]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
This is nothing new and not related to race at all.

2 or three people rob a store at gunpoint, the owner of the store shoots back and kills one one of the robbers, and the remaining robbers are charged with his death.

Fairly common charge and correct, imo.

The man is dead because they attempted an armed robbery. They are responsible for the death, not the store owner.

Damn straight!

If the assholes hadn't broken into the guys house they would all most likely still be alive so the one person responsible for the two deaths is being charged.

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: narcotic

Originally posted by: sandorski
They were fleeing? Home owner should be charged. Perhaps not with Murder, but he was clearly using excessive force in the situation.

Did you even bother reading the f***ing link? Let me give you a little cliff's:

"Edmonds' stepson, Dale Lafferty, suffered brain damage from the baseball bat beating he took during the melee. The 19-year-old lives in a rehabilitation center and can no longer feed himself. "

Enjoy your dinner.

Moot.

I agree with this part of your statement ... the scumbags deserve being shot just for breaking in & trying to rob the guy.





Edit: In fairness however upon further reflection, I think second degree murder or even first degree manslaughter would be a more fitting charge for the survivor since I doubt he planned out anyone being killed in advance.

 

[Eeezee]

The white guy was in his right to shoot at the burglars

But the black guy shouldn't be charged with murder... breaking and entering definitely, but wtf? I can understand the logic behind it (since they were all committing the crime, it's assumed that they all have some share in each others' deaths), but I certainly don't agree with the law.

 

[Dean]

It is a Moot point really. He took part in an armed robbery and basically attempted murder. Either way he will get life.

I have no sympathy for anyone who commits a crime like that. He took part in ruining many lives, let his get ruined also.

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: Flash1969
I'm supposed to feel sorry for the third black man? Sorry but I don't.

ATOT is slipping. It took 4 whole posts before a person was willing to proudly proclaim his idiocy.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Dean
It is a Moot point really. He took part in an armed robbery and basically attempted murder. Either way he will get life.

I have no sympathy for anyone who commits a crime like that. He took part in ruining many lives, let his get ruined also.

The thing is that these cases set precedents. For sure he should recieve just punishment for his crime, but it seems important to me that the law be fair and reasonable. The attitude of using "anything you can" to get a harsher penalty seems dangerous to me, and renders the legal system vulnerable to future abuses.
In short, he should probably get life for taking part in an armed robbery, and assaulting and crippling the son. But I don't think they should tack on that bizarre murder charge, since it doesn't make any sense.

Here's an example of the reasoning I fear:

Originally posted by: Captante
If the assholes hadn't broken into the guys house they would all most likely still be alive so the one person responsible for the two deaths is being charged.

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

The reason the two thieves are dead is that the homeowner shot them. The homeowner was responsible for their deaths, but he was acting in accordance with the law, and therefore shouldn't face any penalties. The two thieves (responsible for the burglary and the assault) have received their punishment. If there had been no other thieves, that would be the end of the story. No one would try to charge the manufacturer of the gun, the parents of the thieves, or the person who originally got them into weed, even though the thieves would "most likely still be alive" if any of those factors were different.

So if there are two thieves, no charges are filed. Yet add on one more thief, and in addition to the punishment for burglary and assault (which the dead ones have already been "punished" for), we're going to tack on a murder charge and claim that he was directly responsible for causing the other two to commit the crime and therefore be killed? How do we know that it wasn't one of the dead ones who was gung-ho about the whole idea and convinced the other ones to join in?

What if there were four thieves? Would both of them get charged with murder? Were they both equally and fully "responsible" for the deaths of the other two? How far can we spread around a single murder charge? What if there were 10?

If the surviving thief had been brainwashing the other two, or was demonstrably the ringleader, maybe there would be a case for sticking him with their deaths. Absent any proof, we should only charge him with the crimes we know he committed, and give him the appropriate punishment.

 

[Turfzilla]

Originally posted by: Flash1969
I'm supposed to feel sorry for the third black man? Sorry but I don't.

He will walk because they are "racially oppressed". It never fails. NAACP will say that the lawyers are preforming a hate crime.

You break into my house, white, black, red, yellow, green, I don't care what color you are, you will be shot in the face. End of story.

At least AZ has it right, the homeowner is protected by law in the case of breaking and entering or attempted murder. Kill all those mother fuckers.

You think because he was black, and was running because he was caught merits a clean get-a-way so he can break into someone else's house and probable kill someone?

He will walk. Fucking NAACP...

 

[Flash1969]

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl

Originally posted by: Flash1969
I'm supposed to feel sorry for the third black man? Sorry but I don't.

ATOT is slipping. It took 4 whole posts before a person was willing to proudly proclaim his idiocy.

Actually, that didn't happen until reply #89. Congrats!
Just for you!

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: Flash1969

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl

Originally posted by: Flash1969
I'm supposed to feel sorry for the third black man? Sorry but I don't.

ATOT is slipping. It took 4 whole posts before a person was willing to proudly proclaim his idiocy.

Actually, that didn't happen until reply #89. Congrats!
Just for you!

That was supposed to be clever or funny or something? Just like in common sense, and most likely life in general, you fail.

 

[Flash1969]

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl

Originally posted by: Flash1969

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl

Originally posted by: Flash1969
I'm supposed to feel sorry for the third black man? Sorry but I don't.

ATOT is slipping. It took 4 whole posts before a person was willing to proudly proclaim his idiocy.

Actually, that didn't happen until reply #89. Congrats!
Just for you!

That was supposed to be clever or funny or something? Just like in common sense, and most likely life in general, you fail.

Just a stupid reply to your stupid post.

Basically, by saying my first post was idiocy you are stating that you feel sorry for the third black man?

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer are ya?

 

[huberm]

anytime someone breaks into my home, I would automatically fear for my life. In most states, this justifies using up to deadly force. And just because they were shot in the back means nothing. The homeowner had no idea if they were just going to another room, possibly to harm another family member.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: herkulease
that's what they get.

I love out the NAACP ignores that the owner's stepson was beaten to being practically a vegatable.

The mother's excuse was funny too. They jsut wanted to buy some pot. Right...

That's because he's white. Same as Jena.

NAACP is losing more and more credibility when they continue to make excuses for blacks.

 

[Cstefan]

I join the masses in saying if someone is in my house for any reason other than my welcoming them in, they are going to hear "BOOM!! HEADSHOT!"

Or double kill! Or... monster kill! Like we should have heard in this case. Homeowner fails for not waxing the third young thug off the planet.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: OdiN
Fuck him. Hang him from a tree.

They're coming out of the woodworks. You just had yourself a rootin tootin klan meeting about this matter? That was the verdict?

BWAHAHAHA, coming from YOU this is exceptionally rich!:laugh:

Originally posted by: Narmer
My main concentration is how she knowingly broke the law and is complaining for being punished for breaking said laws. She's playing the sympathy card. No one is (or should be) above the law. You break it, you get the necessary punishment.

Originally posted by: Narmer
I have a special place in my heart for vengeance. Nothing for forgiveness.

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: yllus
LOL. Man, are you ever a sick little fuck.

Yeah, I'm the sick one for trying to uphold the law:roll:.

It's pretty clear in this matter that the law allows for him to be charged with burglary, B&E, assault, AND felony murder. While the prosecution isn't seeking the death penalty in this case, they could very well for that list of crimes.

What's the matter, don't want to "uphold the law" anymore?:roll:

I guess you failed to read my initial response to this incident

 

[Turin39789]

homeowner was justified in shooting.

charge the burgalar with armed robbery and assualt and whatever else he did, not murder.


eat at wendys.