Man kills teen boy who walked on his grass


Recommended Posts

It's not so much about gun ownership as it is about gun carrying. Where are you getting those numbers anyway? Link me.

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/TheCaseForGunControl.html

http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/pol-leg/res-eval...rpt_e.asp#Table 1

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/GunsinCanada.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20011108062857/...02033037_1.html

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:vBAr2K...us&ct=clnk&cd=2

Canadian gun ownership laws are more strict than the US. You're also forgetting about the huge population difference. So I'm way more likely to get my ass shot in the street here than I am back home.

I'm not sure you understand the concept of percentages.

Plus what the hell,

(1) this guy legally owned his gun,

(2) it was a shotgun (not a handgun), and

(3) he was on his own property, not cruisin' around town.

Still would have happened if he lived in Canada.

Sorry, but then your precious constitution is messed up. Trespassing is no excuse for killing people.

Here in Denmark you have to have hunting license in order to own a gun (and unlike US people don't go hunting with attack rifles).

Sorry guys, but that's my oppinion.

He shot the kid with a shotgun, which is a hunting weapon, not an attack rifle. Trespassing is no excuse for killing someone, you are correct. That's why the old man is in JAIL. The Constitution is just fine.

^ I agree. Crazy americans and their guns. They only need them to protect themselves from all the other crazy americans with guns

Yes, your right. We all know that guns only exist in America and that only Americans are crazy people who just happen to own guns... :rolleyes:

You should NOT be allowed to own a gun. Nobody should, not even an army, there is no skill involved in it, no way of protecting yourself from it. Its a point, click weapon. It is pointed at a person, and usually, that person is dead. Doesn't ANYBODY see how that should never, ever, be allowed? No chance of defence, unless you have a gun yourself, but thats not a defence thats an offence.

yeah, cutting someones head of with a sword or bashing your skull with whatever they used is so much better :p. war is always cruel and useless, if everybody was a chicken like me the world would be a much better place :p

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/TheCaseForGunControl.html

http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/pol-leg/res-eval...rpt_e.asp#Table 1

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/GunsinCanada.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20011108062857/...02033037_1.html

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:vBAr2K...us&ct=clnk&cd=2

I'm not sure you understand the concept of percentages.

Plus what the hell,

(1) this guy legally owned his gun,

(2) it was a shotgun (not a handgun), and

(3) he was on his own property, not cruisin' around town.

Still would have happened if he lived in Canada.

It wouldnt have happened in Canada because we don't have the mentality of shooting people who tresspass. Thats where the problem comes from. it's all in you perception.

To each his own? You just justified the cold blooded, unnecessary murder of a young boy. You wouldn't side with the man if that was your son, and I'm pretty certain you wouldn't shoot a boy for walking on your lawn. Please, explain to me your justification. You will lose in this thread.

Glad I don't live where you live.

There is more to the story.......apparently the entire family of the kid had been harassing him for

quite some time over the period of years. Not that it is justification for shooting someone, but

who knows what was going on in this guys head. Should he be punished, that is for a jury to

deceide. As with most reports, depends on which news outlet you get the "story" from as to

which slant you will take on the article. For example, from the story, you get the "impression"

that the kid was minding his own business and the old guy just shot him. Now, lets say that

the real story (just an example) was that the kid was threatening this guy, and had a bottle,

stick, knife etc in his hand...Makes for a totally different story doesn't it? With the anti-gun

bias in the media, I'm sure the story was originally written to slant it against the gun owner.

Perhaps when it comes to trial, we'll find out the WHOLE story. Whatever the outcome, unless

the kid was pointing a firearm at the old man, he deserves to be punished, unless they find

him not guilty by reason of mental desease or defect.

:alien:

Owning a firearm should be illegal.

Owning a firearm should be illegal.

The fact that most Americas owned weapons played a heavy role in keep the former Soviet Union from ever invading. One of their previous top generals said that they knew if they ever invaded that every "tom, dick and harry" would be taking pot shots at the troops on every occasion.

Also, during WWII, Every man in Switzerland had a rifle at home. Shooting was the national sport. A look at a map shows tiny, democratic Switzerland surrounded by the Axis powers stretching all over Europe and into Russia and North Africa. This nation of riflemen situated in the Alps managed to remain neutral and to dissuade a Nazi invasion. In fact, Hitler disarmed his enemies (starting from German Jews) before they could organize a resistance.

My comment on the original story is.... that will learn that kid a thing or two. I am sorry that it cost him his life, but I don't feel bad for him. 100 years ago, what that old man did would not have been a crime...

Edited by betasp

What the hell is wrong with you? He killed a boy for walking on his grass. You need some help.

If the kid and his parents have been messing with this guy for 5 years perhaps the old guy just snapped. i dont like being "f" ed with for 5 seconds let alone 5 years, so until anyone walks in the old guys shoes they should reserve judgement and let the courts sort this out

To each his own.

So you are saying I can shoot my Mail Carrier since she walks across my lawn daily? Man, get a grip with reality...

I can see the guy coming out and yelling at the kid and/or contacting his parents or police but shooting is WAY to much. That means I can shoot my neighbor for his grass clippings landing on my sidewalk when he cuts his lawn. NOT

So you are saying I can shoot my Mail Carrier since she walks across my lawn daily? Man, get a grip with reality...

I can see the guy coming out and yelling at the kid and/or contacting his parents or police but shooting is WAY to much. That means I can shoot my neighbor for his grass clippings landing on my sidewalk when he cuts his lawn. NOT

Exactly. Thank you.

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/TheCaseForGunControl.html

http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/pol-leg/res-eval...rpt_e.asp#Table 1

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/GunsinCanada.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20011108062857/...02033037_1.html

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:vBAr2K...us&ct=clnk&cd=2

I'm not sure you understand the concept of percentages.

Plus what the hell,

(1) this guy legally owned his gun,

(2) it was a shotgun (not a handgun), and

(3) he was on his own property, not cruisin' around town.

Still would have happened if he lived in Canada.

Nah, the concept of percentages registers pretty well with me. Let's just put away the statistics for a second and read that whole article in the first link. Especially the part about self protection.

This story stands out because the dude is obviously a total wacko. If he was a total wacko without a gun, he would not have shot the kid. The fact that the kid was on his property doesn't give him the right. Owning a gun legally is a pretty laughable concept to me.

Watch the news. Can't go a few days without hearing a story about someone getting shot.

Still, the violent crime rates in canada are hell of a lot lower than the US. I dunno about you, but that makes me feel safer.

This is not surprising. Some people are very perticular about their posessions and don't like it when others tamper with them. I can't say I blame him for what he did especially when he had problems with the neighbors for that many years. In some parts of the United States it isn't uncommon for people to kill trespassers.

Dude...What part of the United States are you talking about? It's not common to kill trespassers anywhere...

This guy who shot the kid is just nuts. He has probably gone his whole life being obsessive compulsive and it has never spilled over. Now a kid pushed his buttons a little bit and he snaps and goes into wacko mode and kills him over walking on his grass. I hope they lock that dude up and throw away the key.

So you are saying I can shoot my Mail Carrier since she walks across my lawn daily? Man, get a grip with reality...

I can see the guy coming out and yelling at the kid and/or contacting his parents or police but shooting is WAY to much. That means I can shoot my neighbor for his grass clippings landing on my sidewalk when he cuts his lawn. NOT

Ok, maybe not kill the little piece of crap. Just a shot to the leg would do. Just as a warning.

So you are saying I can shoot my Mail Carrier since she walks across my lawn daily? Man, get a grip with reality...

I can see the guy coming out and yelling at the kid and/or contacting his parents or police but shooting is WAY to much. That means I can shoot my neighbor for his grass clippings landing on my sidewalk when he cuts his lawn. NOT

The mail guy has permission. If the old man did not want the mail guy there, he could get a PO box. I am not saying what the old man did was wrong, but again, 100 years ago it would not have been a crime.

Oh, and your analogy is not apples to apples. Can I walk through your house whenever I want and it be illegal to shoot me... even if it is your sisters room at 3am?

Its sad but doesnt surprise me at all. People can do anything nowadays.

In the US maybe, but you don't have to expect to get away with stuff like that here in the Netherlands. I honestly can't remember the last time something like this happened in the EU.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I'm not unblocking my camera for this crapola. Sorry, Google.
    • Ummmm that is what is it supposed to do. Just turn if off in settings if you do not want it analyzing your open tabs. Chrome does the same thing with Gemini. Sarfari will do the samething after Apple's AI and even more so with the release of their 27 versions that is now powered by Googles LLM/ML models. Understanding why it is doing it and how it can help you vs jumping to some conspiracy theroy is a much better approach. As long as it can be turned off, all is good. Yes the default should be off but the a lot of people would never discover these features.
    • Just another reason (aside from many others) not to use Edge. Firefox 153.0b5 DEx64 has a similar feature added recently in prior builds that I will turn off at some point when I get around to it. It's the new "Something looks suspicious" page that pops up here and there. It cleverly hides itself between web pages that I've actually visited; as a result, you know, of selecting a web page and telling the browser where to go. The interesting thing is that it does not produce these warnings from pages that I, as the only intelligent user of the browser in my system, have ever directed the browser to open! What seems to be happening is that the browser looks at all the goofy ad links on a web page I do actually open and selects one that "looks suspicious" and then creates the "something looks suspicious" web page, which is neatly inserted, as mentioned, between web pages my RB ("real brain") has directed the browser to load in a session. The thing is, I usually look at links I am considering to follow before I ask the browser to load them, and in cases I have noticed where the link does indeed look suspicious, most of the time I will choose to not follow the link at all. Doesn't everyone do this or something similar? I am picky about what I voluntarily load... (I don't like links that start off fine, with a site designaiton that seems normal enough but then is followed by indecipherable alphanumeric strings many, many lines long, etc. I tend to reject those because they look suspicious. They may not be, but I don't care... I'll stay with Firefox, of course, if for no other reason than they usually let you turn off the junk you don't like. And because it isn't Edge... But at some point Microsoft will come to realize that putting your bookmarks on the left side is a Good Thing for a lot of people, just as Microsoft discovered when it had the bright idea of nailing the Windows taskbar to the bottom of the screen, when for decades Microsoft browsers had left that placement up to the user. They have finally reversed the obscenity of that decision. Finally.
    • Google was using the old CATPCHAs data to train their LLMs. What is the say they won't use this camera data of users to train their LLM? these companies need some strict regulations!
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
    • First Post
      carols23 earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      Tom Willson earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      259
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      94
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!