Man kills teen boy who walked on his grass

[lav-chan]

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.

[Aaron Veteran]

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.

[kirk26]

That will teach that kid and the neighbors to trespass on his property. I side with the man.

[L3thal Veteran]

^ 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:

[XerXis]

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

[S7R1K3R]

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.

[L3thal Veteran]

It wouldnt have happened in Canada because we don't have the mentality of shooting people who tresspass.

Your speaking in behalf of every Canadian citizen, correct?

[ECU Tekkie]

That will teach that kid and the neighbors to trespass on his property. I side with the man.

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

[kirk26]

To each his own.

[Hum]

Well, I guess no one will be taking care of his yard now.

Why couldn't he have put up a fence to keep people out ? :unsure:

[Cavalyr]

< will stay on his own grass from now on.....

[ECU Tekkie]

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.

[naap51stang]

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.

[betasp]

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 March 21, 2006 by betasp

[captblaze]

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

[W1cked-J]

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

[ECU Tekkie]

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.

[sin-ergy]

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.

[DreAming in DigITal]

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.

[kirk26]

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.

[betasp]

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?

[HighwayGlider]

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

[betasp]

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

What do you mean nowadays. It was perfectly legal to kill someone to protect your property until ~70 years ago.

[ECU Tekkie]

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

OK I'm not even taking you seriously anymore. You just blew what little legitimacy your argument might have had. Get a life and wise up.

[.Neo]

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.