It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ohio shopper shoots teen dead outside mall for trying to steal newly bought Nike Air Jordans

page: 32
53
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

There is a more then one.
From that source I don't see the police quoted as saying at gun point, only saying "threatened"
It is also a time line and they use displayed after they say at gunpoint.

It is initial reports, can you agree those can be wrong and/or ever changing?




posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: NOTurTypical

he was a 16 year old kid who never had the chance to learn from his mistakes.....it is sad when we people decide that they are judge jury and executioner....


He requested to be judged when he pointed his firearm at someone. Its not like he didn't know what he was doing was wrong.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Oh maybe you misunderstood? Dang it's hard to explain in sentences lol.

Ok if the boy showed the shopper his gun in his waistband (not touching it). The shopper sees it as a potential threat. The shopper takes his gun out first and point at him to lessen that threat. He doesn't have to shoot him because the threat is minimized. The shooting is not necessary.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Oh maybe you misunderstood? Dang it's hard to explain in sentences lol.

Ok if the boy showed the shopper his gun in his waistband (not touching it). The shopper sees it as a potential threat. The shopper takes his gun out first and point at him to lessen that threat. He doesn't have to shoot him because the threat is minimized. The shooting is not necessary.


Yes, I misunderstood. if it went that way.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: NOTurTypical

There is a more then one.
From that source I don't see the police quoted as saying at gun point, only saying "threatened"
It is also a time line and they use displayed after they say at gunpoint.

It is initial reports, can you agree those can be wrong and/or ever changing?


I agree with you, we need more details from the witnesses. Which might NEVER come since there was no charges or indictment and the suspect was 16. :-/



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Nice to see you agree on that point.
Kinda goes against what you have been saying but thats cool



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Oh maybe you misunderstood? Dang it's hard to explain in sentences lol.

Ok if the boy showed the shopper his gun in his waistband (not touching it). The shopper sees it as a potential threat. The shopper takes his gun out first and point at him to lessen that threat. He doesn't have to shoot him because the threat is minimized. The shooting is not necessary.


If I was faced with the same situation I would keep the laser sight on him and hope he would slowly put the firearm on the ground and back away from it, but I'm telling you the nanosecond he makes a fast move I'm not thinking twice and pulling the trigger. People DON'T want to take human life, but if for a second I feel it's them or me, I'm be the one walking away from that confrontation.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: orangetom1999

ok ....thankyou for the history lesson i was unaware of these things you have pointed out.......could you please tell me if shooting all the wayward kids actual had the desired affect that they were trying to achieve...did it reduce the problem sufficiently to warrant rounding up kids and killing them ?

i personally think it is a sad state of affairs if reach a point in what is perceived to be civilized society we have to kill kids to reduce what is clearly a rampant problem with society...blaming the kids for their actions is only attacking the symptom and i would imagine the next generation of kids will grow up with the same issues ...makes me wonder if our species is too stupid to learn and has to repeat the same mistakes over and over....

from my take on it i will never understand how people can value their materials more than life....i for one will spend as much time with my kids and teach them as much as possible...and hopefully i can get the message through to them that life is precious and will make you much happier than any material goods will ever be able to do...i will teach them to be close to nature and how to live off the land....i would trade everything i own for more time with my kids,which is a lesson i learned from my father who was a very wealthy man (as in money) he was always working and had no time for his kids .....i had everything material given to me a kid as well as the best schools etc...i would have traded it all to have actually known my father....so i will do the opposite to him....

anyhow this kid who lost his life is an absolute tragedy and i wish we as a society would do something to address this destructive thinking that allows kids to feel the need to risk life for a stupid pair of shoes,and steal from others to get them,especially violently.....i thank you for your response and apologize again for my rudeness yesterday it was completely uncalled for



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:17 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical

We will still get more info, I don't think this will blow over right now.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Nice to see you agree on that point.
Kinda goes against what you have been saying but thats cool


Not really, I have been working on the assumption based on what I heard that he pointed the firearm. And I said way earlier in the thread that I'm really interested in hearing more from the witnesses, there were at minimum 5 in the immediate area of the shooting. 3 with the victim and 2 with the deceased teen.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: NOTurTypical



People DON'T want to take human life, but if for a second I feel it's them or me, I'm be the one walking away from that confrontation.


Oh I have no doubt about that. Like we ALL have been saying all along in this thread... it's in our nature. Fight or flight. Self preservation. Quite simple really.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Well you said earlier that the presence of the gun alone presents a deadly threat and that is all people need to shoot.



All the victim needed to think to have taken his life legally is felt he was in danger for his life or serious injury if he didn't pull the trigger.


This is what you said to me just a couple post back.

Or am I misunderstanding that post?



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Quite a few store clerks have been shot after handing over the cash register money. Complying with an armed robber doesn't guarantee the person does not get hurt or killed.

If 'kids' are to not be shot in this type of situation then they need to learn to not threaten someone with a gun. The gun doesn't care what the age of the person squeezing the trigger is, it still fires.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:29 AM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

And some don't get shot...
You are right it doesn't guarantee you won't get hurt but it doesn't hurt your chances of not getting hurt.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:31 AM
link   
Ohio DOES have the same laws on concealed carry as Michigan.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:31 AM
link   
A lot of people have little or no understanding of what it is like to be robbed at gunpoint. Experiences like that will for sure change your worldview.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:36 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I'm not sure were in this thread you see someone putting more value on materialistic items over life. The kid threatened the guy's life. We as a society do not have to do a thing, blame this kid's parents for how he was raised. My job is to raise my children, no one else's children.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: NOTurTypical



People DON'T want to take human life, but if for a second I feel it's them or me, I'm be the one walking away from that confrontation.


Oh I have no doubt about that. Like we ALL have been saying all along in this thread... it's in our nature. Fight or flight. Self preservation. Quite simple really.


Yep, same for a human as it is for a fish or a dog. It's the most primitive instinct any creature on Earth has.



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80

Well you said earlier that the presence of the gun alone presents a deadly threat and that is all people need to shoot.



All the victim needed to think to have taken his life legally is felt he was in danger for his life or serious injury if he didn't pull the trigger.


This is what you said to me just a couple post back.

Or am I misunderstanding that post?



Yes, kinda. I was speaking in the general sense on that quote you showed (a person), and also talking about my personal feelings on another post if I was in the same situation myself. To be a legal/justifiable killing the person must feel if they don't act with deadly force they will lose their life or suffer great bodily injury. Myself, if I were to be drawing down on a person who had just showed it to me in their waistband I would try and get them to SLOWLY put it on the ground with two fingers and back away from it, then shoot if they made a sudden movement. I don't WANT to kill anyone, I would wait till I felt it was absolutely the final opportunity I had to not be seriously hurt.

Maybe that was the confusion?



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: roadgravel

And some don't get shot...
You are right it doesn't guarantee you won't get hurt but it doesn't hurt your chances of not getting hurt.


I suspect most people would not want to rely on the whim of the aggressor to determine if they lose their life.

The existence of a gun greatly increases the odds of a person being seriously hurt or killed.




top topics



 
53
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join