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.

 

NV Man cleared in shooting of sleeping trespassers

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: neo96

You really comparing this to the Bin Laden raid?

Wow.

Apples to freaking oranges.


Your right at least the op was the guys own property unlike invading a foreign country, and a home there.

Why whatever was I thinking.



So the raid on Osama was wrong but... if he was a squatter, it would have been okay?


Hind sight is always 20/20.

The guy was 74, and none of us know what went on before it.

All I can say is thank GOD the NV guy got a trial by jury.

Trials in the kangaroo courts of public opinion severly lack quality, or the meaning of the word justice.
edit on 30-5-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96




Some guy in NV shoots some people, and yet me, and every other gun owner in the country is responsible for it.


Well the OP said that not me.

The problem is that some guy said he was in fear for his life from people who were sleeping.
He decided to use his 2nd to take away one persons 5th.
But we don't care about that right?



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:05 PM
link   
a sad story.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Next thing you know they'll be selling hunting permits.
Two per season. You get fined if they don't have their ears tagged.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: neo96

I don't know what you were thinking comparing two vagrants to one of the most wanted, and supposed terrorist ring leaders.

That would imply that these two were some how a known danger with that comparison.


Oh what's the problem ?

Some guy in NV shoots some people, and yet me, and every other gun owner in the country is responsible for it.



Who in this thread is talking about gun owners being the problem? I know many gun owners who would have called the cops in that situation.

Maybe I missed the post you are talking about but I don't see any anti-gun stuff on the thread.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80




He decided to use his 2nd to take away one persons 5th.


How the hell is that ?

I don't have a right to be on someone else's property.

What happened next was that guy's call for whatever reason.




But we don't care about that right?


Should I ?

Not responsible for someone actions on their own property.

Opinions on it are rather moot.

Especially so since a court of law ruled on it.

Is this what this country has devolved to?

Courts make decisions, and people don't care about them anymore more?

Why the hell do we have them then ?

Hell lets just start lynching people because they do stuff we don't like.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo




Maybe I missed the post you are talking about but I don't see any anti-gun stuff on the thread.


Read the article ?

MISS THIS ?



A friend of the Devine family who now serves as a victims advocate in Minnesota said state lawmakers need to re-examine "how these stand-your-ground laws have led to unjust homicides."


Everytime there is a shooting by the police, or the average John Doe.

Events like the OP are used to push stupidity.

Like what was quoted 'how these stand your grownd laws have led to unjust homicides.

Sounds familar did the same thing with the Zimmerman trial.
edit on 30-5-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

You do remember what the 5th is right?

It is due process.
I said from the get go they had no right to be there and should be charged with a crime and have their day in court.

We all want to champion this guy for using his rights, but he did so to take away those of one.

And yes people have lost faith in the courts when the laws that we have allow people to walk.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Wanting to review the "stand your ground" law is not the same as being anti-gun. I defend 2nd-amendment rights but "stand your ground" is terribly written and people abuse it. That law has nothing to do with a person's right to own a firearm.

And, like I said, none of the gun owners I know (some are hardcore, even) would have gone into that situation instead of calling the police. Having had problems with that property before is even more of a reason to call the cops.

It was a twitchy old man who wanted to shoot somebody and used a bad law to justify it. The most damaging person in he story for the 2nd amendment is the crazy guy duel-wielding pistols. People like him make responsible gun owners (who want their guns for defense) look bad.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80




You do remember what the 5th is right?


Well that was rich.

Considering the due process the people are denying that NV guy who consequently cleared in a court of law.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo




Wanting to review the "stand your ground" law is not the same as being anti-gun. I


Same difference because they go hand in hand.

Since for the last 8 years, and longer both are continually under attack.

And any shooting is used to justify that attack.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Who is denying it?

He received it...

Disagreeing with the outcome is not denying.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
There is so much wrong with this complaint.

1. People have a right to self defense, and that includes not being required to call the police to defend themselves and their property.

2. The criminals that broke into his property, illegally occupied it, and used illegal drugs there are the ones that provoked the shooting.

3. How many guns he had isn't relevant. He's 74, with various serious health issues, and went to protect his place against unknown numbers of people.

4. Their right to due process does not trump his right to not be killed or seriously injured.

5. If the cops had been called, and shot, because they thought he man had a gun, the prosecuting attorney would not be calling it murder. The ONLY reason she is for this man is that he wasn't a cop. Think about that one for a few minutes.

Castle laws and stand your ground laws are there to protect our rights. Guns are a part of that, because they mean anyone can defend themselves, not just the strong.

What is sick and twisted is that anyone defends criminals, and demands the victims that got the upper hand get the death penalty. Insanity, indeed.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

How can you be injured by some one who is asleep?



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Sleeping people don't point flashlights at others. Awake people do.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

How can you be injured by some one who is asleep?

Who was sleeping?



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:53 PM
link   
The area in question is a bad one...Cops don't just show up right away unless a shooting has taken place. Back when I went to school there( not sparks high. But a school in sparks ), as well as now.
The teacher in question is shocking to hear about this. If it were not for this thread. I would have missed it.

As for me. I have no opinion because I have not lived there in years. However I return every 2 years to see family and friends. Mr. Burgarello was only my teacher in three subjects spread over 5 years. He was never a bad teacher. Always had a smile, and helpful. He taught Gym, Math and English. He was part of the Washoe county school district. Wouldn't be uncommon to see him or other teachers float yearly from school to school on a low salary. But happy to do it. In the later years he was a substitute teacher..

That's all I can offer in this case. Sad on all parties involved.
edit on 30-5-2015 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-5-2015 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-5-2015 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The da.
Only the man that shot them said the arm came up.

Wonder if that was before or after shots were fired.

He knew they were there, choose not call the police and take matters into his own hands and then claim self defense...

Vigilante justice I guess huh.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The da.


Was he there?

Only the man that shot them said the arm came up.

You mean only the guy who was actually there?


Wonder if that was before or after shots were fired.

The claim was before, can you falsify the claim?


He knew they were there, choose not call the police and take matters into his own hands and then claim self defense...

Vigilante justice I guess huh.

Or he was trying to protect his property and intended to call the police. Why should he have no right to defend his property? Why should a man be forced to let criminals run roughshod over him?



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Or from the alive witness?

Do you know what she said?
There is two claims, not just one.

I don't see how shooting people who are asleep, yes I am sticking to that, is defending your property.
Is that running roughshod over him?

Or I should say they were asleep till he woke them up to go shoot them.


edit on thSat, 30 May 2015 23:03:38 -0500America/Chicago520153880 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)







 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join