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.

 

8-year-old girl fatally shot by 11-year-old boy for not letting him see her puppy

page: 4
22
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pouilleux
I'm not living in USA so I don't know much about this, but IMO it seems odd and this story should be analysed carefully, cause if it's propaganda, it worked well.


I agree, everything reported by the media should be taken with a grain of salt. It's sad, but the media cannot be trusted. That's not meant to be disrespectful to any victims. It's meant to be disrespectful to the media.

That said, the U.S. does sometimes try children as adults.




posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

My point being guns are somewhat final. If he had hit her with a bat, chances are repetition may have been required to land the killing blow. Thats a hell of a lot more harder to do than simply pulling a trigger.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pouilleux
From the abc post, I see details that point to my belief. Like this: "The two were neighbours and in this neighbourhood all the children would play together and knew each other and all attended school together."

So at first sight, it's the best neighbourhood you could wish for, life is colorful and happiness is flowing. What a paradise! Then a contradiction: "When we first moved to White Pine, the little boy was bullying McKayla," Ms Dyer told WATE 6 news in a video posted on the station's website.

"He was making fun of her, calling her names, just being mean to her."

The children wasn't suppose to be all friendly and go to school together? Why changing version in the same article?

Then: "The boy was inside his home when he shot the girl about 7:30pm"
Oh yeah, because he could hold the gun horizontaly and even aim with it!

"Mr McCoig declined to release any further details of the shooting, which happened in a trailer park in White Pine, Tennessee"
No info about the boy, not even his name, nor where he shot, nor if he got eject by the gun's power.

And finally: "The boy is due to appear in court on October 28, at which time a judge will decide whether he should be tried as a juvenile or as an adult."
Really? I heard story of children killing others, and they all went in juvenile "prison" (sorry for my lack of grammar).

I'm not living in USA so I don't know much about this, but IMO it seems odd and this story should be analysed carefully, cause if it's propaganda, it worked well.



I don't know if it will ever be reported didn't see it in the article. I would be willing to bet an Irish 7 course meal ( 6 pack and a potato) that the boy was on prescription meds for something like ADD , etc. Could be wrong but, I have a feeling.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MotherMayEye

My point being guns are somewhat final. If he had hit her with a bat, chances are repetition may have been required to land the killing blow. Thats a hell of a lot more harder to do than simply pulling a trigger.


The poor 10 year old bat boy who died recently after being struck in the head with a bat once -- WITH A HELMET ON -- is a testament to how deadly bats can be.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

While i agree thats a shame plenty of people have been repeatedly stuck with such implements and sustained only moderately serious injury. How many people have been shot pretty much point blank with a shotgun and lived to tell the tail, not that many would be my guess. Like i said a guns are somewhat more final as anyone with half a mind to see can easily establish.

I take it you are pro gun then?
edit on 6-10-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

You can always phone Jefferson County Sheriff G.W. (Bud) McCoig on 865.471.6000 if you don't believe the story.
He is quoted here: Knoxnews.com



Jefferson County Sheriff G. W. “Bud” McCoig said the 11-year-old boy was charged with delinquency by first-degree murder in what investigators deemed an “intentional shooting.” The sheriff has not identified the boy because of his age, but Arwood identified the boy as Benny Tiller, who she said lived in the mobile home with his parents and five siblings.

He appeared at 11:30 a.m. Monday before Jefferson County Juvenile Court Judge Dennis “Will” Roach II for a detention hearing.
If you still do not believe the story then perhaps check with the court records, they are public documents.
...or is it just easier to claim "It's a media lie!!!" while checking nothing.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

originally posted by: Pouilleux
From the abc post, I see details that point to my belief. Like this: "The two were neighbours and in this neighbourhood all the children would play together and knew each other and all attended school together."

So at first sight, it's the best neighbourhood you could wish for, life is colorful and happiness is flowing. What a paradise! Then a contradiction: "When we first moved to White Pine, the little boy was bullying McKayla," Ms Dyer told WATE 6 news in a video posted on the station's website.

"He was making fun of her, calling her names, just being mean to her."

The children wasn't suppose to be all friendly and go to school together? Why changing version in the same article?

Then: "The boy was inside his home when he shot the girl about 7:30pm"
Oh yeah, because he could hold the gun horizontaly and even aim with it!

"Mr McCoig declined to release any further details of the shooting, which happened in a trailer park in White Pine, Tennessee"
No info about the boy, not even his name, nor where he shot, nor if he got eject by the gun's power.

And finally: "The boy is due to appear in court on October 28, at which time a judge will decide whether he should be tried as a juvenile or as an adult."
Really? I heard story of children killing others, and they all went in juvenile "prison" (sorry for my lack of grammar).

I'm not living in USA so I don't know much about this, but IMO it seems odd and this story should be analysed carefully, cause if it's propaganda, it worked well.



I don't know if it will ever be reported didn't see it in the article. I would be willing to bet an Irish 7 course meal ( 6 pack and a potato) that the boy was on prescription meds for something like ADD , etc. Could be wrong but, I have a feeling.


Hm, I don't know about that. I bet his parents didn't care enough about him to do anything about his behavior. His behavior reflects a complete lack of empathy. If his parents understood his feelings enough to have him seen by a mental-health professional, he would have probably learned something about empathy from that experience.

I bet he was raised in a family where violent behavior went unchecked. I am curious if CPS was involved with the family.

But I could be wrong, too, of course.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: MotherMayEye

You can always phone Jefferson County Sheriff G.W. (Bud) McCoig on 865.471.6000 if you don't believe the story.
He is quoted here: Knoxnews.com



Jefferson County Sheriff G. W. “Bud” McCoig said the 11-year-old boy was charged with delinquency by first-degree murder in what investigators deemed an “intentional shooting.” The sheriff has not identified the boy because of his age, but Arwood identified the boy as Benny Tiller, who she said lived in the mobile home with his parents and five siblings.

He appeared at 11:30 a.m. Monday before Jefferson County Juvenile Court Judge Dennis “Will” Roach II for a detention hearing.
If you still do not believe the story then perhaps check with the court records, they are public documents.
...or is it just easier to claim "It's a media lie!!!" while checking nothing.


I didn't say I didn't believe it. That was the person I was replying to. I didn't/don't fault that person for their skepticism. I happen to feel the story rings true enough for me.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MotherMayEye

While i agree thats a shame plenty of people have been repeatedly stuck with such implements and sustained only moderately serious injury. How many people have been shot pretty much point blank with a shotgun and lived to tell the tail, not that many would be my guess. Like i said a guns are somewhat more final as anyone with half a mind to see can easily establish.

I take it you are pro gun then?



I don't own any guns. I support smarter gun laws and increased enforcement of them.

I just don't have any faith in the federal government.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
I didn't say I didn't believe it. That was the person I was replying to. I didn't/don't fault that person for their skepticism. I happen to feel the story rings true enough for me.
Fair comment, I'm also drawn towards the story being just as it is being presented, a tragic death which could have been avoided.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MotherMayEye

My point being guns are somewhat final. If he had hit her with a bat, chances are repetition may have been required to land the killing blow. Thats a hell of a lot more harder to do than simply pulling a trigger.


Yes, repetition would likely be necessary. So you can be sure that if the kid had a bat, he would have hit her with it repeatedly aiming for her head.

He wanted her dead.

How many blows could he have landed before someone intervened? I am sure at least a few. That sounds like torture and it also sounds highly deadly.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Well lets face it placing our faith in any government these days federal or otherwise seem rather optimistic given there penchant for telling porkies and not keeping promises.

As to smarter gun laws, well prohibition seems rather smart imho.

Its not like guns are ever going to protect against the federal government anyway considering the tools at there disposal.
edit on 6-10-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

But documents can be falsified, and people can be paid to say things, we just have to look at the #'s on TV. The story has everything to be true, I don't doubt that, but I just can't stop thinking there's something weird. From my knowledge (I can lack in some points), that story doesn't feel true. For my point about people beign paid for this, it makes sense. I suppose the families aren't rich, knowing they live in a mobile house, not hard to say: you want to make some easy cash? you just have to lie on TV. After, they create false document about this, and put them in police dept. and court records.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

"How many blows could he have landed before someone intervened? "

Thats the point, someone could possibly have intervened simply down to the time it takes as opposed to the near instantaneous effect of the weapon in question.
edit on 6-10-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin

It's a shame a lot of gun owners don't see the writing on the wall. This is really becoming insane, and to deny that the U.S. doesn't have a gun problem is ignoring the 800 lb. gorilla in the room. Our political representatives should be ashamed of themselves for not addressing this monumental problem.

It really comes down to our screwed up political system. Special interest influences always commands more attention from our politicians than Issues that affect the majority of Americans and the country itself.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Well lets face it placing our faith in any government these days federal or otherwise seem rather optimistic given there penchant for telling porkies and not keeping promises.

As to smarter gun laws, well prohibition seems rather smart imho.

Its not like guns are ever going to protect against the federal government anyway considering the tools at there disposal.



So then why not support prohibition for the government, too? If the people can't have guns, neither should the government. If the government is armed, the U.S. will have an illegal gun market.

Regardless of whether you think people could successfully defend themselves against a tyrannical government with guns, no one should take their right to try to defend themselves away.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Pouilleux

It would be one heck of an elaborate hoax, but not impossible of course.
To what end though? All I can imagine is that it could give support to new legislation requiring gun owners to keep them locked away from children?

This tragic story is more than just locking guns up when children are unattended though, it is about raising children to respect life, treat fellow humans with compassion, controlling tempers etc.
I imagine the lad who pulled the trigger had a pretty poor upbringing in his trailer park.
It reflects wider social issues far deeper than simply locking guns away from children.

I fought regularly as a child but not once did I think of pulling a knife from my mother's kitchen and stabbing someone, no difference to using a gun in my opinion, yet we don't call for kitchen knives to be locked away from children, we teach them not to stab people.
Tragic.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Well lets face it placing our faith in any government these days federal or otherwise seem rather optimistic given there penchant for telling porkies and not keeping promises.

As to smarter gun laws, well prohibition seems rather smart imho.

Its not like guns are ever going to protect against the federal government anyway considering the tools at there disposal.



So then why not support prohibition for the government, too? If the people can't have guns, neither should the government. If the government is armed, the U.S. will have an illegal gun market.

Regardless of whether you think people could successfully defend themselves against a tyrannical government with guns, no one should take their right to try to defend themselves away.


Even in countries where citizens don't have many guns the government does. That won't happen and I legal gun owners won't be willingly giving up guns, nor will criminals. Even getting every gun and producer wouldn't stop it. And good machinist can build a gun completely off the record and punch their own ammo



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MotherMayEye

"How many blows could he have landed before someone intervened? "

Thats the point, someone could possibly have intervened simply down to the time it takes as opposed to the near instantaneous effect of the weapon in question.


But all of this is speculation. The non-speculative point is that the kid wanted this girl dead. No matter what weapon he choose, he was going to use it to its fullest deadly capability.

That's why gun prohibition is a bandaid, not a solution. Clearly, this kid needed intervention before he murdered this poor girl.

THAT is the problem that needs fixing. And it's not as easy as just stripping gun rights. It's going to require a more profound solution. The real problem shouldn't be avoided just because it is hard to think about solving it.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Well lets face it placing our faith in any government these days federal or otherwise seem rather optimistic given there penchant for telling porkies and not keeping promises.

As to smarter gun laws, well prohibition seems rather smart imho.

Its not like guns are ever going to protect against the federal government anyway considering the tools at there disposal.



So then why not support prohibition for the government, too? If the people can't have guns, neither should the government. If the government is armed, the U.S. will have an illegal gun market.

Regardless of whether you think people could successfully defend themselves against a tyrannical government with guns, no one should take their right to try to defend themselves away.


Even in countries where citizens don't have many guns the government does. That won't happen and I legal gun owners won't be willingly giving up guns, nor will criminals. Even getting every gun and producer wouldn't stop it. And good machinist can build a gun completely off the record and punch their own ammo


Correct. That's why disarming the populace and banning guns is not a solution -- whether the government is armed or not. Either way it will result in a black market of illegal guns and every gun will be in the hand of some kind of criminal who believes they are above the law.

Every. Single. One.




top topics



 
22
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join