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.

 

Boy killed by bullet 'fired three miles away'

page: 8
7
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by lpowell0627
 




Do you know how many people died in a car wreck in the US in the last month? Do you still drive or are driven? Well you shouldn't -- it's a very potentially dangerous road out there so follow your own advice to others and in order to remain safe -- don't ever get in a car again.


Naturally I agree that driving is dangerous which is why I don’t. I ride my bicycle on the sidewalks and utilize all my safety equipment too!

Not only am I safer riding my bicycle than driving, but I don’t support the oil companies and their culture of death that is rampant in the Middle East and Africa as they exploit local populations and resources for their own gain.

I also am not supporting the insurance industries with their unfair and predatory business practices either or enriching the state in any fashion.

Nor can the police cite me or fault me for riding my bicycle on the sidewalks!

Lots and lots of plusses to not driving my friend there is no doubt about it.

I grew up in rural Pennsylvania and deer season especially was a concerning time.

Deer by the way are incredibly dangerous they actually kill more people in the United States than anything else.

So it is essential for hunting season to take place to cull their numbers especially states with high concentrations.

We didn’t stay indoors during hunting season but when walking out doors we made sure to wear especially bright colors and to use whistles too to alert others to a human presence. Common sense measures like staying home on New Years Eve.

Now let me put it to you this way, if someone reputable and reliable came up to me and said it’s New Years Eve and there is a million dollars to be made but you have to run a gauntlet of bullets and drive really fast on the highways full of drunks, I am all in for that!

I don’t live my life in fear friend; I live my life weighing risk versus reward!

If there is a real tangible reward born of significant gain, or of significant necessity I can hang with Navy Seals and Green Berets and Mafia Types any day or evening of the week.

If it’s an unnecessary risk for little or no reward, well home is where the heart is.

I honestly wouldn’t risk dragging my children out on New Years Eve and this story is why!

Being a parent by the way requires modifying certain behavior.



[edit on 4/1/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]




posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


Character references can be easily faked, like most forms of 'trusted' identification. If guns had been banned years ago then you, the sensible American, wouldn't need to own guns to defend your home from the guns of the idiot American.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

This should be fairly obvious to anyone not in denial. The church is responsible for the structures integrity. Obviously it is a substandard dwelling if it was so penetrated with lethal force. Believe me the attorneys will be looking at that!

Once again the parents dragged the child out into the cold late at night to place him into harms way. The child is dead through the parent’s actions. That’s just a fact. Had they stayed home the boy would be alive.



You are the one in denial my friend, because you refuse to believe you might actually be wrong!

Surely a church is the last place anyone would expect to be shot (even in gun-crazy America!) so I doubt the parents would have felt like they were risking the life of their child. Just because the structure isn't reinforced like a nuclear bunker is irrelevant.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

I have asked you to explain how the boy could have died if he stayed at home, you had no answer.



Had the parents taken your advice and stayed home the child could have still have suffered the same fate had a stray bullet flew through a window. Are you proposing that any household with a child should brick up its windows?


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Christianity like all religions have so much blood on their hands it is not funny.

Inquisitions, pogroms, witch trials that fun burning people at the stake, religious wars waged all over the world today under the thinly veiled disguise of the war on terror.

Religion sure did not save this child's life.



Again, all completely irrelevant. The history of the church has nothing to do with this boy's death. The religious conflicts of the world have nothing to do with this boy's death. Religion may not have saved his life but it was in no way resonsible for it.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Unlike the United Kingdom which bans firearms and even arrests and imprisons people for defending themselves from home intruders…



And the UK is less safe than the USA because we aren't all packing heat? Really? Let's shoot that one down (pun intended) right now...




The gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in 1994 by country were as follows:

1) U.S.A. 14.24
-
6) Northern Ireland 6.63
-
29) Scotland 0.54

30) England and Wales 0.41



That 1994 combined figure for Scotland, England and Wales (where the majority of the UK population live) doesn't even add up to ONE person in 100,000.
Seeing as how Northern Ireland had been flooded with guns by sympathisers (for both sides) from the US and elsewhere over the years and was in 1994 was still in the midst of the sectarian troubles I think we can leave that aside. Things are a lot better these days.

And just to help illustrate my point:

Britain records 18% fall in gun deaths

So yes I think we're safer over here. For any American to call us a nanny state in comparison to the US is ridiculous. It's not the "land of the free" if you aren't even allowed to cross the road where you please! Jaywalking? Ridiculous...just ridiculous...

If I didn't know better I would swear you are just trolling here but no, it seems that you are just being idiotic.




*edited for clarity

[edit on 4/1/10 by sotp]

[edit on 4/1/10 by sotp]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by UmbraSumus
I found an image of the inside of the Covington Drive Church of God of Prophecy , where the unfortunate incident took place .


The style/structure of roof is visible.


Large image .
Covington Drive, Church of God of Prohecy.

I don`t know if you can deduce what the structural integrity of the roof is- just from this photo .




After blowing up the picture and examining it closely I feel my suspicions in large part have been confirmed.

It looks through and through to be a cheaply constructed building with a very simple design and fairly recently built.

Acoustic Ceiling Tiles suspended by metal frames, Chinese Dry Wall, likely just a thin layer of plywood and roofing tile on tope of it.

Probably built by a contractor belonging to the church, probably some corners cut in construction too, and definitely warrants further investigation by the authorities in my humble opinion.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by sotp
 





Surely a church is the last place anyone would expect to be shot (even in gun-crazy America!) so I doubt the parents would have felt like they were risking the life of their child. Just because the structure isn't reinforced like a nuclear bunker is irrelevant.


Actually they shot the Rev. Martin Luther King, not in church, but hey, clearly ministers and preachers become targets from time to time so yes, one takes their life in their own hands going into a church where who knows who might be gunning for the minister.

Many of them turn out to be pedophiles and embezlers and that certainly can increase the risk of being caught in the cross fire.

Which is an added theory I think we now need to explore thanks to you finally doing a little out of the box thinking.

It is possible someone was trying to murder someone in the church!

You will notice the above picture of the actual church in question. (Late American Tacky) Their is a balcony running along the back wall of the church, could a gunman have fired from that balcony?

Maybe even a U.K. Gunman sent for the expressed purpose of creating a gun controversy here in the U.S. so citizens will no longer be armed and able to defend themselves in a runup for another possible British reprisal for the defeats in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812.

Could be, clearly the British don't do well with guns, having been beaten twice by America overun by Zulus with spears and having had to have us then come and rescue them in every major European War in the last century.

I agree they don't serve the British well, but Americans are pretty darn good with them!

This church is clearly a very cheaply made building, the pews are folding chairs, removable folding chairs!

We may finally be seeing the real conspiracy here as more and more Brits show up to weigh in after it was a Brit who posted the original article!

I think we should check the donors circle of who built the church.

Something tells me there might be a Rothschild in the picture here!



[edit on 4/1/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Actually they shot the Rev. Martin Luther King, not in church, but hey, clearly ministers and preachers become targets from time to time so yes, one takes their life in their own hands going into a church where who knows who might be gunning for the minister.



In a country where a large percentage of the population carry guns isn't everyone 'taking their life in their own hands' all the time?


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Many of them turn out to be pedophiles and embezlers and that certainly can increase the risk of being caught in the cross fire.



As do many people who are not members of the clergy etc. so there is actually no increased risk.




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

It is possible someone was trying to murder someone in the church!



You may be right, but that's not a reason to blame it on religion or the parents as such an attack could've occurred anywhere. If it happened on the street would you blame them for taking the child out of the house? I notice you said nothing about my point regarding stray bullets and windows.




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

You will notice the above picture of the actual church in question. (Late American Tacky) Their is a balcony running along the back wall of the church, could a gunman have fired from that balcony?



Again, you may be right, but that's a pretty lousy assassin if he can't hit his target from there.




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Maybe even a U.K. Gunman sent for the expressed purpose of creating a gun controversy here in the U.S. so citizens will no longer be armed and able to defend themselves in a runup for another possible British reprisal for the defeats in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812.



And this is relevant to the boy's death how?




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Americans are pretty darn good with them!



Can't argue with that, you do successfully kill each other on a regular basis!




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

We may finally be seeing the real conspiracy here as more and more Brits show up to weigh in after it was a Brit who posted the original article!



The only conspiracy here is the one you've cooked up, and I'm not even sure what that is supposed to be! It may have been a Brit who posted the article but where exactly did he accuse the boy's parents of being at fault? That was you and only you, and I again reiterate that you should be ashamed of yourself for doing so.




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Something tells me there might be a Rothschild in the picture here!



Really? How on earth do you get from the accidental death of a child to a Rothschild conspiracy? It's a mystery to me and I will eat my hat if you're proven correct!

What rubbish will you spout next? The boy was a reincarnation of JFK who was going to blow the lid on his assasination so he had to be taken out once more by the mafia/KGB/CIA/KFC (delete where applicable and crazy enough)?

Get a grip.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Mr Traveler,
please give up you are losing any credibility you may have had

(understatement a bit?)

yours sincerely,
the rest of us with sense.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by sotp
 





The only conspiracy here is the one you've cooked up, and I'm not even sure what that is supposed to be! It may have been a Brit who posted the article but where exactly did he accuse the boy's parents of being at fault? That was you and only you, and I again reiterate that you should be ashamed of yourself for doing so.


With out a doubt the boys parents are at fault. To suggest otherwise is just foolish.

They are the ones who took him out of the house to a place that he was too small to even fully participate on the most dangerous night of the year.

There is no getting around the fact that had they stayed home the boy would still be alive.

I happen to have five children my friend, and I am simply holding these parents to the EXACT same standard I hold myself to as a parent.

It's my job to protect my children from harm. If harm befalls them I have failed at my job.

I really had to go out of my way to do that sometimes, make sacrifices I wasn't keen to and make compromises I wasn't keen to, to live up to that standard.

They all made it to adult hood though.

It is simply politically correct nonsense and emotional drivel to excuse the reckless action of these parents.

The reality is this child is dead because of THEIR choices and actions.

Real parents realize the buck always stops here, they take that very seriously.

If this had happened to my child I would blame no one else but me.

Why I would want to be ashamed of being responsible for my actions and my children I haven't a clue.

If this child's parents thought like I do and acted like I do in regard to these things he would be alive and safe at home.

The shame in that sure isn't mine friend.

The Church, the Parents are EVERY BIT as responsible as the person who fired that gun.

Plain and simple friend.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by starwarsisreal
Now folks chill this i not a religion related problem but a firearm problem. I believe there should be laws banning firearms from being fired up in the air.


There are laws.

Its called reckless endangerment. This one would have the added benefit of manslaughter.

Curious what the caliber was.

How did they know it was from 3 miles away? Thats a real stretch. Most likely this church was in a rural area.

Cant fix stupid.

I feel for the parents. The dirtbag that put a round into the air should drawn and quartered!



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by RuledBySecrecy
Mr Traveler,
please give up you are losing any credibility you may have had

(understatement a bit?)

yours sincerely,
the rest of us with sense.


I will consider your terms for surrender, though I make no promises!

The child’s parents, the church and the person who fired the gun all bear responsibility in this matter.

All of them were negligent.

Thanks.

P.S. Sorry you had to reactivate your account just to post that!

Clearly the British are ready to surrender again.

Paris is cold this time of year, I would consider Hawaii for the signing of these instruments.

Thanks.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



Usually, I like your posts. Very informative.

this one you seem to be making an ass of yourself. I really hope someone has highjacked your name and account.

Blaming the parents for taking their kid to church?

If he hadnt been in church he' be alive?

Really?

How do you know that he wouldnt have caught a bullet at home? When its your number, thats it.

I really hope your account has been highjacked by a troll. This is very unlike you.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by sotp
 


You do realize that the british population is considerably smaller than the american population

61,399,118 people live in the UK.

304,059,724 people live in the USA


I think that should be taken into consideration when saying the "UK is safer than america"

edit: i forgot to mention that i do support a certain degree of gun control and i think you hit the nail on the head with your responses to protoplasmic.

[edit on 4-1-2010 by DeathShield]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


reactivate my account? oh sign in again, well i dislike coming on here because there are just some people who seem to be off in their own world and with own ideals, rarely seeing the bigger more obvious picture and often denying something they cannot understand for one reason or another. and would you believe it mostly (but not exclusively) american.

ATS has a lot to offer people, it just gets cluttered by what i hope is a minority.

[edit on 4/1/10 by RuledBySecrecy]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by RuledBySecrecy
 


That's a real pity, almost as tragic as a poorly constucted church, irresponsible parents and a drunken fool firing his gun on New Years Eve.

Not everyone is prepared to deal with all the issues that come up here on ATS.

Did you look at how poorly and cheaply constructed that Church is by the way?

I am pretty sure there will be a lawsuit in regards to that before all is said and done.

Sadly there is a lot of corruption in the building industry here in the United States, people looking to cut corners to make a buck, greedy inspectors willing to look the other way.

It's a real crime.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


yes i did take a close look at that photograph and i am in total agreement that it is entirely plausible this story is 100% genuine contrary to the beliefs of others. i still don't feel that the parents are in any way to blame though and bringing religion into it is just wrong. anyway i shall go no further into this, it is late.

and as far as dealing with the issues here on ATS goes i stick by:

"never argue with an idiot, he will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience"



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by RuledBySecrecy
 


Once again sorry you had to reactivate one of your accounts in order to not argue with someone espousing common sense.

There is no way to get around that the parents are responsible.

The child did not drive himself to the church.

Since it was a church that the parents felt compelled to visit at the risk of their childs life, then yes, religion sure does enter into it, since the boy died in a cheaply made, likely not up to code church.

Of course why should all the parties have to accept and behave responsibly when you can just pin it all on one?

Thus the world is the delightful place it is.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   



Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

With out a doubt the boys parents are at fault. To suggest otherwise is just foolish.

There is no getting around the fact that had they stayed home the boy would still be alive.



Foolish? No. Sane? Yes.

Yet again you ignore my theoretical scenario where the boy could have just as easily been hit by a stray bullet whilst in his own home, a scenario which you yourself asked someone for earlier in the thread.




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

It is simply politically correct nonsense and emotional drivel to excuse the reckless action of these parents.



Reckless? Visiting a church, one of the few places on the planet where people feel safe? Your comments on this thread are the only things that I've seen that can be described as "nonsense".




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

The reality is this child is dead because of THEIR choices and actions.



I'd hate to be one of your children. Do they wear bullet-proof vests over their cotton wool suits? Do you stick all of their food in the blender just in case they choke on a crumb? Do you even allow them to leave the house?




Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Clearly the British are ready to surrender again.



We haven't lost many wars over the years, that's how we had a proper empire. No entry-by-the-backdoor "regime change" nonsense. We came, we saw, we conquered. How many pointless conflicts like Vietnam has the US been involved in? You didn't win that one no matter how you try and spin it. Humbled by a bunch of peasant farmers. I'm not saying the UK is better, it's all just history. What I'm saying is that you're spouting pointless patriotic nonsense that's totally irrelevant in this discussion. It has nothing to do with the topic at hand, absolutely nothing at all. You're just trying to deflect attention away from the fact you made a pretty reprehensible comment and have been called out for it.
You are clearly in the wrong here. No amount of irrelevant jingoism is going to change that fact.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by DeathShield
 


Thanks for your kind words vis-a-vis my responses to a certain member's comments.


Originally posted by DeathShield

You do realize that the british population is considerably smaller than the american population



Yes I do realise that, but I did mention that those figures from 1994 were deaths per 100,000 people. Even if the US & UK had the same size of population there'd still be roughly 14 gun related deaths in the US for every 1 gun related death in the UK.
I suspect that difference could be greater now considering the other article I linked to says we had an 18% reduction in gun deaths from 2007 to 2008.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by sotp
 





Yet again you ignore my theoretical scenario where the boy could have just as easily been hit by a stray bullet whilst in his own home, a scenario which you yourself asked someone for earlier in the thread


But the boys home wasn't hit by a bullet, his parent's church was.

That's a fact. Not a hypothetical.

The Church still would have been hit by the bullet whether the boy was attending or not.

The reailty is that some people want to exploit this issue for a gun control issue, while pretending that others should be ashamed.

Pretty transparent if you ask me.

What exactly do U.K. gun related deaths versus U.S. Gun related Deaths have to do with the incident?

Absolutely not a thing expect for SHAMELESS people looking to EXPLOIT this tragedy for their OWN FOREIGN AGENDA.



BUSTED!



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by sotp
 





Yes I do realise that, but I did mention that those figures from 1994 were deaths per 100,000 people. Even if the US & UK had the same size of population there'd still be roughly 14 gun related deaths in the US for every 1 gun related death in the UK.


This mourning for the poor child touches me so!

This is nothing but exploitation plain and simple. It is a deliberate agenda being foisted to take advantage of the emotions in the aftermath of a tragedy.

I can't tell you how shameful I consider this to be.

I can't tell you how pathetic I consider this to be.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by sotp
 





Reckless? Visiting a church, one of the few places on the planet where people feel safe? Your comments on this thread are the only things that I've seen that can be described as "nonsense".


No the way some foreigners would exploit this issue to try to do away with Second Amendment Rights here in America is nonsense.

People from a nation who are now defenseless in the face of their Totaltarian Government.

A U.K. Government that bashed and assaulted and killed innocent and peaceful protestors at the G-20 there.

It's very transparent, it's why the Original Post got posted in the first place.

To push gun control.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join