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.

 

Defend your daughter? 20 years in prison

page: 5
63
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Should have just shot the kid, not a warning shot.
What a shame.




posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
Most of you would be in the same trouble or more than this guy from reading your replies. You have to know the gun laws of your State.

Here in FL and probably most other States, even if you have concealed weapons permit and lawfully owned gun...you're never supposed to show it or use it to intimidate anyone. When the guy did this he earned himself a charge. Secondly, he fired a warning shot thus earning himself another charge.


Showing gun = charge
Warning shot = charge

Uhhh ok. How about shooting the perp. I will go out on a limb and say .. charge?

So basically the state may as well outlaw guns, since you don't seem to be able to do anything at all with them?



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


And to think, if he would have just put one between the eyes, He'd be a free man.


Q. When can I use my handgun to protect myself?
A. Florida law justifies use of deadly force when you are:

>Trying to protect yourself or another person from death or serious bodily harm;
or
>Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping.

Lawful Self Defence in Florida



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


This is why you shoot to kill when that situation arises, 1 scum deserve ZERO quarter, 2 I belive this ruling would have happened in most states. You can kill an intruder but wounding or scaring them comes back to get you.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 
This guy's defense attorney must have really sucked. I hope he had enough sense to appeal this ruling. Next time he's in this situation you can bet he'll shoot the punk first then fire a warning shot.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:47 AM
link   
I'll admit up front I haven't read all the posts.

I agree this guy shouldn't get twenty years. Mandatory sentencing was a result of far too many liberal judges giving really bad guys slap on the wrist punishments. Wollard is an example of one of the drawbacks to mandatory sentencing.

I don't think brandishing is a crime in FL if you're in your own home. It is if you're in public so as a practical matter if you pull your CCW in FL you better shoot someone.

Next Wollard was stupid to fire a warning shot. If you are legal to shoot in any given situation you need to shoot to kill. Like others have said, if he had shot and killed the punk he may not have gone to jail at all.

You won't find it in any manual or course material but every CCW holder has been told, "if you need to shoot make sure you shoot until he is dead". You can bet if you shoot some thug gangbanger trying to do you harm and he walks away you will end up facing him in court and his story will be nothing like what really happened. He will also be all clean and civilized looking in a brand new suit bought for him by his attorney. Mom and a host of other relatives will be on the stand going on and on about, "He a good boy and he woulda never done nothing like dat". And juries eat that stuff up.

Shooting an unarmed underage kid is going to be a tough sell to a jury anytime.

What he probably should have done is simply call the police or at best arm himself with a baseball bat or similar club.

This guy might get out on an appeal but I doubt it.

Maybe it will at least spark a debate about mandatory sentencing.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
Most of you would be in the same trouble or more than this guy from reading your replies. You have to know the gun laws of your State.

Here in FL and probably most other States, even if you have concealed weapons permit and lawfully owned gun...you're never supposed to show it or use it to intimidate anyone. When the guy did this he earned himself a charge. Secondly, he fired a warning shot thus earning himself another charge.


Showing gun = charge
Warning shot = charge

Uhhh ok. How about shooting the perp. I will go out on a limb and say .. charge?

So basically the state may as well outlaw guns, since you don't seem to be able to do anything at all with them?




You're all correct when you say he may have encountered less trouble if he had simply shot him.

Of course the entire situation sounds like some town where the population is 29 people and there's mass inbreeding...how did the kid take the daughter for two hours and then return without police being called?

The guys story should have been that he came home to find the kid terrorizing and abusing his daughter. He attempted to intervene and was attacked and beaten himself. The kid wouldn't leave and he feared the kid was going to beat him or his daughter to death. (The phone is disconnected so he couldn't call 911) The result is he shot the kid to avoid being killed...he feared for his and his daughters life.

I'll bet the guy proudly gave his report informing them he first flashed his gun and he then fired a shot into the wall. SMFH! It became a felony when he attempted to use his gun to intimidate the kid, then he fired a shot in the act of a felony. Twenty year mandatory sentence!!



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Guy did what he had to in my opinion. If that had been my little girl that kid would'nt just be shot though. I'd make it quite clear you don't hurt my family and walk away without some severe pain. Hopefully one day God willing I'll have children and if I have a similar situation the boy better get right with God quick.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by SpookyFox
[mo
This may be a little off post but since you brought it up,
I vaguely remember some stupid yanks liberating most
of europe and a good part of the south pacific during,what
did they call it WWII?, so if I where you I would strongly
refrain from childish name calling because I think there
are enough stupid yanks around here that would be more
than happy to oblige you in a little hand to hand.I know
I would.
Have a nice day spooky!!!



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
As many have already said, this dad's sentence is rediculous, especially since he chose to fire a warning shot instead of simply killing this kid as a lot of people would have done. As to calling the police, the kid had pulled his crap multiple times and I doubt he'd have stopped just because the cops were involved, I'm sure the dad and gf thought so too.
What the father should have done is immediately spackle and paint over the bullet hole in his house and been like 'what shooting? what hole? I have no idea what this crazy punk is talking about'. It would most likly just be an adults word against some kid's.
Normally I don't advocate lieing in general or to the police in particular. But in a situation like this, with a system that is as screwed up as it is, its not in your best interest to tell your side, at least not without a good lawyer present, preferably one that specializes in cases like this.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by yrwehere1
reply to post by Vitchilo
 
This guy's defense attorney must have really sucked. I hope he had enough sense to appeal this ruling. Next time he's in this situation you can bet he'll shoot the punk first then fire a warning shot.



More than likely, he probably made the same mistake that a lot of people make when they feel they have acted in good faith with the law: he spoke to the police, possibly thinking his LEO auxiliary experience and contacts would help out.

The moment the police showed up he should have gone 5th amendment on them and clammed up. For anything potentially more serious than a speeding ticket, NEVER talk to the police without having a lawyer to consult with first.

The police can use anything you voluntarily say to them against you in a court, even if you say it before you are arrested, and Miranda or not anything you say voluntarily after being arrested.

Regent Law Professor: Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman
Should have just shot the kid, not a warning shot.
What a shame.


I agree. Most 'experts' have told me when you use a gun for self-defense, you are much better off only having your side of the story to tell.

Simply amazing the jury and judge didn't see it our way. This is the kind of legal system we can expect when the sheeple fall for the minimum sentencing platform. Sadly with the push for privatized prisons in Florida, we can expect much more of the same.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Looks like most agree: Just kill the punk, and set it up to look like self-defense.

Also, never talk to cops. They're not going to be on "your" side.

BUT, in this case, who exactly was going to be on this guy's side?

My guess is that even his own daughter would have hung him out to dry, if he had terminated the kid, and tried to cover. Maybe even his wife would have turned on him in a situation like this.

All this, the probable betrayal of wife, and daughter, his torn stitches, the previous history with the punk...And his subconscious put it all together, at that moment, and he fired. He really probably hoped everybody in his sick and crazy family would get the message, that he's finally serious, and to stop the BS.

But no doubt his subconscious screwed him, just like the rest! That week went by, and the daughter was probably on the phone with the punk, and Mama might have even been outraged enough to talk crap behind Papa's back, agreeing with the daughter, yeah, Dad sure flipped-out!

Sure, I'm speculating to fill in a whole lot of blanks, but this was in America, right? I can't be too far off.

And now for Mr. Naive. He gets to think about all this in prison. While he watches TV, episodes of the Simpsons, making men and especially Dads look stupid, and fathers never getting respect from kids. And other shows, husbands always getting thrashed by "smart" loud-mouthed wives, even commercials, playing the same nauseating tapes....

Maybe he'll finally really get angry, and will do something serious the next time!

For your consideration: The future, of society, with the pussified man, finally "in his place."

JR



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


I feel late to the party here, I wish I had seen this thread yesterday.

I absolutely hate minimum sentencing! Everyone knows it is wrong, it is only a political ploy for election time, it has no business in a courtroom.

However, I do think the father was in the wrong to shoot an innocent wall. Not 20 years wrong, but he needs more firearm training. You never fire a gun unless you intend on hurting or killing someone. If he had shot the boy dead, while defending his home, he would be a hero. Instead, he shot a wall, potentially escalated the problem for his own daughter, let the boy leave to stew on it, and wound up in jail himself. All around bad decision. If he didn't fear for his life, he shouldn't have shot anything, if he truly feared for his life, or the life of his daughter, he should have shot the boy dead. Dead men tell no lies.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Well, lesson learned.

Aim for the head, with no warning shots.

Police come, make the report, secure the firearm for testing, return it after a few months, case closed.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Wow, this made me extremely angry.

Where was the justice in this? In what possible way was justice done? I just don't understand, I was always under the impression that the punishment should fit the crime.

I've always thought that if I was in a situation where I had to defend myself, I'd spare the person that was attacking me. According to this I'd do 20 something years in prison for not shooting someone? It's just unbelievable. Did I slip into an alternate reality or something?



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   



On a spring morning in 2008, Wollard got a panicked call from his wife. The teenage boyfriend who had been beating up his 15-year old daughter was back at their house causing trouble. Wollard rushed home and found the boy on the porch and his daughter with a black eye. Wollard told the boy to leave, but instead, the boy attacked him, ripping out stitches from Wollard’s recent surgery, and then ran off with Wollard’s daughter. When the two returned several hours later, the boyfriend began shoving Orville’s daughter around the Wollards’ home. Wollard’s wife and eldest daughter screamed for him to do something. Wollard was frightened for his daughter’s and his family’s safety.


Why the heck the police were not called?,he just assaulted the daughter and then the father,then he runs off with the daughter and doesn`t return for several hours,who in their right mind wouldn`t call straight away? or grab a weapon if needed?


He grabbed his legally registered pistol and confronted the boy, again asking him to leave. The boy stopped assaulting Wollard’s daughter. He smiled, punched a hole in the wall, and began moving toward Wollard. Wollard, who had had firearms training as a former member of the auxiliary police force, aimed a bullet into the wall next to the boyfriend to scare him. No one was hurt, and the boy finally left. That is where this story should have ended, but it didn’t.


How do you assault someone you didn`t hit or harm?

Endangerment I would of thought at worst,but this father was justified,he was injured from having recent surgery and a person was assaulting his family and himself.If this guy spent a day in jail it would be a crime and he`s been in jail already for approx 3 years,its beyond disgusting.

Just when I thought America couldn`t possibly become anymore screwed up,America always prove me wrong.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
As a few other people have said before me: Why didn't this father just subdue the little prick that his daughter was dumb enough to date in the first place?

Whipping out a gun would have been a last resort... and only if the attacker was using deadly force as well. The kid was just some stupid punk whose adrenaline took over, and the father didn't help the situation by throwing a gun into the mix.

Another thing that really stands out to me: Why didn't the family call the police? I mean, there was already physical contact... the kid punched his daughter. If the father was truly concerned with justice he would have called the police and the kid would have been arrested. It's a little suspicious that the father didn't call the police and that the kid did. Maybe there is more to the story.

Obviously the father doesn't deserve to spend 20 years in jail... I don't even think he deserves to spend a month in jail. Maybe just some gun safety courses and community service. If the story is true: it's the kid who should be punished with jail time.

But of course, nothing works like it should, especially the US justice system.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Question? If people of his community and his state band together, can they overrule the courts judgement and get him out of jail? If yes. is there a precedent for this. If they can not get him out, why not?



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Get me a sniper rifle, i'm going to shoot that idiot that made that call to arrest that good man!

Wait, back-up. Shooting one person will only cause 2 more to rise up. How about those people drown in their doings then justice will be satisfied. How? I'll see you on the other side, then I'll leave it in the hands of the big man upstairs.




top topics



 
63
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join