Georgia man guns down immigrant after GPS sends him to wrong driveway

Wow....

I wish I was as good at remote viewing the past, as some of the posters on here are!

What happened to, "innocent until PROVEN guilty"?

You read a few paragraphs about what the Media and the police THINK happened, and you are ready to strap this fellow to the table and push the button yourself?

A guy, who is a Veteran, who has NO criminal record, who has dedicated his life, to helping others....?

If this was just cold blooded murder, then why didn't he kill ALL of them? Why did he hold the others at gunpoint, until the police arrived, if he was just a psycho racist with a gun?

And, WTH is a "faulty" GPS? Last I checked, it's a computer. It must be programmed.

Something is wrong with the whole story. It doesnt add up! A 69 year old, who is in fear for his life, hits a moving target with a headshot, with a .22 revolver? The kids in the car, go to school, locally, according to one of the stories, but they need an interpreter?

I think the police are afraid of some kind of backlash, from the cuban or latino community, and that is the main reason that they are crossing all of their I's and dotting their T's....

reply to post by xedocodex

A 69-year-old war veteran

This was all I needed to read. We train our soldiers to kill then we just expect them to turn it off after they return to being a civilian and expect them to never turn it on again.

Why aren't you blaming the GPS company for sending him to the wrong door. The gun wouldn't have been an issue if wasn't for GPS.

What's the saying "Gun's don't kill people..GPS sending you to the wrong house where the 69 war veteran lives kills people." It's something like that.

Until the anti-gun crowd goes after abortion, which killed over a million babies last year in America alone... I will have to assume the preservation of human life is not your motivation for wanting to ban guns. There are plenty of countries in the world that ban guns. Pick one, and move. Stop forcing your beliefs on us. You all are worst than fundamentalist Christians.

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by xedocodex

 

A 69-year-old war veteran

This was all I needed to read. We train our soldiers to kill then we just expect them to turn it off after they return to being a civilian and expect them to never turn it on again.

Why aren't you blaming the GPS company for sending him to the wrong door. The gun wouldn't have been an issue if wasn't for GPS.

What's the saying "Gun's don't kill people..GPS sending you to the wrong house where the 69 war veteran lives kills people." It's something like that.

If someone arrives at your drive way for whatever reason you shouldn't murder them, that's why the GPS isn't to blame.

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by xedocodex

 

A 69-year-old war veteran

This was all I needed to read. We train our soldiers to kill then we just expect them to turn it off after they return to being a civilian and expect them to never turn it on again.

Why aren't you blaming the GPS company for sending him to the wrong door. The gun wouldn't have been an issue if wasn't for GPS.

What's the saying "Gun's don't kill people..GPS sending you to the wrong house where the 69 war veteran lives kills people." It's something like that.

If someone arrives at your drive way for whatever reason you shouldn't murder them, that's why the GPS isn't to blame.

No I wouldn't murder them but I wasn't trained to earlier in my life. Don't get me wrong I'm not attacking our soldiers just saying what do we expect when one does at a later age what he or she was trained at a young age to do?

The gun didn't pull it's own trigger. You can't blame the gun either. Are we to now expect that we train our soldiers how to shoot a firearm but once they are out of service they can't have one anymore?

Originally posted by kingofmd
Until the anti-gun crowd goes after abortion, which killed over a million babies last year in America alone... I will have to assume the preservation of human life is not your motivation for wanting to ban guns. There are plenty of countries in the world that ban guns. Pick one, and move. Stop forcing your beliefs on us. You all are worst than fundamentalist Christians.

Hell, that is about the most truth I have seen on this board in a very long time.

Good post!

What we have here is another tragic situation once again being used by some smug self important gun grabber to demand that Americans be disarmed because of the actions of a single person in our 350 million person society. This action would leave us all defenseless against the will of bad men. Why are you for disarming the victims? What is wrong with you that you want everyone to become disarmed vulnerable to attack by those who are physically stronger than others? Are you a monster?

Originally posted by exitusstatuquo
What we have here is another tragic situation once again being used by some smug self important gun grabber to demand that Americans be disarmed because of the actions of a single person in our 350 million person society. This action would leave us all defenseless against the will of bad men. Why are you for disarming the victims? What is wrong with you that you want everyone to become disarmed vulnerable to attack by those who are physically stronger than others? You are a monster.

If guns were banned anti-gunners would be back the next day complaining about how someone killed another with a knife, or rock, or bow and arrow, or even bare hands.

It's not the weapon killing the person.

Do guns go to hell for killing people?

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by xedocodex

 

A 69-year-old war veteran

This was all I needed to read. We train our soldiers to kill then we just expect them to turn it off after they return to being a civilian and expect them to never turn it on again.

Why aren't you blaming the GPS company for sending him to the wrong door. The gun wouldn't have been an issue if wasn't for GPS.

What's the saying "Gun's don't kill people..GPS sending you to the wrong house where the 69 war veteran lives kills people." It's something like that.

If someone arrives at your drive way for whatever reason you shouldn't murder them, that's why the GPS isn't to blame.

No I wouldn't murder them but I wasn't trained to earlier in my life. Don't get me wrong I'm not attacking our soldiers just saying what do we expect when one does at a later age what he or she was trained at a young age to do?

The gun didn't pull it's own trigger. You can't blame the gun either. Are we to now expect that we train our soldiers how to shoot a firearm but once they are out of service they can't have one anymore?

Soldiers aren't mindless killing machines, they are still people capable of logical thought and common sense. Being trained as a soldier is not an excuse. No one is blaming guns, that's not what people against guns are saying, the blame is all on him. If he didn't have the gun though it wouldn't have happened, and this man's life, amongst many thousands of others would have been spared. No one is saying guns are sentient, but the ease and convenience of them are the reason behind many deaths.

reply to post by SpearMint


How do you know it wouldn't have happened if he didn't have a gun?
If he didn't have a gun he would have had something else.
It's a crazy old man who was trained how to kill was my point.

misread

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by xedocodex

 

A 69-year-old war veteran

This was all I needed to read. We train our soldiers to kill then we just expect them to turn it off after they return to being a civilian and expect them to never turn it on again.

Why aren't you blaming the GPS company for sending him to the wrong door. The gun wouldn't have been an issue if wasn't for GPS.

What's the saying "Gun's don't kill people..GPS sending you to the wrong house where the 69 war veteran lives kills people." It's something like that.

If someone arrives at your drive way for whatever reason you shouldn't murder them, that's why the GPS isn't to blame.

If the man just snapped, or if the evidence proves to be overwhelming, that the shooting was NOT justified, then he should be prosecuted to the letter of the law.

But let's look at some of the undisputed facts...

It was late in the evening. A carload of youngsters, shows up unannounced, to an ederly couple's residence.
There were reports of recent crimes in the neighborhood. Some sort of altercation took place and the elderly veteran allegedly shot the driver of the car in the head, with a .22 revolver, and then held the others at gunpoint, until "help" arrived...

Now, let's look at the unknowns....Language barrier? Low light/limited vision? Frame of mind of the shooter? Frame of mind of the driver? Layout of the scene? Witness' testimony? Accused's testimony? Wife of the accused's role or testimony? Neighbor's testimony? Investigating officer's frame of mind? Who called 911, first? What was said?

How on earth, can people look at ALL of this, and assume to know what really occured?

I'm listening....

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by SpearMint

 

How do you know it wouldn't have happened if he didn't have a gun?
If he didn't have a gun he would have had something else.
It's a crazy old man who was trained how to kill was my point.

If he had a knife or something then the man had a chance to defend himself or run, if he got stabbed he wouldn't necessarily die from his wounds. Someone is a lot less likely to try to kill someone with a knife or other hand held weapons because of this. The man had no chance though. Bang. Dead.

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by xedocodex

 

A 69-year-old war veteran

This was all I needed to read. We train our soldiers to kill then we just expect them to turn it off after they return to being a civilian and expect them to never turn it on again.

Why aren't you blaming the GPS company for sending him to the wrong door. The gun wouldn't have been an issue if wasn't for GPS.

What's the saying "Gun's don't kill people..GPS sending you to the wrong house where the 69 war veteran lives kills people." It's something like that.

If someone arrives at your drive way for whatever reason you shouldn't murder them, that's why the GPS isn't to blame.

If the man just snapped, or if the evidence proves to be overwhelming, that the shooting was NOT justified, then he should be prosecuted to the letter of the law.

But let's look at some of the undisputed facts...

It was late in the evening. A carload of youngsters, shows up unannounced, to an ederly couple's residence.
There were reports of recent crimes in the neighborhood. Some sort of altercation took place and the elderly veteran allegedly shot the driver of the car in the head, with a .22 revolver, and then held the others at gunpoint, until "help" arrived...

Now, let's look at the unknowns....Language barrier? Low light/limited vision? Frame of mind of the shooter? Frame of mind of the driver? Layout of the scene? Witness' testimony? Accused's testimony? Wife of the accused's role or testimony? Neighbor's testimony? Investigating officer's frame of mind? Who called 911, first? What was said?

How on earth, can people look at ALL of this, and assume to know what really occured?

I'm listening....

Those "undisputed facts" do not justify anything. You can't justify this, it's unjustifiable murder. Guns shouldn't even come in to this situation, but if they do then at least just hold them all at gun point and give them the option to leave. Why couldn't he do that? He held the others at gunpoint, why did he murder the driver first? There are no excuses. It's pretty disgusting that you're trying to justify it.

reply to post by SpearMint

The man had no chance though. Bang. Dead.

Seriously?

I'd rather face a 69 year old Veteran with a .22 revolver, then a cranked-up junkie with a knife, ANY DAY!

You are seriously exaggerating the power of a .22 revolver! I mean, a heavy leather jacket can stop a .22...

"No chance"??? Come on....

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt
reply to post by SpearMint

 

The man had no chance though. Bang. Dead.

Seriously?

I'd rather face a 69 year old Veteran with a .22 revolver, then a cranked-up junkie with a knife, ANY DAY!

You are seriously exaggerating the power of a .22 revolver! I mean, a heavy leather jacket can stop a .22...

"No chance"??? Come on....

He shot him in the head from a distance. He had no chance.

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by xedocodex

 

A 69-year-old war veteran

This was all I needed to read. We train our soldiers to kill then we just expect them to turn it off after they return to being a civilian and expect them to never turn it on again.

Why aren't you blaming the GPS company for sending him to the wrong door. The gun wouldn't have been an issue if wasn't for GPS.

What's the saying "Gun's don't kill people..GPS sending you to the wrong house where the 69 war veteran lives kills people." It's something like that.

If someone arrives at your drive way for whatever reason you shouldn't murder them, that's why the GPS isn't to blame.

If the man just snapped, or if the evidence proves to be overwhelming, that the shooting was NOT justified, then he should be prosecuted to the letter of the law.

But let's look at some of the undisputed facts...

It was late in the evening. A carload of youngsters, shows up unannounced, to an ederly couple's residence.
There were reports of recent crimes in the neighborhood. Some sort of altercation took place and the elderly veteran allegedly shot the driver of the car in the head, with a .22 revolver, and then held the others at gunpoint, until "help" arrived...

Now, let's look at the unknowns....Language barrier? Low light/limited vision? Frame of mind of the shooter? Frame of mind of the driver? Layout of the scene? Witness' testimony? Accused's testimony? Wife of the accused's role or testimony? Neighbor's testimony? Investigating officer's frame of mind? Who called 911, first? What was said?

How on earth, can people look at ALL of this, and assume to know what really occured?

I'm listening....

Those "undisputed facts" do not justify anything. You can't justify this, it's unjustifiable murder. Guns shouldn't even come in to this situation, but if they do then at least just hold them all at gun point and give them the option to leave. Why couldn't he do that? He held the others at gunpoint, why did he murder the driver first? There are no excuses. It's pretty disgusting that you're trying to justify it.

When did I say that those facts "justified" anything? Did you even read my first sentence?
The point I was trying to make, is that we simply DO NOT know what happened! WHY are you so quick to condemn the man, unless it's just the perfect compliment to your obvious agenda?

Now, let's examine your question...
Why didn't he just persuade them to leave??? What would have caused him to shoot the "driver" of a potential weapon, and just hold the passengers at bay???

Think about it.

Originally posted by randomname
the wrong thing to do is crap your pants in fear and start shooting every unarmed person that pulls up to your drive way.

that's murder.

No doubt.

From the linked article.

Friends who were in the car with Diaz told WSB-TV that they were trying to pick up a friend on the way to ice skating on Saturday but their GPS directed them to the wrong address. The friends said that they waited in the driveway for a few minutes before Sailors emerged from the house and fired a gun into the air. Gandy Cardenas, who was in the car, recalled to WAGA that the homeowner made no effort to speak to the group before opening fire.

“He didn’t talk to them, he just started shooting,” Cardenas explained. “The first shot was in the air.” At that point, Diaz tried to turn the car around to leave, but Sailors fired another shot, striking the immigrant on the left side of the head. The group, which included a 15 and an 18 year old, said that Sailors held them at gunpoint until police arrived.

That is just insane. He could have called 911. He could have stayed in his house.

And NONE of it would have happened without a gun.

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by SpearMint

 

How do you know it wouldn't have happened if he didn't have a gun?
If he didn't have a gun he would have had something else.
It's a crazy old man who was trained how to kill was my point.

If he had a knife or something then the man had a chance to defend himself or run, if he got stabbed he wouldn't necessarily die from his wounds. Someone is a lot less likely to try to kill someone with a knife or other hand held weapons because of this. The man had no chance though. Bang. Dead.

Typical answer from a misinformed, untrained and close minded non gun owner.

My go to weapon is a knife, especially within 15-20 feet.....and I would say I am much more likely to kill you with a knife than a gun though I train with both regularly. The reason being is that you can duck and dodge and a bullet fired from a typical home defense gun is no bigger than the end of your pinky finger at the largest. That leaves a lot of room to miss a moving target. With a knife I am not going to miss and an open knife wound does not close of or semi-cauterize as a bullet wound will do....most bullet wounds do not end in death.

Besides those facts, how do we know the guy that pulled in wasn't being hostile?

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by xedocodex

 

A 69-year-old war veteran

This was all I needed to read. We train our soldiers to kill then we just expect them to turn it off after they return to being a civilian and expect them to never turn it on again.

Why aren't you blaming the GPS company for sending him to the wrong door. The gun wouldn't have been an issue if wasn't for GPS.

What's the saying "Gun's don't kill people..GPS sending you to the wrong house where the 69 war veteran lives kills people." It's something like that.

If someone arrives at your drive way for whatever reason you shouldn't murder them, that's why the GPS isn't to blame.

If the man just snapped, or if the evidence proves to be overwhelming, that the shooting was NOT justified, then he should be prosecuted to the letter of the law.

But let's look at some of the undisputed facts...

It was late in the evening. A carload of youngsters, shows up unannounced, to an ederly couple's residence.
There were reports of recent crimes in the neighborhood. Some sort of altercation took place and the elderly veteran allegedly shot the driver of the car in the head, with a .22 revolver, and then held the others at gunpoint, until "help" arrived...

Now, let's look at the unknowns....Language barrier? Low light/limited vision? Frame of mind of the shooter? Frame of mind of the driver? Layout of the scene? Witness' testimony? Accused's testimony? Wife of the accused's role or testimony? Neighbor's testimony? Investigating officer's frame of mind? Who called 911, first? What was said?

How on earth, can people look at ALL of this, and assume to know what really occured?

I'm listening....

Those "undisputed facts" do not justify anything. You can't justify this, it's unjustifiable murder. Guns shouldn't even come in to this situation, but if they do then at least just hold them all at gun point and give them the option to leave. Why couldn't he do that? He held the others at gunpoint, why did he murder the driver first? There are no excuses. It's pretty disgusting that you're trying to justify it.

When did I say that those facts "justified" anything? Did you even read my first sentence?
The point I was trying to make, is that we simply DO NOT know what happened! WHY are you so quick to condemn the man, unless it's just the perfect compliment to your obvious agenda?

Now, let's examine your question...
Why didn't he just persuade them to leave??? What would have caused him to shoot the "driver" of a potential weapon, and just hold the passengers at bay???

Think about it.

edit on 1/29/2013 by GoOfYFoOt because: added text...

He shot him in the head without any communication when the driver tried to leave. He shot an unarmed man without a reason. That's why I'm so quick to condemn him.