Home owner shoots, kills intruder with shotgun

(WDAF-TV) An early morning home invasion ended with the suspected
intruder shot and killed.

Police said a home owner in the 9000 block of N. Garfield in Kansas
City, Mo., shot a man who broke into his home just after 5:30
Wednesday morning. The shooting victim suffered life-threatening
injuries and died inside the residence. He was 20 years old. Police
have not released his identity.

Police said the suspected home intruder was responsible for a series
of crimes early Wednesday morning. Police said he stole a vehicle in
Clay County, Mo., and crashed it near NE 79th Street. After stealing a
second car, Gladstone police pursued him. The suspect ended up driving
that car through a garage. Police said the suspect then car jacked a
third vehicle – a Ford F150 — at gunpoint at a HyVee near Indiana.
Police said the suspect ditched that truck at 92nd and North Brooklyn
and from there broke into a home near 90th and Garfield where he
fought with the home owner. The suspect fled the scene and broke into
a second home, which is where he was shot and killed.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/home-owne...-with-shotgun/

On 9/5/2013 9:22 AM, Metspitzer wrote:
Home owner shoots, kills intruder with shotgun

(WDAF-TV) An early morning home invasion ended with the suspected
intruder shot and killed.

Police said a home owner in the 9000 block of N. Garfield in Kansas
City, Mo., shot a man who broke into his home just after 5:30
Wednesday morning. The shooting victim suffered life-threatening
injuries and died inside the residence. He was 20 years old. Police
have not released his identity.

Police said the suspected home intruder was responsible for a series
of crimes early Wednesday morning. Police said he stole a vehicle in
Clay County, Mo., and crashed it near NE 79th Street. After stealing a
second car, Gladstone police pursued him. The suspect ended up driving
that car through a garage. Police said the suspect then car jacked a
third vehicle – a Ford F150 — at gunpoint at a HyVee near Indiana.
Police said the suspect ditched that truck at 92nd and North Brooklyn
and from there broke into a home near 90th and Garfield where he
fought with the home owner. The suspect fled the scene and broke into
a second home, which is where he was shot and killed.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/home-owne...-with-shotgun/


I find some headlines to be confusing at times. Who had the shotgun, the
homeowner or the intruder? I see a headline such as "Man Shot In Parking
Lot". Which part of the human body is the parking lot? ^_^

TDD

On 9/5/2013 10:40 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:


I find some headlines to be confusing at times. Who had the shotgun, the
homeowner or the intruder? I see a headline such as "Man Shot In Parking
Lot". Which part of the human body is the parking lot? ^_^

TDD

It is the the back, just above the legs and is sort of rounded. Two
parts separated by a crack. Available in many sizes.

On 9/5/2013 10:20 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/5/2013 10:40 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:


I find some headlines to be confusing at times. Who had the shotgun, the
homeowner or the intruder? I see a headline such as "Man Shot In Parking
Lot". Which part of the human body is the parking lot? ^_^

TDD

It is the the back, just above the legs and is sort of rounded. Two
parts separated by a crack. Available in many sizes.

I've noticed that many parking lots have cracks in them, some bigger
than others. O_o

TDD

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 09:40:01 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

I see a headline such as "Man Shot In Parking
Lot". Which part of the human body is the parking lot? ^_^

The part where you park the bullets; or in this case, the shotgun
pellets.

Saw a quick story on NBC Today Show this morning about a foiled convenience store robbery.

Video shows the thug attempt to pull a gun on the shopkeeper. Shopkeeper reaches for the gun. Thug pulls gun back and points it away from shopkeeper. Shopkeeper draws down on thug point-blank and shoves the gun in his face. Thug retreats.

I think there's a 75 percent chance the homeowner had the shotgun.


Or, "I saw a man in the distance with a pair of binoculars."

The biggest pain in reading questions posed by people is that if something is obvious to them, they presume it's obvious to everyone else as well. We often have to figure out from the context of the question whether "bathroom tile" means wall tiles or floor tiles. It doesn't occur to people that they need to specify things like that because it's blindingly obvious to them what they're referring to and so they see no need to state the obvious.

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better ending for all concerned if it did.

Kids brains aren't fully developed until they're fully mature, and while most 20 year old women are fully mature, many 20 year old men aren't. Their brains are still developing, and they don't make rational decisions like they would at age 25 or 30. Unless this kid was breaking into homes to feed a drug habit, often the reason why people commit crime is that they want (but don't actually need) money, and what's important to immature men is their "rep" or "street cred" amongst their friends, and the thrill of doing something dangerious. So, while they could go back and live with their parents, that would be their last choice as long as they could support themselves by selling drugs or selling stolen stuff. Truth is that what lots of young kids like that really need is a few years in jail to protect them from themselves until they get mature enough to start thinking straight. Then, they become no different than the rest of us.

Yeah, I know, people are going to bark at me for having such a wuss opinion about it, but it's true. In 5 years time, that criminal kid could have been a totally different person. I saw that myself when I was growing up and saw that the "crazy people" I knew in high school started to change between the ages of 17 to 23. People that I believed were headed for either prison or an early grave ended up getting jobs, getting married, having a kid, saving for a house and I never heard much about them any more.

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 10:40:54 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Saw a quick story on NBC Today Show this morning about a foiled convenience store robbery.

Video shows the thug attempt to pull a gun on the shopkeeper. Shopkeeper reaches for the gun. Thug pulls gun back and points it away from shopkeeper. Shopkeeper draws down on thug point-blank and shoves the gun in his face. Thug retreats.

The clerk stuck a better gun in the man's "parking lot".

Video & interview:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2650460556001/veteran-turns-tables-on-would-be-robber/

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 20:00:04 +0200, nestork
wrote:

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a
tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was
up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but
still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner
phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended
up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended
up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never
committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that
things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better
ending for all concerned if it did.

Kids brains aren't fully developed until they're fully mature, and while
most 20 year old women are fully mature, many 20 year old men aren't.
Their brains are still developing, and they don't make rational
decisions like they would at age 25 or 30. Unless this kid was breaking
into homes to feed a drug habit, often the reason why people commit
crime is that they want (but don't actually need) money, and what's
important to immature men is their "rep" or "street cred" amongst their
friends, and the thrill of doing something dangerious. So, while they
could go back and live with their parents, that would be their last
choice as long as they could support themselves by selling drugs or
selling stolen stuff. Truth is that what lots of young kids like that
really need is a few years in jail to protect them from themselves until
they get mature enough to start thinking straight. Then, they become no
different than the rest of us.

Yeah, I know, people are going to bark at me for having such a wuss
opinion about it, but it's true. In 5 years time, that criminal kid
could have been a totally different person. I saw that myself when I
was growing up and saw that the "crazy people" I knew in high school
started to change between the ages of 17 to 23. People that I believed
were headed for either prison or an early grave ended up getting jobs,
getting married, having a kid, saving for a house and I never heard much
about them any more.


nestork,

I won't "bark" at you but will dismiss some of your notions.

- A 20-year is NOT a "kid".

- Rehabilitation is a known fallacy - a person has to be "habilitated"
before the person can be "rehabilitated". You cannot rehabilitate one
that has never been habilitated.

- Recidivism rates are as high as 85% or more.

- Science has not yet figured out how the brain works in psychopaths
(cite Newtown, CT).

- Many, most all prisons, do NOT have trade skill programs anymore.
Many never did in the first place.

- Prisons are now "warehousing" crooks, scoundrels, and scallywags.

On Thursday, September 5, 2013 2:00:04 PM UTC-4, nestork wrote:


Home owner shoots, kills intruder with shotgun





I think there's a 75 percent chance the homeowner had the shotgun.





Or, "I saw a man in the distance with a pair of binoculars."



The biggest pain in reading questions posed by people is that if

something is obvious to them, they presume it's obvious to everyone else

as well. We often have to figure out from the context of the question

whether "bathroom tile" means wall tiles or floor tiles. It doesn't

occur to people that they need to specify things like that because it's

blindingly obvious to them what they're referring to and so they see no

need to state the obvious.



I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a

tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was

up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but

still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner

phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended

up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended

up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never

committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that

things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better

ending for all concerned if it did.



Kids brains aren't fully developed until they're fully mature, and while

most 20 year old women are fully mature, many 20 year old men aren't.

Their brains are still developing, and they don't make rational

decisions like they would at age 25 or 30. Unless this kid was breaking

into homes to feed a drug habit, often the reason why people commit

crime is that they want (but don't actually need) money, and what's

important to immature men is their "rep" or "street cred" amongst their

friends, and the thrill of doing something dangerious. So, while they

could go back and live with their parents, that would be their last

choice as long as they could support themselves by selling drugs or

selling stolen stuff. Truth is that what lots of young kids like that

really need is a few years in jail to protect them from themselves until

they get mature enough to start thinking straight. Then, they become no

different than the rest of us.



Yeah, I know, people are going to bark at me for having such a wuss

opinion about it, but it's true. In 5 years time, that criminal kid

could have been a totally different person. I saw that myself when I

was growing up and saw that the "crazy people" I knew in high school

started to change between the ages of 17 to 23. People that I believed

were headed for either prison or an early grave ended up getting jobs,

getting married, having a kid, saving for a house and I never heard much

about them any more.









--

nestork

Regarding phone call versus shooting:

You're assuming that the homeowner would have had the intruder's permission to take the time to call the police. The intruder ran from police after the car jacking, so I doubt that he'd go into custody willingly.

Since the intruder attacked the first homeowner, he probably tried to attack the second one, too. The second one probably had to shot him in self defense rather quickly.

Paul

On 9/5/2013 1:00 PM, nestork wrote:


Home owner shoots, kills intruder with shotgun


I think there's a 75 percent chance the homeowner had the shotgun.


Or, "I saw a man in the distance with a pair of binoculars."

The biggest pain in reading questions posed by people is that if
something is obvious to them, they presume it's obvious to everyone else
as well. We often have to figure out from the context of the question
whether "bathroom tile" means wall tiles or floor tiles. It doesn't
occur to people that they need to specify things like that because it's
blindingly obvious to them what they're referring to and so they see no
need to state the obvious.

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a
tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was
up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but
still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner
phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended
up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended
up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never
committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that
things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better
ending for all concerned if it did.

Kids brains aren't fully developed until they're fully mature, and while
most 20 year old women are fully mature, many 20 year old men aren't.
Their brains are still developing, and they don't make rational
decisions like they would at age 25 or 30. Unless this kid was breaking
into homes to feed a drug habit, often the reason why people commit
crime is that they want (but don't actually need) money, and what's
important to immature men is their "rep" or "street cred" amongst their
friends, and the thrill of doing something dangerious. So, while they
could go back and live with their parents, that would be their last
choice as long as they could support themselves by selling drugs or
selling stolen stuff. Truth is that what lots of young kids like that
really need is a few years in jail to protect them from themselves until
they get mature enough to start thinking straight. Then, they become no
different than the rest of us.

Yeah, I know, people are going to bark at me for having such a wuss
opinion about it, but it's true. In 5 years time, that criminal kid
could have been a totally different person. I saw that myself when I
was growing up and saw that the "crazy people" I knew in high school
started to change between the ages of 17 to 23. People that I believed
were headed for either prison or an early grave ended up getting jobs,
getting married, having a kid, saving for a house and I never heard much
about them any more.


Perhaps if young offenders were marched through the morgue and forced to
look at the body of the 20 year old home invader having his body cut
up and internal organs and brain dug out, the young offenders may be
frightened enough to change their ways and the 20 year old home invader
would, in death, be doing a public service. Youngsters should be taught
that life is not a video game, there's no reset button. O_o

TDD

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT), Pavel314
wrote:

Regarding phone call versus shooting:

When only a couple of seconds count, the police are minutes away.
Hours in Detroit.

I have a gun, because I can't carry a police officer in my pocket.

Oren wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 10:40:54 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Saw a quick story on NBC Today Show this morning about a foiled convenience store robbery.

Video shows the thug attempt to pull a gun on the shopkeeper. Shopkeeper reaches for the gun. Thug pulls gun back and points it away from shopkeeper. Shopkeeper draws down on thug point-blank and shoves the gun in his face. Thug retreats.

The clerk stuck a better gun in the man's "parking lot".

Video & interview:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2650460556001/veteran-turns-tables-on-would-be-robber/

Hi,
He was a veteran with 4 tours to Iraq under his belt. In his 50's,
he could've rewarded a better job than that for what he did for his
country. Too few fitting jobs to go around for too many vets., maybe.

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 20:00:04 +0200, nestork
wrote:

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a
tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was
up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but
still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner
phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended
up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended
up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never
committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that
things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better
ending for all concerned if it did.

Clearly this was not this turd's first offence. It wasn't even his
second offence. From the OP's message I counted at least 6 crimes...
just that night and early morning.

The only tragedy is that he didn't get his life terminated at the
first crime scene. If it had gone down that way it would have saved a
lot of people the pain of having to deal with the consequences of this
crime spree.

And there are those that want to take our guns away.

On 9/5/2013 4:19 PM, Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 20:00:04 +0200, nestork
wrote:

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a
tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was
up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but
still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner
phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended
up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended
up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never
committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that
things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better
ending for all concerned if it did.

Clearly this was not this turd's first offence. It wasn't even his
second offence. From the OP's message I counted at least 6 crimes...
just that night and early morning.

The only tragedy is that he didn't get his life terminated at the
first crime scene. If it had gone down that way it would have saved a
lot of people the pain of having to deal with the consequences of this
crime spree.

And there are those that want to take our guns away.


Yea, you might kill some innocent little Black toddler who attacks you
MMA style. O_o

TDD

I've heard that in UK, the cops will take the
guns away from the victims, and give the
crook a comfortable ride home.

..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 9/5/2013 5:19 PM, Gordon Shumway wrote:

The only tragedy is that he didn't get his life terminated at the
first crime scene. If it had gone down that way it would have saved a
lot of people the pain of having to deal with the consequences of this
crime spree.

And there are those that want to take our guns away.

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 17:24:06 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 9/5/2013 4:19 PM, Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 20:00:04 +0200, nestork
wrote:

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a
tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was
up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but
still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner
phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended
up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended
up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never
committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that
things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better
ending for all concerned if it did.

Clearly this was not this turd's first offence. It wasn't even his
second offence. From the OP's message I counted at least 6 crimes...
just that night and early morning.

The only tragedy is that he didn't get his life terminated at the
first crime scene. If it had gone down that way it would have saved a
lot of people the pain of having to deal with the consequences of this
crime spree.

And there are those that want to take our guns away.


Molon labe -- "come and take", is a classical expression of defiance
reportedly spoken by King Leonidas I in response to the Persian army's
demand that the Spartans surrender their weapons at the Battle of
Thermopylae.""

Yea, you might kill some innocent little Black toddler who attacks you
MMA style. O_o

TDD

Body piercing with bullets?

How's that worked, so far, in the US?
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org

..On 9/5/2013 6:51 PM, Oren wrote:

Molon labe -- "come and take", is a classical expression of defiance
reportedly spoken by King Leonidas I in response to the Persian army's
demand that the Spartans surrender their weapons at the Battle of
Thermopylae.""

Ed Pawlowski posted for all of us...

And I know how to SNIP


On 9/5/2013 10:40 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:


I find some headlines to be confusing at times. Who had the shotgun, the
homeowner or the intruder? I see a headline such as "Man Shot In Parking
Lot". Which part of the human body is the parking lot? ^_^

TDD

It is the the back, just above the legs and is sort of rounded. Two
parts separated by a crack. Available in many sizes.

Where many people heads can be found.

--
Tekkie

Oren posted for all of us...

And I know how to SNIP


- Prisons are now "warehousing" crooks,
scoundrels, and scallywags.

But the politicians get out early... Like Vince
Fumo from Philly, PA

--
Tekkie

On 09/05/2013 03:22 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

[snip]

Perhaps if young offenders were marched through the morgue and forced to
look at the body of the 20 year old home invader having his body cut
up and internal organs and brain dug out, the young offenders may be
frightened enough to change their ways and the 20 year old home invader
would, in death, be doing a public service. Youngsters should be taught
that life is not a video game, there's no reset button. O_o

TDD

Despite what the majority seem to think, death is not a reset button.

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 11:46:07 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 20:00:04 +0200, nestork
wrote:

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a
tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was
up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but
still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner
phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended
up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended
up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never
committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that
things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better
ending for all concerned if it did.

Kids brains aren't fully developed until they're fully mature, and while
most 20 year old women are fully mature, many 20 year old men aren't.
Their brains are still developing, and they don't make rational
decisions like they would at age 25 or 30. Unless this kid was breaking
into homes to feed a drug habit, often the reason why people commit
crime is that they want (but don't actually need) money, and what's
important to immature men is their "rep" or "street cred" amongst their
friends, and the thrill of doing something dangerious. So, while they
could go back and live with their parents, that would be their last
choice as long as they could support themselves by selling drugs or
selling stolen stuff. Truth is that what lots of young kids like that
really need is a few years in jail to protect them from themselves until
they get mature enough to start thinking straight. Then, they become no
different than the rest of us.

Yeah, I know, people are going to bark at me for having such a wuss
opinion about it, but it's true. In 5 years time, that criminal kid
could have been a totally different person. I saw that myself when I
was growing up and saw that the "crazy people" I knew in high school
started to change between the ages of 17 to 23. People that I believed
were headed for either prison or an early grave ended up getting jobs,
getting married, having a kid, saving for a house and I never heard much
about them any more.


nestork,

I won't "bark" at you but will dismiss some of your notions.

- A 20-year is NOT a "kid".

- Rehabilitation is a known fallacy - a person has to be "habilitated"
before the person can be "rehabilitated". You cannot rehabilitate one
that has never been habilitated.

- Recidivism rates are as high as 85% or more.

- Science has not yet figured out how the brain works in psychopaths
(cite Newtown, CT).

- Many, most all prisons, do NOT have trade skill programs anymore.
Many never did in the first place.

- Prisons are now "warehousing" crooks, scoundrels, and scallywags.

All true but it is useful to incarcerate the psychopaths until they're
too old to commit crimes.

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT), Pavel314
wrote:

On Thursday, September 5, 2013 2:00:04 PM UTC-4, nestork wrote:


Home owner shoots, kills intruder with shotgun





I think there's a 75 percent chance the homeowner had the shotgun.





Or, "I saw a man in the distance with a pair of binoculars."



The biggest pain in reading questions posed by people is that if

something is obvious to them, they presume it's obvious to everyone else

as well. We often have to figure out from the context of the question

whether "bathroom tile" means wall tiles or floor tiles. It doesn't

occur to people that they need to specify things like that because it's

blindingly obvious to them what they're referring to and so they see no

need to state the obvious.



I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a

tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was

up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but

still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner

phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended

up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended

up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never

committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that

things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better

ending for all concerned if it did.



Kids brains aren't fully developed until they're fully mature, and while

most 20 year old women are fully mature, many 20 year old men aren't.

Their brains are still developing, and they don't make rational

decisions like they would at age 25 or 30. Unless this kid was breaking

into homes to feed a drug habit, often the reason why people commit

crime is that they want (but don't actually need) money, and what's

important to immature men is their "rep" or "street cred" amongst their

friends, and the thrill of doing something dangerious. So, while they

could go back and live with their parents, that would be their last

choice as long as they could support themselves by selling drugs or

selling stolen stuff. Truth is that what lots of young kids like that

really need is a few years in jail to protect them from themselves until

they get mature enough to start thinking straight. Then, they become no

different than the rest of us.



Yeah, I know, people are going to bark at me for having such a wuss

opinion about it, but it's true. In 5 years time, that criminal kid

could have been a totally different person. I saw that myself when I

was growing up and saw that the "crazy people" I knew in high school

started to change between the ages of 17 to 23. People that I believed

were headed for either prison or an early grave ended up getting jobs,

getting married, having a kid, saving for a house and I never heard much

about them any more.









--

nestork

Regarding phone call versus shooting:

Sign posted on front door: "WE DO NOT CALL 9-1-1"

You're assuming that the homeowner would have had the intruder's permission to take the time to call the police. The intruder ran from police after the car jacking, so I doubt that he'd go into custody willingly.

Since the intruder attacked the first homeowner, he probably tried to attack the second one, too. The second one probably had to shot him in self defense rather quickly.

Paul

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 13:47:30 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT), Pavel314
wrote:

Regarding phone call versus shooting:

When only a couple of seconds count, the police are minutes away.
Hours in Detroit.

I have a gun, because I can't carry a police officer in my pocket.

OTOH, people like Nancy Pelosi want to take your gun because she DOES
have the police in her pocket.

On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:24:14 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 11:46:07 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 20:00:04 +0200, nestork
wrote:

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a
tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was
up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but
still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner
phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended
up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended
up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never
committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that
things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better
ending for all concerned if it did.

Kids brains aren't fully developed until they're fully mature, and while
most 20 year old women are fully mature, many 20 year old men aren't.
Their brains are still developing, and they don't make rational
decisions like they would at age 25 or 30. Unless this kid was breaking
into homes to feed a drug habit, often the reason why people commit
crime is that they want (but don't actually need) money, and what's
important to immature men is their "rep" or "street cred" amongst their
friends, and the thrill of doing something dangerious. So, while they
could go back and live with their parents, that would be their last
choice as long as they could support themselves by selling drugs or
selling stolen stuff. Truth is that what lots of young kids like that
really need is a few years in jail to protect them from themselves until
they get mature enough to start thinking straight. Then, they become no
different than the rest of us.

Yeah, I know, people are going to bark at me for having such a wuss
opinion about it, but it's true. In 5 years time, that criminal kid
could have been a totally different person. I saw that myself when I
was growing up and saw that the "crazy people" I knew in high school
started to change between the ages of 17 to 23. People that I believed
were headed for either prison or an early grave ended up getting jobs,
getting married, having a kid, saving for a house and I never heard much
about them any more.


nestork,

I won't "bark" at you but will dismiss some of your notions.

- A 20-year is NOT a "kid".

- Rehabilitation is a known fallacy - a person has to be "habilitated"
before the person can be "rehabilitated". You cannot rehabilitate one
that has never been habilitated.

- Recidivism rates are as high as 85% or more.

- Science has not yet figured out how the brain works in psychopaths
(cite Newtown, CT).

- Many, most all prisons, do NOT have trade skill programs anymore.
Many never did in the first place.

- Prisons are now "warehousing" crooks, scoundrels, and scallywags.

All true but it is useful to incarcerate the psychopaths until they're
too old to commit crimes.

By that time they become "institutionalized" and try to refuse parole
or to be released. One guy (long term bank robber sentence), after
release, went out and threw bricks into post office windows, sat on
the curb waiting to be arrested. They cannot function in society and
prefer to stay locked up, being told what to do and when to do it.

One day, INS (immigration service then) released dozens of Haitians
from a detention facility in Miami. Some showed up at the federal
prison wanting back in. We ran 'em off. We had no custody Remand Order
--

On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:38:34 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 13:47:30 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT), Pavel314
wrote:

Regarding phone call versus shooting:

When only a couple of seconds count, the police are minutes away.
Hours in Detroit.

I have a gun, because I can't carry a police officer in my pocket.

OTOH, people like Nancy Pelosi want to take your gun because she DOES
have the police in her pocket.

Just keep in mind the radical gun grabbers are not about gun control.
They want to CONTROL the issue and have all the say.

On 9/6/2013 1:59 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:24:14 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 11:46:07 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 20:00:04 +0200, nestork
wrote:

I know that this isn't going to be a popular comment, but I think it's a
tragedy that someone only 20 years old got shot and killed. The kid was
up to no good with breaking into people's homes and hijacking cars, but
still, it would have been better for all concerned if the homeowner
phoned the police and they came and arrested the intruder and he ended
up going to jail for two years where he took a welding course and ended
up getting a job with a local farm equipment manufacturer and never
committed another crime in his life. I know it's naive to think that
things would always work out for the better that way, but it's a better
ending for all concerned if it did.

Kids brains aren't fully developed until they're fully mature, and while
most 20 year old women are fully mature, many 20 year old men aren't.
Their brains are still developing, and they don't make rational
decisions like they would at age 25 or 30. Unless this kid was breaking
into homes to feed a drug habit, often the reason why people commit
crime is that they want (but don't actually need) money, and what's
important to immature men is their "rep" or "street cred" amongst their
friends, and the thrill of doing something dangerious. So, while they
could go back and live with their parents, that would be their last
choice as long as they could support themselves by selling drugs or
selling stolen stuff. Truth is that what lots of young kids like that
really need is a few years in jail to protect them from themselves until
they get mature enough to start thinking straight. Then, they become no
different than the rest of us.

Yeah, I know, people are going to bark at me for having such a wuss
opinion about it, but it's true. In 5 years time, that criminal kid
could have been a totally different person. I saw that myself when I
was growing up and saw that the "crazy people" I knew in high school
started to change between the ages of 17 to 23. People that I believed
were headed for either prison or an early grave ended up getting jobs,
getting married, having a kid, saving for a house and I never heard much
about them any more.


nestork,

I won't "bark" at you but will dismiss some of your notions.

- A 20-year is NOT a "kid".

- Rehabilitation is a known fallacy - a person has to be "habilitated"
before the person can be "rehabilitated". You cannot rehabilitate one
that has never been habilitated.

- Recidivism rates are as high as 85% or more.

- Science has not yet figured out how the brain works in psychopaths
(cite Newtown, CT).

- Many, most all prisons, do NOT have trade skill programs anymore.
Many never did in the first place.

- Prisons are now "warehousing" crooks, scoundrels, and scallywags.

All true but it is useful to incarcerate the psychopaths until they're
too old to commit crimes.

By that time they become "institutionalized" and try to refuse parole
or to be released. One guy (long term bank robber sentence), after
release, went out and threw bricks into post office windows, sat on
the curb waiting to be arrested. They cannot function in society and
prefer to stay locked up, being told what to do and when to do it.

One day, INS (immigration service then) released dozens of Haitians
from a detention facility in Miami. Some showed up at the federal
prison wanting back in. We ran 'em off. We had no custody Remand Order
--


I read about some Amish teens who were arrested and jailed who didn't
want to leave the jail because it was so much easier for them in jail
than it was at home, they considered it a vacation. ^_^

TDD

On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:25:46 -0400, wrote:

Sign posted on front door: "WE DO NOT CALL 9-1-1"

"My dog has a gun and refuses to take his medication"

http://freakyts.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/warningmydoghasagunandrefusestotakehismeds5b25d.jp g

On 9/6/2013 1:38 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 13:47:30 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT), Pavel314
wrote:

Regarding phone call versus shooting:

When only a couple of seconds count, the police are minutes away.
Hours in Detroit.

I have a gun, because I can't carry a police officer in my pocket.

OTOH, people like Nancy Pelosi want to take your gun because she DOES
have the police in her pocket.


Doesn't she and other Washington elite have machine gun toting guards
surrounding them? I remember reading something about Ted Kennedy showing
up someplace that had strict gun control laws with his machine
gun toting guards and claimed to be exempt from those laws because he
was a U.S. senator. That seems to be the attitude of ALL the anti-gun
politicians and elite Commiecrats. ^_^

TDD

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 21:26:23 -0400, Tekkie® wrote:

Oren posted for all of us...

And I know how to SNIP


- Prisons are now "warehousing" crooks,
scoundrels, and scallywags.

But the politicians get out early... Like Vince
Fumo from Philly, PA

Those are "White Collar" crimes. Written by then. Sneaky *******s.

On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:14:57 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 9/6/2013 1:38 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 13:47:30 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT), Pavel314
wrote:

Regarding phone call versus shooting:

When only a couple of seconds count, the police are minutes away.
Hours in Detroit.

I have a gun, because I can't carry a police officer in my pocket.

OTOH, people like Nancy Pelosi want to take your gun because she DOES
have the police in her pocket.


Doesn't she and other Washington elite have machine gun toting guards
surrounding them? I remember reading something about Ted Kennedy showing
up someplace that had strict gun control laws with his machine
gun toting guards and claimed to be exempt from those laws because he
was a U.S. senator. That seems to be the attitude of ALL the anti-gun
politicians and elite Commiecrats. ^_^

TDD

...."do as I say and not as I do" mentality.

You need OcamaCare, but we'll exempt ourselves.

Heck, yeah. Extra four hours sleep till 8.

..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 9/6/2013 3:02 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
I read about some Amish teens who were arrested and jailed who didn't
want to leave the jail because it was so much easier for them in jail
than it was at home, they considered it a vacation. ^_^

TDD

On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 12:01:28 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:38:34 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 13:47:30 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT), Pavel314
wrote:

Regarding phone call versus shooting:

When only a couple of seconds count, the police are minutes away.
Hours in Detroit.

I have a gun, because I can't carry a police officer in my pocket.

OTOH, people like Nancy Pelosi want to take your gun because she DOES
have the police in her pocket.

Just keep in mind the radical gun grabbers are not about gun control.
They want to CONTROL the issue and have all the say.

Clarification: They don't want to control the issue. They want to
control YOU. It's all about control of the population.