"Stranded motorist" shoots and kills good samaritans - Polidicks

[quote]Trying to be Good Samaritans cost two members of a Montana family their lives and left their daughter wounded.[/quote] [quote]The family was shot when they returned to help Mendoza, whose car was seen stopped along side a road on the Crow Indian Reservation on Wednesday morning, according to an FBI criminal complaint. The daughter said her mother “came to her house and told her that there was a guy that needed assistance.” The mother, father and daughter then returned to where Mendoza’s car was parked, the court document says. Mendoza pulled a gun on them and ordered them out of their car. He demanded money, but the family said it didn’t have any, according to the FBI. The daughter said Mendoza told them to start walking away from the car. She heard a gunshot and turned back to see her father lying on the road.[/quote] [url]http://ktla.com/2015/07/31/good-samaritan-family-gunned-down-trying-to-help-stranded-driver-in-montana/[/url]

Killing people for pocket change and expecting to get away with it. Pathetic

This is just awful, regular people helping their fellow man and they up and get shot for their good will. Shit is depressing.

Honestly shit like this is why I stopped helping people out of the blue. I've been mugged twice by people I was being a good Samaritan to.

this isolated event is why i never stop for anyone

[QUOTE=Levelog;48352694]Honestly shit like this is why I stopped helping people out of the blue. I've been mugged twice by people I was being a good Samaritan to.[/QUOTE] how?

Is it worse to kill someone indiscriminately or for money?

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;48352705]how?[/QUOTE] They exploit that you will follow them when they say "Somebody is injured/needs your help/is sick/et cetera" and use that to get you into a secluded area, where others may be waiting to lay an ambush, like in the article above. They pull a knife or gun or you suddenly find yourself surrounded and being shaken down for everything of value.

What a sick motherfucker.

This guy didn't even put effort, most cases I've heard about this involve someone pretending to be sexually assaulted by an accomplice and the first person who helps gets jumped by two guys hiding in the shadows

And people wonder why others are reluctant to help other?

Montana have the death penalty?

[QUOTE=JesseR92;48353046]Montana have the death penalty?[/QUOTE] Yes, it does

Things like this are why I don't help people on the side of the road. I've seen some sketchy people pulled over.

When I was in university I lived downtown in the city. One time a guy told me he needed help with his car and it was "just around the corner." He tried to bait me in by telling me that he had a big case of beer he would give me for helping him. No thanks.

[QUOTE=Superwafflez;48354421]Things like this are why I don't help people on the side of the road. I've seen some sketchy people pulled over.[/QUOTE] People on side of an empty highway at midnight is the scariest shit. I feel sorry for people who legit break down and need help but hell nope don't stop to help them.

[QUOTE=Archonos 2;48354564]When I was in university I lived downtown in the city. One time a guy told me he needed help with his car and it was "just around the corner." He tried to bait me in by telling me that he had a big case of beer he would give me for helping him. No thanks.[/QUOTE] Man reading that makes me realize I have no street smarts.

Well then now I know to never help people on the side of the road, unless it's some hot chick.

Seriously just call the police. They can go help if the person needs help and arrest them if they're trying to bait people.

[QUOTE=GURREN LAGANN;48354631]Well then now I know to never help people on the side of the road, unless it's some hot chick.[/QUOTE] A man gets you beat up and mugged, a chick leaves you with no kidneys.

[QUOTE=GURREN LAGANN;48354631]Well then now I know to never help people on the side of the road, unless it's some hot chick.[/QUOTE] Reverse ted bundy [sp]if you somehow don't know, ted bundy was a guy who looked like a normal somewhat attractive dude who used that to lure women. And then he killed them[/sp]

It's really sad that people like this exist. I've always been told never to help strangers on the side of the road. I'm sure there's plenty of legit people in need of a ride or help. But it's a real risk letting someone in your car or getting out of yours. I've driven one guy home before that was stuck at a gas station. But only because he needed a jump and we couldn't get it working. I talked to him a decent amount before even considering giving him a ride. But I eventually determined he likely wasn't a threat so I gave him a ride. During our conversations I did however mention I was armed. In a nonthreatening way. So maybe he was really a crook and decided not to risk it. Lol. (I'm aware that being armed doesn't make it safe. Considering if he pulls a knife or gun while in the car I wouldn't be able to reach mine in time. Like I said befor, I only gave him a ride cause I felt it to be unlikely he was a piece of shit)

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;48353212]Yes, it does[/QUOTE] While others find it barbaric in certain situations I see it as justified.

Please tell me Montana has the electric chair. Let's see if he can make time for that after 10 years in jail.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;48352705]how?[/QUOTE] I'm helping someone and all the sudden, oh, there's a knife in my face. That shit ain't worth 40 bucks.

[QUOTE=JesseR92;48355848]While others find it barbaric in certain situations I see it as justified.[/QUOTE] The problem with the death penalty as such is more of the issue of finality, especially when miscarriages of justice happen and innocent people die for crimes they didnt commit. The thing is, many people who argue against the death penalty (this includes me, on principle) argue that we shouldn't be killing other human beings, since we're just as fallible as the next dude. Another issue is that it's considered that the death penalty doesn't even do what it's purported to do (deterrence) as people will still commit crimes that carry a death sentence despite any level of deterrence that people insist that it has, because of fanaticism, for example, among other things. Sure, perhaps the dude who you put in his grave will no longer be able to commit any crimes, as the old saying in French went (prison has a door, the grave doesn't) but if somebody has a strong enough reasoning/provocation to commit these crimes, it's not going to do jack shit to stop the majority of such people. And yet another argument is that the death penalty itself is an inadequate response on principle. You have heinous crimes such as the mass killings of innocents in terrorist strikes, and yet when a perpetrator is captured, and sentenced to death to be subsequently executed, it only gives their deaths the sheen of martyrdom. The maximum that any government can do is to employ the law of vengeance - a life for a life. And yet, it's only seen as a response in the fashion that "try what we can, we have no other idea how to respond to such crimes."

[QUOTE=GURREN LAGANN;48354631]Well then now I know to never help people on the side of the road, unless it's some hot chick.[/QUOTE] Hot chicks can murder too. Big black scary guns are not some district 9 shit that only old fat bearded men with america shirts and trucker caps can discharge. Don't help strangers, ever. If it's not robber, it's a hobo with necrotizing fascittis

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;48363534]The problem with the death penalty as such is more of the issue of finality, especially when miscarriages of justice happen and innocent people die for crimes they didnt commit. The thing is, many people who argue against the death penalty (this includes me, on principle) argue that we shouldn't be killing other human beings, since we're just as fallible as the next dude. Another issue is that it's considered that the death penalty doesn't even do what it's purported to do (deterrence) as people will still commit crimes that carry a death sentence despite any level of deterrence that people insist that it has, because of fanaticism, for example, among other things. Sure, perhaps the dude who you put in his grave will no longer be able to commit any crimes, as the old saying in French went (prison has a door, the grave doesn't) but if somebody has a strong enough reasoning/provocation to commit these crimes, it's not going to do jack shit to stop the majority of such people. And yet another argument is that the death penalty itself is an inadequate response on principle. You have heinous crimes such as the mass killings of innocents in terrorist strikes, and yet when a perpetrator is captured, and sentenced to death to be subsequently executed, it only gives their deaths the sheen of martyrdom. The maximum that any government can do is to employ the law of vengeance - a life for a life. And yet, it's only seen as a response in the fashion that "try what we can, we have no other idea how to respond to such crimes."[/QUOTE] I am not saying its a solve all punishment for every Tom ,Dick,and Harry who kills someone but for the most hienous of individuals some local examples Clifford Olson,Paul Bernardo,Willy Pickton ,when you have people commuting crimes that monstrous there is no point or possibility of rehabilitating them. When you have a person who shoots an entire family execution style because he couldn't rob them for enough its in my mind definately an option to look into. Terrorists are going to look at everything with a sheen of martyrdom because they are insane and have constructed a worldview where everything they do is justified and rieghtous.

[QUOTE=JesseR92;48363908]I am not saying its a solve all punishment for every Tom ,Dick,and Harry who kills someone but for the most hienous of individuals some local examples Clifford Olson,Paul Bernardo,Willy Pickton ,when you have people commuting crimes that monstrous there is no point or possibility of rehabilitating them. When you have a person who shoots an entire family execution style because he couldn't rob them for enough its in my mind definately an option to look into. Terrorists are going to look at everything with a sheen of martyrdom because they are insane and have constructed a worldview where everything they do is justified and rieghtous.[/QUOTE] To be fair, if anybody's naive enough to think that "we can rehabilitate everybody" there's really no use in trying to point out to them that it doesn't work that way. And the sanctity of life argument is primarily an anthropocentric argument in most Western world views also, as opposed to eastern religious philosophies like Jainism, which holds even animal and insect life as sacred. The problem begins when people start trying to force this as being the only acceptable viewpoint, in the form of moral or evangelical rhetoric - I don't hold with that sort of thing, myself, as I believe every individual's entitled to their views as long as they're more or less reasonable, and even in most cases where it isn't, save for the really bizarre/extremist rubbish. The problem is though, many people argue against it because of its essential inhumanity and finality as a mode of punishment - the consequences are irreversible, and it's not the individuals in the cases that matter to the anti-death penalty proponents, it's the finality of the punishment itself that people are primarily against. Albert Camus argued that for there to be an equivalency of the death sentence in regular life, the murderer would have to warn their victim well in advance, months or even years, while having them simultaneously confined and at their mercy, which was something one never saw outside of a prison. I'm personally against the death penalty on principle, as I mentioned before, but neither am I going to shed any tears for a piece of shit human being who dances on air as a reward for the crimes they committed.

To add to what Zonesylvania is saying, which I completely agree with, [URL="http://helenair.com/news/local/panel-backs-abolishing-death-penalty/article_5feb0d6b-2229-5dbe-b5c4-247e0d7d209d.html"]Montana has also been pushing to end capital punishment this year[/URL], partly because it's expensive as shit. The only way to make it less expensive is to speed up the process, which makes it even more likely we'll execute the wrong person, which is not only morally wrong and leaves the actual criminal to run around free. As the death penalty works now, we, outsiders to this event, won't hear anything else about this case ever again, yet the surviving family will have to deal with months/years of the appeals process before this scumbag is actually put to death. And those trails cost [I]tons [/I]of taxpayer money that should be going to things that benefit society more (schools, police, etc.). It's a human nature to want revenge and justice (and I feel it too), but when it comes down to it the death penalty just has no practical benefits other than a short-lived feeling of justice for everyone but the actual survivors, who should be allowed to move on with their lives.