• 65 years old knocked off his bicycle by three kids. Results? One dead, one wounded, one in jail
    566 replies, posted
put yourself in the old guy's shoes. you are 65, taking a bike ride somewhere, 3 people (whose ages you do not know at all, you are getting attacked and you aren't thinking that kinda stuff, kinda not the time) push you off your bike and start assaulting you on the floor (intents unknown, whether it was a robbery or sickos trying to kill someone) oughta do something about that.
He could have totally just, like, pulled the gun out and scared them off. I mean, I've never robbed a dude nor do I ever intend to, but I don't really think some guy's wallet is worth getting shot (apparently lethally). [editline]24th October[/editline] I can totally see [I]why[/I] he shot them, I just don't think that it's a good thing at all that he was in the position where he had to. I would have much preferred nobody get shot at all.
This thread is full of illiterate tools jumping at the throats of people who even remotely hint that the kids were stupid and at fault for robbing the guy. "You are all such animals! Condoning such violent acts, you make me sick. All they did was push him off his bike, how does that warrant them being shot and killed?" Read the article fully next time. So many idiots have gone and started a pointless debate.
I don't get you guys. I believe that the old man had every right to do what he did; he was protecting himself. It's just tragic that it resulted in a dead kid...
[QUOTE=Scot;38167688]Um what the fuck, how is a crazy old man killing a child who simply knocked him over a good thing? You guys are fucked up.[/QUOTE] Note how it says [I]assaulted[/I]. Most likely they knocked him off his bike and started kicking him or something. I don't know the full details, but that's what I assume happened. If you're getting the shit kicked out of you, you don't give a damn what you need to do to stop it, you just do it.
[QUOTE=wallyroberto_2;38167954]According to some of us, it's better to be robbed, beaten and then do nothing about it but report it to the police after than it is to defend yourself. Ok.[/QUOTE] I honestly believe that killing another human being to protect your wallet is an unjustified action and anyone who does that should have some sort of legal culpability.
[QUOTE=Bobie;38167971]ok where did you get 'they started beating him up' from. the only word i see that would even hint that is 'assault' - and that can mean lots of things. the guy didn't leave with any injury whatsoever, and from the article, he drew his gun -without warning- and fired off shots. sounds like a bunch of bullies who picked on a crazed gunman, there is [I]no[/I] justification for what he did. not to mention he could've fired off one shot. he fired off multiple, and we all know it was to seriously injure them, not to disable them.[/QUOTE] He is a 65 year old man being robbed by 3 teenagers. He wouldn't have any time to give them a warning or a "warning shot" before getting the shit beat out of him.
[QUOTE=Cone;38168012]He could have totally just, like, pulled the gun out and scared them off. I mean, I've never robbed a dude nor do I ever intend to, but I don't really think some guy's wallet is worth getting shot (apparently lethally).[/QUOTE] It was probably a natural reaction to pull the trigger. He probably didn't have "pull it out to scare them" going through his head when people are trying to rob/assault/kill him.
[QUOTE=Zero Ziat;38167991]put yourself in the old guy's shoes. you are 65, taking a bike ride somewhere, 3 people (whose ages you do not know at all, you are getting attacked and you aren't thinking that kinda stuff, kinda not the time) push you off your bike and start assaulting you on the floor (intents unknown, whether it was a robbery or sickos trying to kill someone) oughta do something about that.[/QUOTE] If I was in his shoes, I would draw my pistol and let them see it, they keep coming at me I shoot. I think there is a saying do not aim your weapon at someone unless you have the intent to shoot.
[QUOTE=loopoo;38168019]This thread is full of illiterate tools jumping at the throats of people who even remotely hint [I]that the kids were stupid and at fault for robbing the guy.[/I] "You are all such animals! Condoning such violent acts, you make me sick. All they did was push him off his bike, how does that warrant them being shot and killed?" Read the article fully next time. So many idiots have gone and started a pointless debate.[/QUOTE] missprint? I'm confused, The kids chose to rob him
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;38168037]He is a 65 year old man being robbed by 3 teenagers. He wouldn't have any time to give them a warning or a "warning shot" before getting the shit beat out of him.[/QUOTE] right because at 65 you're totally senile and lack the ability to not fire off multiple shots at kids running towards him
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;38167987]He should have let them beat him senseless and take his money and bike, that'd be much much better for all parties.[/QUOTE] And possibly his gun too.
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;38168037]He is a 65 year old man being robbed by 3 teenagers. He wouldn't have any time to give them a warning or a "warning shot" before getting the shit beat out of him.[/QUOTE] This is an assumption. This is an assumption that will likely be taken as fact because the police, just like everyone in this thread apparently, will more readily believe his side of the story than the opposing one despite the fact that they should be equally important. This is what is so dangerous about a carte-blanche attitude towards self defense.
This title is really fucking bad. Should be changed to teenagers. 16 year olds arent kids, they're teenagers.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;38168036]I honestly believe that killing another human being to protect your wallet is an unjustified action and anyone who does that should have some sort of legal culpability.[/QUOTE] You know a lot robberies involve, you know, physical harm.
[QUOTE=Justin Case;38167749]I know we don't have all the facts but could he not have just given one of them a non-lethal shot so they'd leave him? Doesn't sound like they even had a knife or anything... I'm not siding with the little pricks, I just think the death of a 16 year old could have been avoided.[/QUOTE] Shooting to wound leads to more problems in court. Like the fact that maybe you didn't feel in enough danger to have to kill and that the use of lethal force was unnecessary. It did end really badly for the kids but the man must have felt that his life was in danger and used his weapon in the appropriate manner. Not to take a side because this is a sad situation but if I were a 65 year old man pushed off my bike by some teenagers, I'd be fucking scared for my life.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;38167894]I'm not condemning that, I just find it kind of weird how condemning the fact that he killed someone (albeit in self defense) is apparently an amazing thing that we should praise.[/QUOTE] I agree, we shouldn't praise. My guess is it was the heat of the moment that made him shoot. I don't know if I would, but what do I know, I haven't been in the situation.
It's a choice they all agreed to make. "Let's mug that old guy" and everyone was like hell yeah, let's mug that old fart with wheels! It's not like they didn't know what they were doing. Their loss was that they didn't take into account the possibility of getting shot dead while mugging the old man. You never know if your target is armed or not, so you better not whine about it if you get shot dead while doing something awfully retarded. No remorse from me.
[QUOTE=Bobie;38167846]its like this thread is in a far-flung dystopia where killing kids for pushing you off of a bike is a-ok[/QUOTE] Welcome to facepunch
If you knock a guy down and charge at him, even when he has a gun out. You're either russian or plain stupid. Not saying that the kids are dumb and should have been shot. I'm just saying that it could have been prevented.
Honestly, I think that there's far too little information for us to say just how disproportionate the shootings were. "Assault" could be anything from a couple nasty punches to a savage beating.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;38168072]This is an assumption. This is an assumption that will likely be taken as fact because the police, just like everyone in this thread apparently, will more readily believe his side of the story than the opposing one despite the fact that they should be equally important. This is what is so dangerous about a carte-blanche attitude towards self defense.[/QUOTE] Yeah, because it makes much more sense that he fell on the ground, drew his gun and then methodically murdered one kid and injured the other. Get a fucking grip.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;38168072]This is an assumption. This is an assumption that will likely be taken as fact because the police, just like everyone in this thread apparently, will more readily believe his side of the story than the opposing one despite the fact that they should be equally important. This is what is so dangerous about a carte-blanche attitude towards self defense.[/QUOTE] What if he did not have a gun and in the process of robbing him they punched him in the chest, his ribs broke and punctured his lugs or even his heart and killed him. Or they just plain out killed him. I do not think that he should have killed one of them, but it happened. In that situation, especially when your that old that happens fast and you just fire.
[QUOTE=Cone;38168117]Honestly, I think that there's far too little information for us to say just how disproportionate the shootings were. "Assault" could be anything from a punch to a savage beating.[/QUOTE] And it doesn't matter either way.
[QUOTE=Hullu V3;38168096]It's a choice they all agreed to make. "Let's mug that old guy" and everyone was like hell yeah, let's mug that old fart with wheels! It's not like they didn't know what they were doing. Their loss was that they didn't take into account the possibility of getting shot dead while mugging the old man. You never know if your target is armed or not, so you better not whine about it if you get shot dead while doing something awfully retarded. No remorse from me.[/QUOTE] According to the article, they charged at him, even though he had a gun out. Stupid people.
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;38168108]Welcome to facepunch[/QUOTE] Gun Debates, and trying to rationalize murdering kids. Gotta love SH :T
[QUOTE=J!NX;38167761]That is on par with punishing a victim of rape in my opinion. It's a very backwards thought.[/QUOTE] Are you seriously fucking comparing a failed robbery attempt to raping someone?
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;38168108]Welcome to facepunch[/QUOTE] Where people don't read the op
[QUOTE=J!NX;38168044]missprint? I'm confused, The kids chose to rob him[/QUOTE] The kids were stupid and at fault <--- basically saying the kids chose to rob him.
[QUOTE=assassin_Raptor;38168041]If I was in his shoes, I would draw my pistol and let them see it, they keep coming at me I shoot. I think there is a saying do not aim your weapon at someone unless you have the intent to shoot.[/QUOTE] I guess he was knocked over. If you are knocked over and have 3 guys around you, you don't have time to "scare" them off, do you? And shut already with the O GOD HE KILLED SOMEBODY thing. If you are panicing and shooting somebody, you do not know if the shot is going to be lethal or not.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.