Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
Watching Dr. Phil, the story is about four boys, 16 and 17 years old
that decided to rob a vacant home. When they got into the home, it turns out the owner was home and came out with his gun. The home owner shot and killed one of the boys. Because of the murder* committed during the commission of a crime the three living boys were convicted of a murder and each sentenced to 50 years. I'm usually pretty hard on people that don't know what's theirs and what's not, but 50 years for a 16 year old is pretty tough. *not sure why they keep calling it a murder. |
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 15:47:14 -0600, amdx wrote:
Watching Dr. Phil, the story is about four boys, 16 and 17 years old that decided to rob a vacant home. When they got into the home, it turns out the owner was home and came out with his gun. The home owner shot and killed one of the boys. Because of the murder* committed during the commission of a crime the three living boys were convicted of a murder and each sentenced to 50 years. I'm usually pretty hard on people that don't know what's theirs and what's not, but 50 years for a 16 year old is pretty tough. *not sure why they keep calling it a murder. Perhaps Dr. Phil is not a lawyer. It would be interesting to see the actual story. |
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
On 1/17/2014 4:15 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 15:47:14 -0600, amdx wrote: Watching Dr. Phil, the story is about four boys, 16 and 17 years old that decided to rob a vacant home. When they got into the home, it turns out the owner was home and came out with his gun. The home owner shot and killed one of the boys. Because of the murder* committed during the commission of a crime the three living boys were convicted of a murder and each sentenced to 50 years. I'm usually pretty hard on people that don't know what's theirs and what's not, but 50 years for a 16 year old is pretty tough. *not sure why they keep calling it a murder. Perhaps Dr. Phil is not a lawyer. It would be interesting to see the actual story. Reading the article, I now see why they called it murder, Damn it! http://www.elkharttruth.com/article/...WS05/709129981 Mikek Last edited by kevin : January 19th 14 at 09:17 PM |
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
On Friday, January 17, 2014 4:24:11 PM UTC-6, amdx wrote:
On 1/17/2014 4:15 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 15:47:14 -0600, amdx wrote: Watching Dr. Phil, the story is about four boys, 16 and 17 years old that decided to rob a vacant home. When they got into the home, it turns out the owner was home and came out with his gun. The home owner shot and killed one of the boys. Because of the murder* committed during the commission of a crime the three living boys were convicted of a murder and each sentenced to 50 years. I'm usually pretty hard on people that don't know what's theirs and what's not, but 50 years for a 16 year old is pretty tough. *not sure why they keep calling it a murder. Perhaps Dr. Phil is not a lawyer. It would be interesting to see the actual story. Reading the article, I now see why they called it murder, Damn it! http://www.elkharttruth.com/article/...WS05/709129981 Mikek "Becker said the tragic results of the burglary could have been avoided if the teens had decided against breaking into Scott’s house. " Best line in the whole article. |
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
On 1/17/2014 7:19 PM, BAR wrote:
In article , says... Watching Dr. Phil, the story is about four boys, 16 and 17 years old that decided to rob a vacant home. When they got into the home, it turns out the owner was home and came out with his gun. The home owner shot and killed one of the boys. Because of the murder* committed during the commission of a crime the three living boys were convicted of a murder and each sentenced to 50 years. I'm usually pretty hard on people that don't know what's theirs and what's not, but 50 years for a 16 year old is pretty tough. *not sure why they keep calling it a murder. If one of these young men had killed the homeowner they would all be faced with the same outcome. 50 years ago when I was about that age if I ever got caught with some friends entering a vacant building, I'd probably be hauled down to the police station along with my friends and all of the parents, read the riot act by the cop on duty and then sent home to face the real punishment at the hands of my old man. Today you get shot or sent to prison for 50 years. Is it me or has the concept of parenting and teaching right and wrong gone out the window? It seems like many young people today have many anger issues and absolutely no respect for authority, rules, laws or respect for the property of others. |
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:00:09 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
50 years ago when I was about that age if I ever got caught with some friends entering a vacant building, I'd probably be hauled down to the police station along with my friends and all of the parents, read the riot act by the cop on duty and then sent home to face the real punishment at the hands of my old man. The difference is, 50 years ago the chance of you and your friends packing heat is very low. As we've all seen, the chance of it now, with the numbing of our young by Hollywood's glamorization of violence along with video games, etc., has increased that chance many times. I'm, unfortunately, on the side of the homeowner. It's a consequence of the loss of morals by society in general. |
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
|
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Bad outcome
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 20:31:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 1/17/2014 8:09 PM, wrote: On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:00:09 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote: 50 years ago when I was about that age if I ever got caught with some friends entering a vacant building, I'd probably be hauled down to the police station along with my friends and all of the parents, read the riot act by the cop on duty and then sent home to face the real punishment at the hands of my old man. The difference is, 50 years ago the chance of you and your friends packing heat is very low. As we've all seen, the chance of it now, with the numbing of our young by Hollywood's glamorization of violence along with video games, etc., has increased that chance many times. I'm, unfortunately, on the side of the homeowner. It's a consequence of the loss of morals by society in general. I guess I agree although there is statistical data that would suggest the opposite is true in terms of having access to firearms. I found some data that covers 1973 to 2012 (39 years). The percentage of households with one or more firearms has decreased over that period from 49.1 percent in 1973 to 34.4 percent in 2012. The percentage peaked in 1974 at 54 percent and the lowest was 2010 at 32.3 percent. So, again, I put the blame solely on the lack of parenting. I wonder where they got that data. I've never been asked how many firearms I own on any census or survey I can remember. I'll bet there are a whole hell of a lot of unregistered, illegal handguns floating around our big problem cities that aren't included in those households. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Eclipse Abandonment Outcome | Cruising |