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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

On Friday, 17 January 2014 21:31:27 UTC-4, 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 saw the Dr Phil show also.
All three mothers were up on the stage but I don't recall seeing one father..

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.