Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by FCFC, Jul 10, 2008.
definitely not a way to become a board member of the HOA.
gotta feel for his family. they just had a raving lunatic try to break in and kill dad, and now they have to hear about his "alleged" adultery. i hope that if the adultery claims prove unfounded they will clear his name with the same publicity with which they've besmirched it.
so think about this
you know all of you are so sure to say the mekin went crazy and kicked the door in maybe they wanted him to go crazy so they could murder him you dont know what happened all you know is what the news says but i know the fmaily personaly and did you know that jonny was having a sexual relationship with mekins wife he wasnt going there to steal something he was going there to get his wife and yeah maybe he was going to fight him but tell me if it was your wife screwing your so called friend wouldnt you want to fight him as well but see you all have no idea what really happened so if you could keep you mouth shut untill you know the whole story that would be great and his wife who takes there children over to the person that she was cheating on her husband with ....great parenting skills lets teach our kids that its okay to be unfaithful to our loved ones thats what i want my children to do
and as for jonny he could have shot him in the leg or arm or something but he didnt he was tryingto kill him so did you ever think maybe they planned it maybe they lured mekin over there and waited for him at the door and shot him in the face so his wife could get the money and run away with jonny wow theres a thought...thats not common in the usa today is it....
just a little some thing for y'all to think about
and... Whatever happened to punctuation?
peacedude1, grammar helps to convey the point of one's message.
That smacks of being little more than just a cop-out to excuse acting before thinking. If the guy in question knows the woman is in an exclusive relationship with another guy, he is just as much to blame for what ills befall as the woman is.
Entering another's home unbidden, especially after voicing intent to do harm to that other's person is a good way to get yourself shot.
peaceude you might want to try some punctuation beacuse I don't know what you are talking about and neither does anyone else.
While I have no love for adulterers, your spouse isn't your personal property and you certainly cannot break into other's homes and beat up the occupants even if they were. Ask OJ how that worked for him.
BTW telling folks to shut their mouths is likely a violation of the rules here so unless you want banned by the mods play nice.
If I were a friend of a given family, and I were intent on conveying facts about this situation, I would be concerned about authenticating my identity. To join a forum by the name "peacedude1" doesn't cut it for me. As I see it, the 1970s brought us "Soap-on-a-Rope". This thread has brought us "Troll-on-a-Stroll".
Ummmm.. Peacedude, Welcome to the High Road..I think...If you have some relevant information you may want to keep it to yourself. Ya see there is going to be at least one official inquiry into the events described in the OP. If you absolutely must "share" with us all of the "facts" that you have please try writing in a way that most people can understand. Incoherent rantings without punctuation are hard to understand.
In your rambling diatribe you expressed the opinion that a crippling shot in the leg would have been appropriate. Only somebody who has never been in a self defense situation would make such a simple statement. A man calls and texts threats then kicks a door in. He is large drunk and mad. You are smaller and defending your family and self. Your adrenaline is through the roof and you think you will be calm enough and expert enough to hit a small target like a bone in a leg. Not likely, cops trained for situations like that have a 25% hit ratio to shots fired and this guy wasn't a cop. You shoot for center of mass and that is often fatal, always painful. Your premise might work on a TV show because the script said it will be so and so it is. You might want to read for a week or so and find out what kind of experience you are dealing with on this forum before you make your long 'run on sentence' pronouncements of how it should be.
As for playing out in front of a jury, this probably won't get past the inquest. The prosecutor in this case will most likely see it as a no win situation and write it off as either justifiable homicide, or self defense.
As for whether or not the guy was actually having an affair with the dead guy's wife, we only have a line or so in the original story that implies such without any proof, it is pretty much a moot point. No one put a gun to the dead guy's head until he made threats that he was apparently capable of carrying through on, and then invaded the other man's home with obvious intent to do great bodily harm.
Not all body builders are on steroids, but that should be looked at anyway. If they do find evidence of steroid use in the dead man it could certainly have played a factor in this whole thing, and would explain why the guy was completely unreasonable. Of course, you don't have to look much past the alcohol in the guy's system to explain unreasonable behavior either.
As for blaming the woman, if there was an affair to begin with, that's fine. We have a system to handle such things, it's called divorce court. I've had two marritalectomies myself. It's a painful operation, but it beats getting yourself killed or spending the rest of your life in prison for murdering someone. Catching your spouse cheating is no excuse for being physically violent regardless of whether it is the wife or husband who is the one being unfaithful.
If anyone gets any updates on this I'd sure like to see anything the state comes up with.
Considering the handle and post count of 1:
Or he's really serious and just a kid who's played way too many first person shooters.
Personally - I'm gonna go with:
This got pretty Low Road awful quick. Peacedude actually brings up points that are not the most far-fetched stuff I've ever read or heard.
Edited version of his post:
You know, all of you are so sure to say that Mekin went crazy and kicked the door in. Maybe they wanted him to go crazy so they could murder him. You dont know what happened, all you know is what the news stories say. But I know the family personally. Did you know that Johnny was having a sexual relationship with Mekins wife? Mekin wasnt going there to steal something, he was going there to get his wife back. Yeah, maybe he was going to fight him too. But tell me, if it was your wife screwing your so-called friend, wouldn't you want to fight him as well?
But see, you all have no idea what really happened. So, if you could keep you mouth shut until you know the whole story, that would be great. Further more, consider his wife - who takes their children over to the person that she was cheating on her husband with... Wow, great parenting skills. [sarcasm] Let's teach our kids that it's okay to be unfaithful to our loved ones. Thats what i want my children to do. [/sarcasm]
As for Johnny, he could have shot him in the leg or arm or something, but he didnt, he was trying to kill him. So, it's entirely possible Johnny and Mekin's wife planned it. Maybe they purposefully leaked the "news" to lure Mekin over there, waited for him at the door, and shot him in the face so his wife could collect insurance money and run away with Johnny. Wow, there's a thought! Crazy stuff like this is not common in the USA today, is it?
Just a little some thing for y'all to think about.
/end of edit
I read less plausible stuff on these pages daily. My guess is that English isn't Peacedude's primary language, and maybe wasn't Mr. Kankaphone's either.
The notion that B&E and assault is an acceptable response 'to get his wife back' in the face of presumed and/or alleged marital infidelity is Neanderthalic; it places her in the role of stolen property, and it presumes that the appropriate reaction to stolen property is physical confrontation. To further expect that anyone can have the skill and presence of mind to 'shoot to wound' when confronted with a large drunk intruder is ludicrous in the extreme.
I understood Peacedude's point; it was sophmoric and ill formed and deserving of little positive response.
Wow.. having sex with the neighbors wife, killing the husband, breaking down doors, cops called...
What ever happened to decent neighbors?
"and as for jonny he could have shot him in the leg or arm or something but he didnt he was tryingto kill him so did you ever think maybe they planned it maybe they lured mekin over there and waited for him at the door and shot him in the face so his wife could get the money and run away with jonny wow theres a thought...thats not common in the usa today is it." ...
And as for Mekin he could have disarmed "jonny" and did him with his own gun and then killed his family. Go ask any cops you know other than SWAT officers how easy it is to hit a target such as an arm or leg when when a person is rapidly advancing on you. Assuming that you did shoot the perpetrator in said arm or leg they can still continue to fight and the result can be what I said above if the shooter is disarmed. The idea is to stop the attack and handguns are poor man stoppers when compared to rifles and shotguns. But the home defender was armed only with a handgun so a head shot halted the attack.
"What ever happened to decent neighbors"?
+1 and a BIG +1 to the TROLL warning.
This is my first post here. I am not a troll. Mekin was a buddy of mine years ago before he left the state. We were also workout partners. I only want to say that when I knew him he was not a bad guy. He could be a hothead at times. I do not know the specifics of the case. I don't think alcohol or steroids are necessary to make someone lose it over a woman. As a police officer I do find it strange that he was shot in the head when most people will shoot at center mass (or the threat "gun,knife, etc.) when being rushed by someone. Also, shooting someone in the leg is not a reasonable stradegy for a civilian or most LEO's.
He made a mistake and paid the price. Whether he was set up or not he kicked in the door and paid the price.
I don't think peacedude sounds like a troll, just someone upset by some of the responses here and typed as fast as he thought. There are responses here by people with many previous posts that sound like they have no knowledge or experience to draw from.
Bottom line, he's dead now. We don't know the whole story, we can have some measure of respect for the dead.
Well, perhaps if I could have waded through the unpunctuated, ramblings I could have thought about it.
Do you write that way on purpose? Why bother to write at all if nobody can read it or make sense of it?
You handled it very well, ZeSpectre. Kudos to you for staying cool.
No need to open the door and, luckily, no need to shoot the guy.
YEP; Sounds like Roid Rage to me!!!!!
All those muscles must have sucked blood and function from the decedent's brain. Stupid, stupid.
Sorry peacedude, virtually nothing you say makes sense:
Yes, YOU even say that - at least you say that he went over there to start a fight, which makes the door kicking allegation more believable than not.
Yes, maybe. But it's still justifiable homocide based on the facts. The deceased bears the burden of knowing the law of self-defense, and ignores it at his peril.
That's true, sort of. We know that, PLUS what YOU say. And YOU say he went over there to fight him, and YOU do not deny the fact that the door was kicked in.
Yes, we know that - that was part of the original story. As mentioned, that doesn't change the law of self-defense.
Was she actually there? If you want your wife back, you knock on the door and ask, NOT kick the door in.
And with the Castle Doctrine, Make my Day law, and size disparity of the two involved, starting such a fight justifies DEADLY force being used to prevent the fight. A muscled up dude like that can kill someone with one blow.
No, not really. I'd want to divorce HER dumb butt. But if I did, I would obtain his *consent* to fight in mutual combat, not kick down his door.
Yes, we do - you corroborated the story of going over there to start trouble, which reinforces that the shooting was justifiable.
Well, if there's more to the story, I'd like to hear it. Are you disputing the allegation that he kicked in the door of the guy's house?
Happens all day, every day, all over this country. It's not ideal, but it doesn't justify invading someone's home, which in this country, is a man's CASTLE!
Yes, he could have, but that's not the best way to stop the deadly threat of a meathead bent on hurting you in your own home.
Possibly, or possibly, he was just try to STOP the attack. The by-products of wounds which stop an attack also happen to be detrimental to the recipient staying in an above-ground state.
Maybe so; that's certainly possible. If so, he walked right into their OBVIOUS trap by doing something highly illegal and meriting deadly force being used against him. If you don't know that in America - Arkansas no less, where lots of people have guns, and you're going to attack a much smaller weaker person by KICKING IN HIS FRONT DOOR and INVADING HIS HOME, then your death is Darwin at work. In my opinion.
if roid rage exists,would'nt a pro wrestler at some point gone off in the ring after he got hit a little hard?
sounds just fine to me
Insane people these days...
Separate names with a comma.