Idiot kid with .22 shot dead by CCW holder

Status
Not open for further replies.
Um, no, it isn't. The likelyhood of an armed citizen defending him/herself in Richmond is not the same as the likelyhood of someone going out and murdering someone and then planting the rifle/taped magazine that they carry around as a "throw gun" just in case they want to murder someone.

You're probably right about that.

But until there's some more investigation, it doesn't rule out some scenario such as the kid's riding around with his unloaded, duct-taped rifle, and cuts off the driver. The driver and the kid exchange words, tensions escalate, kid gets shot.

Driver realizes what he's done and spins a tale.

If the kid was threatening the guy then he got what was coming to him. The article doesn't give that much information.
 
And maybe the guy pulled out his gun first, the kid tries getting away, guy shoots through the glass to nail the little punk who shouldn't have been out at 11:40 anyway, because any kid out at that hour is up to no good. Let's give the driver a medal for blowing away a kid who would have grown up to be a vicious criminal because he already had an arrest record and was probably taking part in a gang initiation the night he died. There. I accounted for the broken windows.

Who knows? Maybe the kid did have an arrest record for a string of violent crimes and he was trying to rob the driver. Maybe he was just a kid who'd had a few brushes with the law who was out using the rifle/mag combo as a toy gun with his buddies.

We don't have a full picture of what went on and, in that light, the rush to deify the driver and make all these assumptions about the kid, who he was, what he was doing out at that hour, and what he would grow up to be is a little troubling.
 
He told police that after dropping off a woman at her home

Im guessing this could be one of many reasons he didnt decide to flee, Perhaps this woman was still on her way into her home and him fleeing would have made her the next victim... Thats my guess, and I would have reacted the exact same way...
 
In any case, the shooter is SOL. Very very few people are given CCWs, especially in cities like Richmond, and carrying a gun in a car in CA is absolutely verboten. Just having the gun means he broke the law and will forfeit his ability to own a gun (and protect himself) ever again.

I'm interested to see if the DA pursues this (likely will), and if so what the jury decides. Could go either way: guilty (sympathy for another 14 year old killed in Richmond), not guilty (empathy for a neighbor who was scared for his life just driving in their neighborhood).
 
A pox on all those bleeding hearts that value the criminal more than his victim. A pox on those folks sitting in judgement, behind their nice, safe computer, and ignoring the fact that the assault victim had to make an instant decision, based on the best info he had at the time. I think he made the right choice.
I have zero feelings for the dead perp's family, and even less for the little miscreant.
 
Sorry guys but with CDMA reasoning I have to ask,

What color is the sky in your world :uhoh: ?

And no CDMA, not every kid out at 11:40 at night is up to no good, but I suspect that nine times out of ten, the ones that have no adult supervision, are carrying a weapon, and have a criminal history are :banghead: :what: !
 
The reporter e-mailed me back. He thanked me for the information and said he got the "40 mm" handgun info from his source. He said he didn't know enough to know it was incorrect.
Rob:

Lots of ignorance in the world, but you just removed a tiny little bit of it. I'd say that's a good day's work.

pax

The problem with most folks ain't their ignorance, it's that they know so much that just ain't so. -- Mark Twain
 
It's the classic "he was a good kid" rhetoric. It sounds like the dead punk's family is in denial about his delinquency. They don't want to face the fact that their lack of parenting contributed to their child's death. They would have a law-abiding citizen charged with murder in a feeble attempt to alieve them of their guilt. If he has any younger brothers, I hope they learn from their older brother's mistakes. The parents don't seem up to the task.
 
In any case, the shooter is SOL. Very very few people are given CCWs, especially in cities like Richmond, and carrying a gun in a car in CA is absolutely verboten. Just having the gun means he broke the law and will forfeit his ability to own a gun (and protect himself) ever again.

I'm interested to see if the DA pursues this (likely will), and if so what the jury decides. Could go either way: guilty (sympathy for another 14 year old killed in Richmond), not guilty (empathy for a neighbor who was scared for his life just driving in their neighborhood).

I think you are confused as to the location, this was Richmond, Virginia not California.
 
I understand how some feel it being somewhat "wrong" to express a less than sorrowfull response at the death of this 14 yr old. It is sad that a 14 yr old got himself into that situation...however, I just think he was in training for bigger and better criminal efforts not very far in the future. I point to the events here in Nashville, Tn. ( 6/18), in which a 15 yr old carjacked a vehicle, drove to the mall to steal a pair of tennis shoes,shoot and kill the security guard, drive across the parking lot to rob a man( shooting his victims 9 yr old son in the face), then head back to his 'hood'...oh yes, as he passed a woman out walking her dog he shot her in the back. This punk has had 20 "encounters" with law enforcement and likes his " street credit" . All that to say this...we're better off without these punks early. Before they start putting notches on their guns and building up their "street credit"
I feel worse for the man that shot this punk...the law offers no protection to us when we are forced to defend ourselves.
Mark.
 
cdma wrote:
Who knows? Maybe the kid did have an arrest record for a string of violent crimes and he was trying to rob the driver. Maybe he was just a kid who'd had a few brushes with the law who was out using the rifle/mag combo as a toy gun with his buddies.

We don't have a full picture of what went on and, in that light, the rush to deify the driver and make all these assumptions about the kid, who he was, what he was doing out at that hour, and what he would grow up to be is a little troubling.

cdma,
There is a new pill out, it's called.....reality. Please, check with your Dr.


ClonaKilty wrote:
In any case, the shooter is SOL. Very very few people are given CCWs, especially in cities like Richmond, and carrying a gun in a car in CA is absolutely verboten. Just having the gun means he broke the law and will forfeit his ability to own a gun (and protect himself) ever again.

I'm interested to see if the DA pursues this (likely will), and if so what the jury decides. Could go either way: guilty (sympathy for another 14 year old killed in Richmond), not guilty (empathy for a neighbor who was scared for his life just driving in their neighborhood).

CK: This happened in Richmond Virginia, not California.

Sam
 
Who knows? Maybe the kid did have an arrest record for a string of violent crimes and he was trying to rob the driver. Maybe he was just a kid who'd had a few brushes with the law who was out using the rifle/mag combo as a toy gun with his buddies.

Perhaps the youth had just found the rifle, and was just bringing it to the closest adult.......

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Who knows? Maybe the kid did have an arrest record for a string of violent crimes and he was trying to rob the driver. Maybe he was just a kid who'd had a few brushes with the law who was out using the rifle/mag combo as a toy gun with his buddies.

Oh, okay, and the kind of moron who goes out with a real gun to play with it as a toy is the kind you feel alright having running around in public?

I'm just as happy that someone that friggin' dumb is not around anymore. How long before someone that goddamned stupid causes someone innocent a measure of undeserved harm?

-Jeffrey
 
"Very very few people are given CCWs, especially in cities like Richmond, "

Wrong. All you have to do is fill out the form and pay the $50.

And carrying a loaded handgun in your car is legal in Virginia as long as it's not concealed. IOW, as long as you leave it on the seat in plain view. The dash is legal, but a real attention getter.

JT
 
OK I second the bile-riffic thing ;)

Lets calm the discussion Por favor :)

about the driving off?

2 kids circling only one gets off his bike.

for all we know the unarmed kid was on his bike in front of the car.

So by "driving off" are we advocating running over the unarmed kid to leave the armed kid time to ditch the gun and put on the tears? then we'd really be in for it.

I'm betting (though we all know we weren't there) that guy looks for exit, blocked by kid # 2 and decides to deal with immediate and more pressing threat.- (since he is probably now at point blank having used the guys decision time to get in close.)- unarmed probably fled when the victim fired...
 
Lavern, or Laverne, is an old french name.

"Rodvon" and "Daymetric" are not. Although the "Daymetric" has a european feel... :D
 
There's a lot left out of this story that might sway things one way or the other, but from what's there it sounds like the guy in the car really had no choice. How does he know the kid's gun is empty? It's still armed robbery in the eyes of the law, and rightly so. A legal decision from N. Carolina states:

"When a person perpetrates a robbery by brandishing an instrument which appears to be a firearm, or other dangerous weapon, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the law will presume the instrument to be what his conduct represents it to be - a firearm or other dangerous weapon."

I don't know about other states, but I believe this is a generally recognized concept.

As several others have pointed out, if he had tried to drive away he would have been putting himself and many others in grave danger. He had every reason to believe that the kid would shoot, not to mention the dangers of taking evasive action with the vehicle on city streets.
 
The reporter e-mailed me back. He thanked me for the information and said he got the "40 mm" handgun info from his source. He said he didn't know enough to know it was incorrect.

Nice work.
 
June 22nd, 2005, 03:21 PM #70 JohnBT wrote:


"ample time and opportunity to simply drive away." Time it yourself. Turn the key until the engine catches, shift into gear, release the parking brake, etc. How many rounds can you fire from a gun in, say, 2 seconds? You have fired a gun before, right? ;)


John...I'll be keeping an eye out for updates.


John I'm not sure what my firing a gun before has to do with your post, but I was reading the original post, which states,

He told police that after dropping off a woman at her home, he saw Brown and another boy circling his car on their bicycles.



I merely point out that I have been reading about carrying a weapon. The first rule seems to be simply to be aware of your surroundings ... who, what, where. Take measures to minimize becoming a victim from the begining, and not to rely upon a weapon to get you off the hook. Simple question ... not looking to blast, or justify the event that took place ... could this shooting have been avoided ?

Please save all the blasts about this kid had it coming. This was a human being. Could it have been handled in a less violent manner ?

John I've seen folks get off six in less than 2 seconds. How long does it take to circle a car on a bike ?

Hook686
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top