Man Shoots Teen During Snowball Fight

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just love how everyone is LEAPING onto one side or the other. This is precisely why I thank God daily that we live in a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy (Mobocracy).

All we have is your typical, hyped up, sensationalism from your typical "managed media" source. High on emotions and low on facts.

We might all want to consider that before rushing to any judgements.
 
"That is a possibility, and since the news reports say that many neighbors left candles and cards where the incident took place, and many neighbors took part in a vigil, I'm not so sure that he was a gang member or his friend he was playing with."

From what I saw on the news, I don't think the victim was a gang member either. I don't know about the shooter. The point is, people in the neighborhoods are scared to death to report crimes. There are 12 year olds walking around with guns, in Philly. A few months ago, a nine year old shot another kid.

Last year, Philly reached it's annual homocide quota in April. No wonder people are afraid.
 
Hey joe,
Guess what? innocent until proven, innocent until proven, innocent until proven, innocent until proven, innocent until proven, keep chanting joe until you get it....Not that it matters joe, but it's a Bill of Right's, not a joe is right...........

We are not saying any particular person should get whatever punishment for this, we are saying the person who is guilty of shooting an unarmed kid in the head should get whats comming to him. Innocent untill proven guilty doesn't apply here since we are talking about the person who is guilty, not someone who we think might be guilty.
 
Repeat after me; "the bill of rights applies to government", "the bill of rights applies to government", "the bill of rights applies to government", "the bill of rights applies to government". Now, do you get it? I, as an individual, am allowed, as per the 1st amendment, to make all the judgments I want about people based on whatever I feel like judging them on.

Now stated below is my opinion, if you do not like it, feel free to disagree with it.

THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR WALKING OFF, GETTING A GUN, COMING BACK, AND SHOOTING ANYONE, MUCH LESS AN UNARMED MINOR, EXECUTION STYLE IN THE HEAD.

Have a nice day.
 
there Is No Justification For Walking Off, Getting A Gun, Coming Back, And Shooting Anyone, Much Less An Unarmed Minor, Execution Style In The Head.

There Is No Justification For Rendering A Decision Of Guilty (or innocent) Based On The (lack Of) Facts From A Newspaper Article.
 
There Is No Justification For Rendering A Decision Of Guilty Based On The (lack Of) Facts From A Newspaper Article.

... of a specific person.

However biased this article may be I can glean a few facts.

An unarmed boy was shot, close range, in the face.

Said boy died.

The shooter fled the scene. The police are looking for him.

Barring some evidence that the youth was part of a large group of youths attempting to assault the shooter... I feel quite confident in saying:

"Anyone who shoots and kills an unarmed youth for throwing a snowball should get the death penalty."



Is our language and our logic so flawed that people cannot differentiate between the condemnation of a specific individual and the condemnation of a crime??!?!?

Or do we need to prove to you it's bad to shoot youths?
 
Well, I don't see this thread being open too much longer, but...

There Is No Justification For Rendering A Decision Of Guilty (or innocent) Based On The (lack Of) Facts From A Newspaper Article.

If the cold blooded murderer(excuse me: ALLEGED cold blooded murderer) thought his execution style killing was justified, why did he flee???

There is no reason for him to be hiding from the police if he executed in self defense(and yes, I meant to say execute. :))
 
"Anyone who shoots and kills an unarmed youth for throwing a snowball should get the death penalty."

As a general rule...fine.

the point I've been trying to make is that we don't know the whole story from the news article and there are a LOT of dangerous assumptions flying around.
 
Bazooka Joe71
Now again let me be clear, I'm neither defending nor accusing anyone in this article. But statements like...

If the cold blooded murderer(excuse me: ALLEGED cold blooded murderer) thought his execution style killing was justified, why did he flee???

Show several automatic assumptions, and an enormous gap in the understanding of how people react in a crisis. Flight does not = guilt, although that is a common misconception.

You should really read "In the Gravest Extreme: The Role of the Firearm in Personal Protection" by Massad Ayoob
 
Ze, I know you aren't defending/justifying Shooter McGavin's actions, I would like to know under what circumstances would you need to flee if you did nothing wrong...If I shot someone, the last thing I am going to do is run, I'm calling the police IMMEDIATELY...

But, if I shoot someone it's going to be justified.

You should really read "In the Gravest Extreme: The Role of the Firearm in Personal Protection" by Massad Ayoob

Will do. ;)
 
Zespectre, I understand what you are saying. I think the point being made by myself and other members is that the shooting did take place. If there were no other factors, such as the kid was armed, someone in the kids group was armed, etc, then this is a bad shoot. It is cut and dry. I think most of the posters have consented that there may be some other factors that contributed to this, but they are not mentioned. Wouldn't you agree that if this amounts to a kid being shot for throwing a snowball, the guy who shot the kid should be punished?

The courts will decide if this guy is guilty or innocent if he is caught. As Americans, however, we have the right to discuss the incident on whatever terms we deem appropriate. I'm not suggesting we form a lynch mob and go find this SUSPECT. I'm just saying that if found and convicted he should get the death penalty. If he perpetrated this act in cold blood then he is of the lowest form of human being.
 
:uhoh:Careful Ze, I took this approach and they wanted to lynch me for it. They're as a group, not as concerned with the truth, as they are with a good hanging...:eek:
 
Careful Ze, I took this approach and they wanted to lynch me for it. They're as a group, not as concerned with the truth, as they are with a good hanging...

I don't think you get it, we (or I at least) are not condeming a specific person but hte action and someone had to commit that action so whoever it was (someone is guilty) deserves the death penalty. Once again, innocent untill proven guilty doesn't apply here since we are not talking about someone on trial for it, we are talking about the person who did do it (which as far as I know, we don't know who it is yet.)
 
Careful Ze, I took this approach and they wanted to lynch me for it. They're as a group, not as concerned with the truth, as they are with a good hanging...

To which I reply:


Is our language and our logic so flawed that people cannot differentiate between the condemnation of a specific individual and the condemnation of a crime??!?!?
 
No, you don't get it! You weren't there, you don't have all of, or perhaps even any of the facts! I'm not so hot-headed as I was in my youth, I've learned to temper my emotions, and assimilate data before committing to any course of action, or rendering judgement on any other man!
 
This certainly sounds like murder over a snowball fight.

However, there are several problems with thing people have said:
1. At 16 he is (or was) a man and not a kid and should act like one.
2. There could be a situation where one could feel threatened by a group of thugs (whether age 16 or 60). You go to confront the guy about hitting you with a snowball, probably an accident right? Next thing you know he and his 4,5 or more friends all gather to together and threaten you. You could easily feel that you are in danger and need to take action. Doesn't sound like that is what happened here, but some of you were making it sound like there is no way anyone could feel threatened by a 16 year old.
 
What ever happened to Rules of Engagement? Levels of Force? If the kid throws a snowball and hits you, respond in kind! Throw one back! Snowball fight ensues, but then the kid pulls out an AKM, well, uhh, darn. What would a kid be doin with that?

(not to make light of this tragic occurance, however, some folks really get fired up, its nice to put something weird in the middle of the discourse)
 
There could be a situation where one could feel threatened by a group of thugs (whether age 16 or 60). You go to confront the guy about hitting you with a snowball, probably an accident right? Next thing you know he and his 4,5 or more friends all gather to together and threaten you. You could easily feel that you are in danger and need to take action. Doesn't sound like that is what happened here, but some of you were making it sound like there is no way anyone could feel threatened by a 16 year old.

No offense, but read the story...He LEFT and came BACK with a gun.

If I felt threatened, I'd leave and NOT come back...Maybe even, I don't know...Call the police!
 
No, you don't get it! You weren't there, you don't have all of, or perhaps even any of the facts! I'm not so hot-headed as I was in my youth, I've learned to temper my emotions, and assimilate data before committing to any course of action, or rendering judgement on any other man!

Emphasis added.

To which I reply:

Is our language and our logic so flawed that people cannot differentiate between the condemnation of a specific individual and the condemnation of a crime??!?!?

emphasis added
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top