Fosbery
Member
Tony Martin shot a man who was running away. That's not self defence.
Shotgun blasts kill two intruders
- Thread starter Desertdog
- Start date
- Status
I have to go along with that. Shooting a lawn furnature thief as he was running away? As much as the emotional side of some people would like to justify shooting every grafiti artist/tagger, shop lifter, petty thief, and/or the jerk who cut you off in traffic this morning, the intelligent, human part of people recognizes that this is just wrong on so many levels. If it becomes acceptable to met out punishment in that extreeme for behaviour that is more aggrivating and inconvenient than an actual threat to you and your's, where do you end up drawing the line?
+1 on the attitude of 'good guys won this round'
+1 on the attitude of 2 out of 3 ain't bad
+1 on the attitude of 'bad headlines'
the headline, in addition to making it sound like the shotgun fired itself, made it sound like a single trigger pull dropped both men. Might a well say 'handgun bullet kills two people!' when two different people both die as a result of each getting shot at and hit once.
I recall a MN article about 'man jumps from window to avoid gun' when he was really avoiding an armed intruder. The first headline made it sound like he opened up his sock drawer, saw a gun someone was hiding in there, and got so scared he bailed out of the window.
now, the followup article
"We've come to the conclusion that they must of have had an altercation with one or two of those guys at some point and that caused them to do what they did," Marshall E. Anderson said. "According to the Lyman detective, they didn't recover any drugs, they didn't see anything in the house that was worth stealing."
Gee another parent of the thugs being postitive that their little criminals are angels. B.S.
"They had everything they needed, they're not wanting for anything. I work, I provide for my family, my wife works. So we ruled out those two things, so it had to be some kind of altercation."
What they needed was respect for others and a dose of common sense. Lots of times theft has nothing to do with need, it is all about 'want', or sometimes vengance, throw in there killing for being 'dissed' being common in inner city culture, fights over the same girl resulting in death since before cave men invented fire, etc etc, having everything you need means absolutely nothign regarding crime.
"Good people sometimes make bad decisions, and my boys are good people," the father said. "If they were wrong they paid the ultimate price, but if they went up there, were invited in, it's a whole other scenario you can come up with."
Again, I really doubt if these are, errr, WERE, 'good people'. Good people, even when invited in don't enter armed and start pistolwhipping people.
Oglesby, the brothers' friend who police say carried a .357 caliber handgun to the home Wednesday morning, had known the brothers since they were children.
Since he's facing charges in connection with Wednesday's incident and awaiting a trial in Greenville County in connection with criminal domestic violence and second-degree burglary charges, Oglesby remained hesitant to divulge details about Wednesday's invasion.
humm, big indicator to me these guys are not angels. If you lie down with dogs, expect to wake up with feas. Sounds like the others just hadn't gotten caught by the police yet, that's why no criminal record
He says his friends "got wrapped up in the wrong thing" and that nothing was taken in the incident because "it didn't get that far."
Humm, 'got wrapped up in the wrong thing' I wonder what that will turn out to be? drugs? vengance?
"They didn't fire no shots first," he said. "If they did, I wasn't aware of it." So the criminals think an armed home owner should wait and let the badguys fire first?
"I think its way blown out of proportion," he said. "It's big because two people died. But my friends died, my family No criminal, it is not being blown out of proportion, being big because 2 people died is plenty enough reason for local and state media to put a LOT of attention on the story. It sure as hell deserves more attenion than John Mark Carr deserved.
+1 on the attitude of 2 out of 3 ain't bad
+1 on the attitude of 'bad headlines'
the headline, in addition to making it sound like the shotgun fired itself, made it sound like a single trigger pull dropped both men. Might a well say 'handgun bullet kills two people!' when two different people both die as a result of each getting shot at and hit once.
I recall a MN article about 'man jumps from window to avoid gun' when he was really avoiding an armed intruder. The first headline made it sound like he opened up his sock drawer, saw a gun someone was hiding in there, and got so scared he bailed out of the window.
now, the followup article
"We've come to the conclusion that they must of have had an altercation with one or two of those guys at some point and that caused them to do what they did," Marshall E. Anderson said. "According to the Lyman detective, they didn't recover any drugs, they didn't see anything in the house that was worth stealing."
Gee another parent of the thugs being postitive that their little criminals are angels. B.S.
"They had everything they needed, they're not wanting for anything. I work, I provide for my family, my wife works. So we ruled out those two things, so it had to be some kind of altercation."
What they needed was respect for others and a dose of common sense. Lots of times theft has nothing to do with need, it is all about 'want', or sometimes vengance, throw in there killing for being 'dissed' being common in inner city culture, fights over the same girl resulting in death since before cave men invented fire, etc etc, having everything you need means absolutely nothign regarding crime.
"Good people sometimes make bad decisions, and my boys are good people," the father said. "If they were wrong they paid the ultimate price, but if they went up there, were invited in, it's a whole other scenario you can come up with."
Again, I really doubt if these are, errr, WERE, 'good people'. Good people, even when invited in don't enter armed and start pistolwhipping people.
Oglesby, the brothers' friend who police say carried a .357 caliber handgun to the home Wednesday morning, had known the brothers since they were children.
Since he's facing charges in connection with Wednesday's incident and awaiting a trial in Greenville County in connection with criminal domestic violence and second-degree burglary charges, Oglesby remained hesitant to divulge details about Wednesday's invasion.
humm, big indicator to me these guys are not angels. If you lie down with dogs, expect to wake up with feas. Sounds like the others just hadn't gotten caught by the police yet, that's why no criminal record
He says his friends "got wrapped up in the wrong thing" and that nothing was taken in the incident because "it didn't get that far."
Humm, 'got wrapped up in the wrong thing' I wonder what that will turn out to be? drugs? vengance?
"They didn't fire no shots first," he said. "If they did, I wasn't aware of it." So the criminals think an armed home owner should wait and let the badguys fire first?
"I think its way blown out of proportion," he said. "It's big because two people died. But my friends died, my family No criminal, it is not being blown out of proportion, being big because 2 people died is plenty enough reason for local and state media to put a LOT of attention on the story. It sure as hell deserves more attenion than John Mark Carr deserved.
As for other titles to the sound of "Brave, heroic, extremely cool (?) homeowner defends himself with lethal force" gives the impression that you should be brave, heroic, and extremely cool. These titles condone this action.
In conclusion, the title is catchy, filled with facts, and on top of that does not condone this action.
While I agree that 'homeowner defends himself and another from armed intruders' does definately shed a different light, I don't think it makes it sound 'extremely cool'. Brave and heroic, possibly, but that is more based on what the reader is 'bringing to the table' 'Boy saved after falling through thin ice' some people are going to read that as brave and heroic, others as more evidence on how terribly risky it is to be on frozen lakes, others are going to paint a picture in their mind as 'parents not watching kids again'
I don't think such a headline is condoning the action, I think it is reporting it accurately. However it is stated, people can always read into it as the paper is condoning something. (Mass Murderer Sentenced to Death...oh, newspaper is condoning capitol punishment!!!)
But further, I think if a paper is going to condone anything being brave and heroic and responsible for yourself is something worth condoning. So if you are faced with at least in some people's minds condoning something with your headlines, choose which side of the line you fall on. This is the same thing they do with offending people. A good newspaperman knows that no matter what he writes, he has the potential to offend someone. Heck, there is always some group at the fore-front of the push to change a PC term yet again (handicapped to disabled, to differently abled, to whatever) so you have to decide where you are going to fall on that one too, same thing should be applied to worrying about people thinking your headline is going to condone soemthing.
In conclusion, the title is catchy, filled with facts, and on top of that does not condone this action.
While I agree that 'homeowner defends himself and another from armed intruders' does definately shed a different light, I don't think it makes it sound 'extremely cool'. Brave and heroic, possibly, but that is more based on what the reader is 'bringing to the table' 'Boy saved after falling through thin ice' some people are going to read that as brave and heroic, others as more evidence on how terribly risky it is to be on frozen lakes, others are going to paint a picture in their mind as 'parents not watching kids again'
I don't think such a headline is condoning the action, I think it is reporting it accurately. However it is stated, people can always read into it as the paper is condoning something. (Mass Murderer Sentenced to Death...oh, newspaper is condoning capitol punishment!!!)
But further, I think if a paper is going to condone anything being brave and heroic and responsible for yourself is something worth condoning. So if you are faced with at least in some people's minds condoning something with your headlines, choose which side of the line you fall on. This is the same thing they do with offending people. A good newspaperman knows that no matter what he writes, he has the potential to offend someone. Heck, there is always some group at the fore-front of the push to change a PC term yet again (handicapped to disabled, to differently abled, to whatever) so you have to decide where you are going to fall on that one too, same thing should be applied to worrying about people thinking your headline is going to condone soemthing.
Humility
"Travis Anderson was a talented receiver on the Byrnes High School football team and was named to the North-South all-star game following his senior season in 2001. He signed with Gardner-Webb University."
A lot of these high-school sports stars are pretty arrogant people. I have known a few exceptions, but a lot of them think they are gods and can do anything they like. Most of them have been showered with worship and adoration since the age of ten or so. This kind of thing distorts the personality.
Teach your children humility!
"Travis Anderson was a talented receiver on the Byrnes High School football team and was named to the North-South all-star game following his senior season in 2001. He signed with Gardner-Webb University."
A lot of these high-school sports stars are pretty arrogant people. I have known a few exceptions, but a lot of them think they are gods and can do anything they like. Most of them have been showered with worship and adoration since the age of ten or so. This kind of thing distorts the personality.
Teach your children humility!
silverlance
Member
a bit on HS atheletes
they are people too, and very often while they excel on the field they are terrible in school.
once football / basketball season ends, what to do with one's self?
which is why it is important for educators to not ever let athletes slide so they can go to practice. it's for their own good.
they are people too, and very often while they excel on the field they are terrible in school.
once football / basketball season ends, what to do with one's self?
which is why it is important for educators to not ever let athletes slide so they can go to practice. it's for their own good.
- Status
Similar threads
