Eleven-year-old Shoots Home Invader

[blackjack50]

I didn't absolve the criminal in any way.

I simply discard the idea that it is appropriate to shoot a fleeing petty criminal.

He stopped being a petty criminal when he was armed. Rethink your definition of petty criminal please.

 

[Absentglare]

Like I said, his training obviously was not finished and I doubt he was even thinking that. Just how many childhood, life and death altercations, have you been in?

You said.... "Your unwavering defense of this obvious retaliation is bizarre."
Well, I don't think I'm defending the kid, as much as I'm stating the facts as we know them.

I've been very clear on what the kid should not have done. Had this been an adult, that didn't know the law, and so many don't, I'd probably say about the same thing.
Due to his young age, I'd say he held up pretty well. Could I surmise, with your vast experience in these matters, that you may have done better as an 11 year old, given the same circumstances? I seriously doubt it.

Did you even know how to shoot a gun when you were 11?

You're right that it wasn't completely unwavering- just mostly unwavering.

 

[Absentglare]

Do not put words in my mouth and it seems you have an incredible delusion despite being told it is not valid, that a child who has been threatened with his life can only be expected to respond with the facilities they have. To call this irresponsible shows a callus, deliberate agenda to uses this to suit your own foul anti-social reaction to your deepest fears.

Get a grip on yourself and read the crap you write in your desperate attempts to blame others. Your suggestions can only harm others by making them helpless victims. That you exhibit fear is not in doubt but that does not give you the right to spread this fear like a disease.

What bothers me is the assholes of the world who are incapable of examining evidence contrary to their idiotic beliefs and coming to the conclusion they are wrong.

I care about the people others deliberately intend to harm in any way they can.

You do not care about your neighbours and if any were murdered you would be using it to forward your ideological agenda.

Nor do you care if any woman is raped and if at gun point or the woman defended herself you would be claiming attempted rape does not justify killing the would be rapist. You want and support defenceless victims for rapists.

Do not ever again make false claims about what I have said,

Your criticism is not criticism is the spewing of deliberate falsehood to further your foul agenda.

Your deliberate lie of

I didn't put words in your rambling mouth. Apparently, you forgot that you said this :

Sure you do.... and 11 year old is not capable of judging right from wrong at any depth or understanding the consequences that only develops much later in life.

I was agreeing with what you already wrote.

The rest of your post is pure insanity. Get a grip. This isn't about me no matter how badly your pathetic debate position compels you to lash out at me personally.

The dishonesty of trying to blame me for rape because i criticized this dangerous little kid is mind boggling.

 

[Absentglare]

Comprehension is not one of your attributes. You were told the mental capabilities of an 11 year old. Your absolute idiotic insistence this is not true is a deliberate lie and avoidance of facts that destroy your petty agenda. Either refute the capabilities of and 11 year old or desist with these deliberate lies.

You cannot fault me for your brazen incomprehensibility. I am not lying. Cease the dishonesty, it is petty, worthless, and embarrassing.

What right does the criminal have to escape justice?

A chubby 11 year old kid is not dispensing justice. Tell me, if an adult shoots another adult who is running away, do you seriously they still have a strong case for self defense ?

He stopped being a petty criminal when he was armed. Rethink your definition of petty criminal please.

Only one of the two pointed a gun at the other. We only know this kids side of the story, for all we know, the criminal didn't even have a gun.

 

[MickeyW]

You're right that it wasn't completely unwavering- just mostly unwavering.

Dodging my questions, huh?

A chubby 11 year old kid is not dispensing justice. Tell me, if an adult shoots another adult who is running away, do you seriously they still have a strong case for self defense ?



Only one of the two pointed a gun at the other. We only know this kids side of the story, for all we know, the criminal didn't even have a gun.

It all depends on the DA, the circumstances and what was in the mind of the homeowner...be it adult or child.

We only know this kid's side of the story.....yes....and all the rest of your drivel, is supposition.

Seems to me that you are jealous of this kid, because he may have done something that you could never bring yourself to do.

When are you going to answer my two questions?

 

[Absentglare]

Dodging my questions, huh?



It all depends on the DA, the circumstances and what was in the mind of the homeowner...be it adult or child.

We only know this kid's side of the story.....yes....and all the rest of your drivel, is supposition.

Seems to me that you are jealous of this kid, because he may have done something that you could never bring yourself to do.

When are you going to answer my two questions?

I wasn't dodging your questions, i simply exposed them for the personal attacks they were (and there were 3 of them).

I find it amusing that you accuse me of supposition and then, in the very next sentence, you make a personal supposition about me.

 

[Crimefree]

You cannot fault me for your brazen incomprehensibility. I am not lying. Cease the dishonesty, it is petty, worthless, and embarrassing.

Whatever you found incomprehensible do post and explain what is not understood. I'm reasonable but totally unforgiving of idiots who make unevidenced statements.

Your personal attack instead of producing evidence is noted as the response of the guilty as charged. You are lying and you know as well as I do that you are aware of the lack of understanding by a child of what you are claiming possible in order to carry on this disgusting display of hatred and fear, A person cannot be irresponsible if they do not comprehend the consequences. Is that beyond your grasp of the English language?

A chubby 11 year old kid is not dispensing justice. Tell me, if an adult shoots another adult who is running away, do you seriously they still have a strong case for self defense ?

Once again you continue disparaging with your incessant diatribe about somebody you admit does not have the mental growth and capacity to make the decisions your falsely accuse him of. The person in question is a child. It is beyond cretinous to compare that to an adult. Yet here you are.

Only one of the two pointed a gun at the other. We only know this kids side of the story, for all we know, the criminal didn't even have a gun.

The idiotic concept somebody who threatens you life with a pencil must be met with a pencil is utterly ridiculous and dangerously stupid. It makes no difference if the perp was armed with a bazooka or not. Why on earth do you think it matters.

I fail to see the relevance of who pointed a gun. Best you go into great detail of why it is important to you.

 

[Absentglare]

Whatever you found incomprehensible do post and explain what is not understood. I'm reasonable but totally unforgiving of idiots who make unevidenced statements.

Your personal attack instead of producing evidence is noted as the response of the guilty as charged. You are lying and you know as well as I do that you are aware of the lack of understanding by a child of what you are claiming possible in order to carry on this disgusting display of hatred and fear, A person cannot be irresponsible if they do not comprehend the consequences. Is that beyond your grasp of the English language?



Once again you continue disparaging with your incessant diatribe about somebody you admit does not have the mental growth and capacity to make the decisions your falsely accuse him of. The person in question is a child. It is beyond cretinous to compare that to an adult. Yet here you are.



The idiotic concept somebody who threatens you life with a pencil must be met with a pencil is utterly ridiculous and dangerously stupid. It makes no difference if the perp was armed with a bazooka or not. Why on earth do you think it matters.

I fail to see the relevance of who pointed a gun. Best you go into great detail of why it is important to you.

"You are lying and you know as well as I do that you are aware of the lack of understanding by a child of what you are claiming possible in order to carry on this disgusting display of hatred and fear, A person cannot be irresponsible if they do not comprehend the consequences. Is that beyond your grasp of the English language?"

That is one incoherent sentence.

"Once again you continue disparaging with your incessant diatribe about somebody you admit does not have the mental growth and capacity to make the decisions your falsely accuse him of. The person in question is a child."

There's another incoherent sentence.

Your argument seems to be that 11 year olds are incapable of handling the responsibility of gun possession.

 

[Crimefree]

I didn't put words in your rambling mouth. Apparently, you forgot that you said this :

I bolded exactly what you said as a quote. Are you not capable of understanding that? Let me quote so you can see the lie.

You're right, this eleven year old boy was irresponsible with respect to the use of deadly force.

Which is nowhere close to what I claimed. You feigned agreement and dishonestly then redefined what I had said.

I repeat You know how the child reacted to some hulking brute who had invaded his home with the intent of violence and made threats to kill you. Sure you do.... and 11 year old is not capable of judging right from wrong at any depth or understanding the consequences that only develops much later in life.


Where do you see your dishonesty of claiming I said "irresponsible" Your claim was a lie and putting words in my mouth. Got it now?

I was agreeing with what you already wrote.

That is a lie. A person who does not comprehend the action or consequences cannot be claimed to know better or be acting irresponsibly.

The rest of your post is pure insanity. Get a grip. This isn't about me no matter how badly your pathetic debate position compels you to lash out at me personally.

My pathetic debate position has just proven your claims to be lies, and the wild demented ramblings filled with derogatory euphemisms for a child who was brave enough and probably frightened half to death by the worst nightmare a child could possibly dream. You come along and scream obscenities about his "irresponsibility"

The dishonesty of trying to blame me for rape because i criticized this dangerous little kid is mind boggling.

Your criticism was no more than the spewing of a demented diatribe of hate and fear. If the hat fits wear it.

Another of those moral busy bodies deciding that if attacked with a pencil only a pencil or less may be used to retaliate. Go explain that to a woman about to be raped or a child threatened by death.

I rest my case we are done with this and the egg is all over you.

 

[MickeyW]

I wasn't dodging your questions, i simply exposed them for the personal attacks they were (and there were 3 of them).

I find it amusing that you accuse me of supposition and then, in the very next sentence, you make a personal supposition about me.

Only to coax you into an answer....which you refuse to give.

Again................
1. Could I surmise, with your vast experience in these matters, that you may have done better as an 11 year old, given the same circumstances?
2. Did you even know how to shoot a gun when you were 11?

Those questions are just that...no attack whatsoever.

 

[Masterhawk]

he probably doesn't know how to react to a kill since he's 11 but he probably shouldn't be so boasty about it

 

[Absentglare]

I bolded exactly what you said as a quote. Are you not capable of understanding that? Let me quote so you can see the lie.



Which is nowhere close to what I claimed. You feigned agreement and dishonestly then redefined what I had said.

I repeat You know how the child reacted to some hulking brute who had invaded his home with the intent of violence and made threats to kill you. Sure you do.... and 11 year old is not capable of judging right from wrong at any depth or understanding the consequences that only develops much later in life.


Where do you see your dishonesty of claiming I said "irresponsible" Your claim was a lie and putting words in my mouth. Got it now?



That is a lie. A person who does not comprehend the action or consequences cannot be claimed to know better or be acting irresponsibly.



My pathetic debate position has just proven your claims to be lies, and the wild demented ramblings filled with derogatory euphemisms for a child who was brave enough and probably frightened half to death by the worst nightmare a child could possibly dream. You come along and scream obscenities about his "irresponsibility"



Your criticism was no more than the spewing of a demented diatribe of hate and fear. If the hat fits wear it.

Another of those moral busy bodies deciding that if attacked with a pencil only a pencil or less may be used to retaliate. Go explain that to a woman about to be raped or a child threatened by death.

I rest my case we are done with this and the egg is all over you.

What lie ?

Uhh... You're saying that someone who is ignorant cannot be irresponsible ...? And you don't see a problem with that argument ...?

 

[Multicam]

Kudos to this kid. I wish more American youth had his courage.

 

[blackjack50]

What lie ?

Uhh... You're saying that someone who is ignorant cannot be irresponsible ...? And you don't see a problem with that argument ...?

Tapatalk sucks. Just sayin.

Lol

 

[Crimefree]

"You are lying and you know as well as I do that you are aware of the lack of understanding by a child of what you are claiming possible in order to carry on this disgusting display of hatred and fear, A person cannot be irresponsible if they do not comprehend the consequences. Is that beyond your grasp of the English language?"

That is one incoherent sentence.

"Once again you continue disparaging with your incessant diatribe about somebody you admit does not have the mental growth and capacity to make the decisions your falsely accuse him of. The person in question is a child."

There's another incoherent sentence.

Your argument seems to be that 11 year olds are incapable of handling the responsibility of gun possession.

Once again you create a strawman to bolster your idiotic argument. You just love putting your own words in others mouth in order to shoot them down.

My argument is precisely that a child who does not understand the CONSEQUENCE of HIS ACTIONS cannot be held RESPONSIBLE. Got it now It's a legal principle you are only responsible if you fully know what you are doing. Did I not say that right at the beginning?

Apparently getting that through to you is impossible when it should have been obvious

I gave you the reasoning of that right at the beginning with my claim.

You are the one going in mindless circles screeching obscenities about the child trying to deny my claim offering no proof at any stage.

It is your silly excuse you used to make such abominable derogatory remarks about a child and not an adult.

See Children and Young Persons Act 1933 if that will help you understand what diminished capacity is and expose all your lies along the way.

It is entirely possible to TRAIN an 11 year old to be responsible with handling a gun. It is idiotic to think 11 years olds are capable of understanding the consequences of shooting somebody. Even the concept of death is not understood. So where did this 11 year old's training take place and does he understand the consequences? You obviously know.

"Once again you continue disparaging with your incessant diatribe about somebody you admit does not have the mental growth and capacity to make the decisions you falsely accuse him of. The person in question is a child."

I repeat: You know how the child reacted to some hulking brute who had invaded his home with the intent of violence and made threats to kill him. Sure you do.... and 11 year old is not capable of judging right from wrong at any depth or understanding the consequences that only develops much later in life.

Clear to you now? Imagine how traumatised an adult would be and consider that was a child.

 

[MickeyW]

Kudos to this kid. I wish more American youth had his courage.

I wish more American adults, had his courage!

 

[Riveroaks]

so it's illegal for anyone under 18 to babysit in some/many states?

Most states draw the line at 18 correct.

 

[Lursa]

Most states draw the line at 18 correct.

Please provide sources for that. I know lots of babysitters under 18, in several states.

 

[Riveroaks]

Please provide sources for that. I know lots of babysitters under 18, in several states.

If you want to research your own state then google the state statues. Google is your friend.

California "Child Endangerment" Laws under Penal Code 273a pc

 

[Lursa]

If you want to research your own state then google the state statues. Google is your friend.

California "Child Endangerment" Laws under Penal Code 273a pc

I did not watch the video but nowhere did I read that the babysitter has to be at least 18 yrs old.