Imagine u are the driver? What should the law charge this driver with?

Posted: 10:41 am EDT May 8, 2011Updated: 10:55 am EDT May 8, 2011

A bishop shot him?

Anywho, considering that the kid could have killed someone by throwing a rock through a car windshield, I don't think anything should happen to the shooter.

i bet that little twerp wont throw another rock again...

i have a pretty good feeling this kid was a lil asshole

Considering how bad the injuries are to the teen, some jail time for the bishop and restitution payments to the teen for medical bills and any long-term care and trauma for the shooting. Teen should do some community service as well, and some form of restitution to the bishop for any damage to his car.

[Edited 5/8/11 13:31pm]

2elijah said:

Considering how bad the injuries are to the teen, some jail time for the bishop and restitution payments to the teen for medical bills and any long-term care and trauma for the shooting.

oh that little asshole deserved a little bit of it

not get shot but to get his little tail beat

2elijah said:

Considering how bad the injuries are to the teen, some jail time for the bishop and restitution payments to the teen for medical bills and any long-term care and trauma for the shooting. Teen should do some community service as well, and some form of restitution to the bishop for any damage to his car.

[Edited 5/8/11 13:31pm]

This is just about my thinking, too, although I'd charge the Bishop with a crime regardless of the extent of injury. Doesn't sound like he was acting out of defense of self or property, but rather vengeance. And you just can't go shooting at people simply to get even.

No charges for the shooter.

He was acting in defense of lives and property.

2elijah said:

Considering how bad the injuries are to the teen, some jail time for the bishop and restitution payments to the teen for medical bills and any long-term care and trauma for the shooting. Teen should do some community service as well, and some form of restitution to the bishop for any damage to his car.

[Edited 5/8/11 13:31pm]

No way . . .

The teen should not have been throwing rocks.

Being shot at and/or shot was a foreseeable consequence of throwing rocks at cars.

Graycap23 said:

Imagine u are the driver? What should the law charge this driver with?

Teen Shot For Throwing Rocks At Car

Posted: 10:41 am EDT May 8, 2011Updated: 10:55 am EDT May 8, 2011

ATLANTA -- A 13-year-old was shot after police said the teen was throwing rocks at cars.

Atlanta police said the teen broke the rear windshield of a car driven by Bishop Alex Williams Sr.

Investigators said that’s when Williams pulled a gun on the teen and allegedly shot the juvenile in the hip.

William was arrested and the teen was taken to an area hospital.

http://www.wsbtv.com/news...etail.html

I don't understand this story at all. It makes no sense. How does this bad reporting pass through an editor?

Its a good thing that the driver didn't swerve and lose control of the vehicle or crash into another car... especially if it was the front windshield that could have been smashed.

The bishop should have let the police handle that one and the kid would have went to jail. Instead the Bishop will get jail time... he may have saved a life on the road... thank goodness the kid didn't hit a car that had young children in it.

Kid gets no mercy from me.

Lammastide said:

2elijah said:

Considering how bad the injuries are to the teen, some jail time for the bishop and restitution payments to the teen for medical bills and any long-term care and trauma for the shooting. Teen should do some community service as well, and some form of restitution to the bishop for any damage to his car.

[Edited 5/8/11 13:31pm]

This is just about my thinking, too, although I'd charge the Bishop with a crime regardless of the extent of injury. Doesn't sound like he was acting out of defense of self or property, but rather vengeance. And you just can't go shooting at people simply to get even.

That may be for a jury to decide.

But he was acting in the defense of others' lives and property.

The teen wasn't singling him out, just cars.

The next driver could have been killed or caused an accident that injured and/or killed them and others.

It sounds as if the bishop's actions were spontaneous. It doesn't sound like he turned around and went looking for the teen to shoot.

If he looked back through his windshield and shot the teen, then it's likely going to be seen as defense of life an property.

We don't want to send a message that people should hesitate to save life and property.

paintedlady said:

Its a good thing that the driver didn't swerve and lose control of the vehicle or crash into another car... especially if it was the front windshield that could have been smashed.

The bishop should have let the police handle that one and the kid would have went to jail. Instead the Bishop will get jail time... he may have saved a life on the road... thank goodness the kid didn't hit a car that had young children in it.

Kid gets no mercy from me.

I don't think the bishop will get jail time. Even if charged, he'll get probation.

I'd be surprised if he were even charged.

(The article only says Williams was arrested, not that he was charged.)

[Edited 5/8/11 15:39pm]

Okay, if the teen broke the guy's rear windshield, doesn't that mean that the driver (the bishop) would have to 1) stop the car, find his gun and pull it out; and 2) circle back and shoot the perpetrator?

This story reminds me of the kids that stand on overpasses/bridges and drop rocks on passing cars for fun.

Efan said:

Okay, if the teen broke the guy's rear windshield, doesn't that mean that the driver (the bishop) would have to 1) stop the car, find his gun and pull it out; and 2) circle back and shoot the perpetrator?

No. All he had to do was stop the car. We don't know how far he had to reach for the gun.

kill everyone involved.

SUPRMAN said:

Efan said:

Okay, if the teen broke the guy's rear windshield, doesn't that mean that the driver (the bishop) would have to 1) stop the car, find his gun and pull it out; and 2) circle back and shoot the perpetrator?

No. All he had to do was stop the car. We don't know how far he had to reach for the gun.

He shot backward? He saw the rock thrower and was able to aim behind himself and hit the thrower?

definitely have his bishop status revoked.

Jesus said turn the other cheek. Why is a bishop driving around with a loaded gun?

Efan said:

SUPRMAN said:

No. All he had to do was stop the car. We don't know how far he had to reach for the gun.

He shot backward? He saw the rock thrower and was able to aim behind himself and hit the thrower?

Why couldn't he simply turn around in the driver's seat and shoot either out the side window or shoot through the broken rear windshield?

ZombieKitten said:

definitely have his bishop status revoked.

Jesus said turn the other cheek. Why is a bishop driving around with a loaded gun?

Maybe it's legal in Georgia.

Also, it's Georgia, so if he drives at night, he may feel safer with it.

SUPRMAN said:

Efan said:

He shot backward? He saw the rock thrower and was able to aim behind himself and hit the thrower?

Why couldn't he simply turn around in the driver's seat and shoot either out the side window or shoot through the broken rear windshield?

If that is true, then I sincerely hope he is punished. The kid deserves to be punished, too--I have zero tolerance for hooligans like him.

But the man who thought it was okay to fire a bullet in the direction opposite where he was facing deserves to be put in jail.

SUPRMAN said:

ZombieKitten said:

definitely have his bishop status revoked.

Jesus said turn the other cheek. Why is a bishop driving around with a loaded gun?

Maybe it's legal in Georgia.

Also, it's Georgia, so if he drives at night, he may feel safer with it.

I'm sure it is legal

ZombieKitten said:

SUPRMAN said:

Maybe it's legal in Georgia.

Also, it's Georgia, so if he drives at night, he may feel safer with it.

I'm sure it is legal

It's America, so it's probably illegal to drive without a gun there.

Efan said:

ZombieKitten said:

I'm sure it is legal

It's America, so it's probably illegal to drive without a gun there.

I think instead of a gun to protect yourself against being shot, if guns ownership is so widespread, USA should look into making standard bullet proof cars and houses and clothing (I'm only half joking! there's money to be made).

A loaded gun isn't going to prevent you from being shot unaware, or from rocks thrown you didn't see coming. I'm sure in America the average person doesn't feel safe if everyone ELSE but them is carrying a gun. I know it's accepted self-defence, but shooting someone AFTER the fact isn't self-defence IMO, it's retaliation. YES I agree it stopped the perp from doing it again, but the bishop MAIMED A CHILD. I don't care what a little shit that child was! That kid hasn't had a chance to develop common sense yet (teens don't have any - apprently that's a proven fact ) The bishop didn't know it was a child he shot I suppose, so shooting blindly is also not cool with me. What if the kid on the bridge was an armed gunman who missed the bishop the first time, but now he has stopped to retaliate, provides the armed gunman with the opportunity to take him out properly. Wouldn't driving away and calling the police been a safer option?

It's easier to NOT weigh up your options if you have a loaded gun at hand I suppose.

wait... you're tellin' me this DIDN'T happen in Florida!!???

SUPRMAN said:

No charges for the shooter.

He was acting in defense of lives and property.

So you are saying it's okay to shoot somebody just for trashing your car?

Now defense of life is one thing, but I can just imagine it:

Some asshole kids walk past a car and smash its rearview window. Just for 'fun'.

Owner comes out out all mad, shoots the kids but gets to walk free.

Cuz he is allowed to do that as an act of defense of property.

What a fucking joke.

ZombieKitten said:

definitely have his bishop status revoked.

Jesus said turn the other cheek. Why is a bishop driving around with a loaded gun?

It is legal here 2 carry a gun in your car.

Efan said:

Graycap23 said:

Imagine u are the driver? What should the law charge this driver with?

Teen Shot For Throwing Rocks At Car

Posted: 10:41 am EDT May 8, 2011Updated: 10:55 am EDT May 8, 2011

ATLANTA -- A 13-year-old was shot after police said the teen was throwing rocks at cars.

Atlanta police said the teen broke the rear windshield of a car driven by Bishop Alex Williams Sr.

Investigators said that’s when Williams pulled a gun on the teen and allegedly shot the juvenile in the hip.

William was arrested and the teen was taken to an area hospital.

http://www.wsbtv.com/news...etail.html

I don't understand this story at all. It makes no sense. How does this bad reporting pass through an editor?

THANK YOU !

Tremolina said:

SUPRMAN said:

No charges for the shooter.

He was acting in defense of lives and property.

So you are saying it's okay to shoot somebody just for trashing your car?

Now defense of life is one thing, but I can just imagine it:

Some asshole kids walk past a car and smash its rearview window. Just for 'fun'.

Owner comes out out all mad, shoots the kids but gets to walk free.

Cuz he is allowed to do that as an act of defense of property.

What a fucking joke.

In the U. S. you can protect life and property.