paintedlady said:

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

Yes I know, that is so scary....

So Bishops are bored with molesting kids and now going out maiming them

Self defence is to protect yourself before / during a conflictual event. retaliation is what happens afterwards.

Simply firing the Gun in "Warning shot" manner would have possibly resolved this situation, but alas, he chose not too.

itsnotallover said:

So Bishops are bored with molesting kids and now going out maiming them

Self defence is to protect yourself before / during a conflictual event. retaliation is what happens afterwards.

Simply firing the Gun in "Warning shot" manner would have possibly resolved this situation, but alas, he chose not too.

Thank you!

was he throwing rocks at passing cars?

SUPRMAN said:

Tremolina said:

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.

Oh like, in the reast of the world you can't?

Give me a break PLEASE.

This is about THE WAY HE CHOOSE to "protect his property"

Tremolina said:

SUPRMAN said:

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

Oh like, in the reast of the world you can't?

Give me a break PLEASE.

This is about THE WAY HE CHOOSE to "protect his property"

What way should he have chosen to protect his life and property? Keep driving?

SUPRMAN said:

Tremolina said:

Oh like, in the reast of the world you can't?

Give me a break PLEASE.

This is about THE WAY HE CHOOSE to "protect his property"

What way should he have chosen to protect his life and property? Keep driving?

Do you think the kid could have still hit his car with rocks, if he WOULD HAVE?

Tremolina said:

SUPRMAN said:

What way should he have chosen to protect his life and property? Keep driving?

Do you think the kid could have still hit his car with rocks, if he WOULD HAVE?

The kid had already hit his car once.

What about the next car?

And the next?

The kid can keep throwing until someone is injured or killed?

Tremolina said:

SUPRMAN said:

What way should he have chosen to protect his life and property? Keep driving?

Do you think the kid could have still hit his car with rocks, if he WOULD HAVE?

The kid put himself in a position to be shot by his own actions.

The fact that his action led to him being shot is the consequence of his actions.

Actions have consequences.

Even as a teenager, he should be civilized enough to realize that his actions can have negative consequences.

SUPRMAN said:

Tremolina said:

Do you think the kid could have still hit his car with rocks, if he WOULD HAVE?

The kid put himself in a position to be shot by his own actions.

The fact that his action led to him being shot is the consequence of his actions.

Actions have consequences.

Even as a teenager, he should be civilized enough to realize that his actions can have negative consequences.

ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee hoo hoo hoo...... THUD...............thats me laughing my head off.

The kid DID NOT put himself in a position to be shot by his actions. The Bishop was a gun toting nut job who got out of his car and shot him in anger. Any responsible Gun owner would have not done this. end of. A simple scare shot would have sufficed if it was needed or guess what? A call to this special agency called the Police, they are there to stop this kind of shit going on.

I am pretty sure the Kid didn't think "Oh I know I will go out and lob a few bricks at passing cars and see how many cars I can damage before being blown away"................

America ain't living in the "Wild West" anymore

I hate 2 say it......but I'm glad he shot this fool.

whistle said:

kill everyone involved.

I've found many of the responses here to be, sad. Good grief.

The Pastor is in trouble and he should be.

There's a possibility the Pastor could be charged with attempted murder in the second degree or with, Second Degree Felony (Aggravated Assault). The condense article and video spoke of this Pastor being harassed unmerciful... including his home and church being torched. Scary no boubt and I'm sure the Pastor was frustrated he was unable to get the community and/or the police involved to resolve the consistent harassment.

Even so, "hood rules" in reverse don't apply here either, sorry.

All of this could have gone terribly, terribly wrong, he could've killed that boy or claimed the life of an innocent bystanders. Bullets don't necessarily hit the target the gunman/woman are aiming at. Save me, "what if the boy or boy's had killed someone"? We have a judicial system and a police force, to arrest, charge, convict, and punish those who don't abide by the laws of the land.

------------------------------------------------

[Edited 5/9/11 10:12am]

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.

Exactly. The kid did something stupid which could have caused serious harm to the bishop, and the bishop reacted which did cause harm to the kid. Both could have killed the other, so they both should pay for their act of stupidity. No excuses for either. It works both ways. You can't go around throwing bricks, just because you can, and you can't go around shooting everybody, just because you have a license. There are rules and regulations to follow in a civilized society.

[Edited 5/9/11 9:26am]

itsnotallover said:

SUPRMAN said:

The kid put himself in a position to be shot by his own actions.

The fact that his action led to him being shot is the consequence of his actions.

Actions have consequences.

Even as a teenager, he should be civilized enough to realize that his actions can have negative consequences.

ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee hoo hoo hoo...... THUD...............thats me laughing my head off.

The kid DID NOT put himself in a position to be shot by his actions. The Bishop was a gun toting nut job who got out of his car and shot him in anger. Any responsible Gun owner would have not done this. end of. A simple scare shot would have sufficed if it was needed or guess what? A call to this special agency called the Police, they are there to stop this kind of shit going on.

I am pretty sure the Kid didn't think "Oh I know I will go out and lob a few bricks at passing cars and see how many cars I can damage before being blown away"................

America ain't living in the "Wild West" anymore

I read lots of stories in the news about people pulling out guns and shooting just because they aren't let into a party. So I think the teen did put himself into a position to get shot by throwing rocks at cars.

Vendetta1 said:

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 completely agree!!

Since when do bishops drive around with guns?

Sounds like these two idiots were destined for each other

NDRU said:

Since when do bishops drive around with guns?

Sounds like these two idiots were destined for each other

A lot of folks in Georgia drive around w guns in their car, purse, etc.

terrytibbs said:

was he throwing rocks at passing cars?

this kid is one smack from his ooh papa papa from being a superstar!

Graycap23 said:

NDRU said:

Since when do bishops drive around with guns?

Sounds like these two idiots were destined for each other

A lot of folks in Georgia drive around w guns in their car, purse, etc.

Is that legal?

this was actually the perfect opportunity for a man of god to reach out and teach a troubled child the error of his ways.

I guess he did, just not in a very positive or "forgiving of our sins" kinda way.

Was this bishop actually robert blake?

NDRU said:

Graycap23 said:

A lot of folks in Georgia drive around w guns in their car, purse, etc.

Is that legal?

Yes it is, Georgia is a "right to carry" state.

P.S. Even so, "right to carry" state's require some type of registration & permit process.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Edited 5/9/11 10:17am]

NDRU said:

Graycap23 said:

A lot of folks in Georgia drive around w guns in their car, purse, etc.

Is that legal?

It's legal 2 carry in your car.

U need a permit 4 a concealed weapon on your person.

[Edited 5/9/11 10:21am]

I am all for self defense. Yet, when deadly force is used and it is not warranted then that was a risk you took. For it to be warranted it has to pass the reasonable person test. Would a reasonable person believe that there was a risk of serious harm or loss of property.

Now so 13 year old kids can be pretty menacing. Some can pose a risk of serious bodily harm. Yet for some reason I am thinking that was not the case here. If it was, if that can be demonstrated then that is something to consider.

TD3 said:

NDRU said:

Is that legal?

Yes it is, Georgia is a "right to carry" state.

P.S. Even so, "right to carry" state's require some type of registration & permit process.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Edited 5/9/11 10:17am]

Not true. U can carry a gun in your car in Ga, without a permit.

[Edited 5/9/11 10:20am]

The bishop has concequences to pay for his actions just as the teenager has consequences for his. It's the price you pay for living in a socialized society and not out in the wilderness somewhere.

[Edited 5/9/11 10:36am]

paintedlady said:

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

...and I wouldn't cry if any of them got shot, either. Remember a few years ago when some dickhead teen threw a frozen turkey at a car windshield? Happened here in NYC, and the poor woman required extensive facial surgery.

At age 13 I knew enough not to do dumb shit like this. I have zero sympathy for these asshole kids. I'm with Vendetta on this.

paintedlady said:

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

that can be deadly

itsnotallover said:

So Bishops are bored with molesting kids and now going out maiming them

Self defence is to protect yourself before / during a conflictual event. retaliation is what happens afterwards.

Simply firing the Gun in "Warning shot" manner would have possibly resolved this situation, but alas, he chose not too.

I do not agree with a warning shot. Either he was legitimately felt that he was at danger of serious bodily harm or death or being robbed (which I assume is a legal reason for deadly force in AL)... or he did not. If not then any use of deadly weapon would be a crime. One think I learned in weapon training is Never pull out a gun if you are not ready to use it and have a legal reason to do so.

Um.....sorry but..... A CAR IS NOT WORTH MORE THAN A HUMAN LIFE.

yeah the kid was a gutter brat and needs to get punished for throwing the rocks (ass beating will suffice) but to think that the child could have been killed or paralyzed and all he did was break a windshield; nah....that is not a case of where punishment fits the crime.