A teenager knocked on the wrong door. Now he’s dead, and the homeowner is accused of murder.

[Pogo]

Which part? The breaking glass? The guy was drunk? They were trying to get in? Brain left it out? It is funny?

The "trying to get in" part. Read the thread. Better yet, read the article.
For that matter, although it wasn't the point, there's no evidence he was "drunk" either. The report was that they were "drinking alcohol". They never said how much.


...

1. R-i-g-h-t... They just had a teenie tiny sip, and then became so disoriented that they tried to enter the wrong house and didn't stop when the people inside yelled at them. Want to bet that when we get the autopsy is released that he was HAMMERED? Or just bet on HOW hammered? I take 3 times the legal limit.


2. You don't break a window with normal knocking. That's either they pounding so hard that it was, or could reasonable considered to be an attempt to break down the door, OR they purposefully broke a window so they could reach in and unlock the door.

3. There was communication between the people inside and those outside. Want to bet that in the conversation insults were exchanged and by the time of the window being broken that the drunk guy knew that his friend was not inside and was trying to get inside to attack the man that insulted him?

1. No idea. I'm saying people are jumping to conclusions of "drunk" from the report of "drinking alcohol", which is obviously scant information. And that's not verifiable at this point. One of several fabrications that have come up here, including making the kid an "adult sized" "thug" who magically became "17 years old" and was "trying to get in" ---- ALL of which are hypotheses contrary to fact.

And you just did the same thing again in 434 "the two drunks". You weasels constantly try to insert these little micro-myths to make a story go the way you want it to go, and unfortunately I call you on it.

2. You don't unlock a door by breaking the TOP window of a three-window door. You DO knock on that window because it's up at eye level. As for what shape the glass was in before it broke, that's another thing we don't know --- likely this guy sent more on his gun fetish than on his house maintenance. Who knows.

3. We already know what the conversation entailed. I posted it yesterday. And not only did the police conclude the kid was not "breaking in" --- the killer himself said that.

 

[Pogo]

I post nothing that I don't know and can't back up.
All of the above is in my last link. There ain't nothing "redacted" in it --- they're actual quotes.

Prove that's how you do things. It's not whether or not you do, it's whether or not you can prove you do.

I don't need to "prove" jack shit. I simply reviewed what was already posted. Dumbass.

If you make a claim, you do. That you're unwilling means you can't. You're dismissed, retard. No one believes you.

You can hold your breath until you turn blue, stomp your feet and go "la la la" all you want, child. It doesn't change the content of the link that was already up there.
Dumbass.

Seems you're the one stomping your feet. You've already you won't prove your claim. It's not that you won't, you can't.

I already *DID*. Yesterday. I established it first. You can go all you like but it ain't going away. Grow the fuck up.

 

[Conservative65]

Prove that's how you do things. It's not whether or not you do, it's whether or not you can prove you do.

I don't need to "prove" jack shit. I simply reviewed what was already posted. Dumbass.

If you make a claim, you do. That you're unwilling means you can't. You're dismissed, retard. No one believes you.

You can hold your breath until you turn blue, stomp your feet and go "la la la" all you want, child. It doesn't change the content of the link that was already up there.
Dumbass.

Seems you're the one stomping your feet. You've already you won't prove your claim. It's not that you won't, you can't.

I already *DID*. Yesterday. I established it first. You can go all you like but it ain't going away. Grow the fuck up.

You can claim you did all you want but it doesn't change that you didn't. Keep whining bitch. It's all you got.

 

[Pogo]

You don't know what happened anymore than anyone else. The link does not provide the unredacted story.

I post nothing that I don't know and can't back up.
All of the above is in my last link. There ain't nothing "redacted" in it --- they're actual quotes.

Prove that's how you do things. It's not whether or not you do, it's whether or not you can prove you do.

I don't need to "prove" jack shit. I simply reviewed what was already posted. Dumbass.

so only everyone else has to. Funny.

Make a claim and Pogo will demand proof. Let Pogo make a claim and proof is refused.

409, Bubba. It was already there.

Oopsie.

 

[Papageorgio]

Drunk teenager starts breaking windows in someone's home. Looks like a good shoot to me.

You should go house to house banging on doors. Let us know who's a 'good shot'.

Don't forget breaking windows.

 

[Conservative65]

I post nothing that I don't know and can't back up.
All of the above is in my last link. There ain't nothing "redacted" in it --- they're actual quotes.

Prove that's how you do things. It's not whether or not you do, it's whether or not you can prove you do.

I don't need to "prove" jack shit. I simply reviewed what was already posted. Dumbass.

so only everyone else has to. Funny.

Make a claim and Pogo will demand proof. Let Pogo make a claim and proof is refused.

409, Bubba. It was already there.

Oopsie.

Sounds like a justified shooting.

 

[jc456]

Which part? The breaking glass? The guy was drunk? They were trying to get in? Brain left it out? It is funny?

The "trying to get in" part. Read the thread. Better yet, read the article.
For that matter, although it wasn't the point, there's no evidence he was "drunk" either. The report was that they were "drinking alcohol". They never said how much.


...

1. R-i-g-h-t... They just had a teenie tiny sip, and then became so disoriented that they tried to enter the wrong house and didn't stop when the people inside yelled at them. Want to bet that when we get the autopsy is released that he was HAMMERED? Or just bet on HOW hammered? I take 3 times the legal limit.


2. You don't break a window with normal knocking. That's either they pounding so hard that it was, or could reasonable considered to be an attempt to break down the door, OR they purposefully broke a window so they could reach in and unlock the door.

3. There was communication between the people inside and those outside. Want to bet that in the conversation insults were exchanged and by the time of the window being broken that the drunk guy knew that his friend was not inside and was trying to get inside to attack the man that insulted him?

1. No idea. I'm saying people are jumping to conclusions of "drunk" from the report of "drinking alcohol", which is obviously scant information. And that's not verifiable at this point. One of several fabrications that have come up here, including making the kid an "adult sized" "thug" who magically became "17 years old" and was "trying to get in" ---- ALL of which are hypotheses contrary to fact.

And you just did the same thing again in 434 "the two drunks". You weasels constantly try to insert these little micro-myths to make a story go the way you want it to go, and unfortunately I call you on it.

2. You don't unlock a door by breaking the TOP window of a three-window door. You DO knock on that window because it's up at eye level. As for what shape the glass was in before it broke, that's another thing we don't know --- likely this guy sent more on his gun fetish than on his house maintenance. Who knows.

3. We already know what the conversation entailed. I posted it yesterday. And not only did the police conclude the kid was not "breaking in" --- the killer himself said that.

do you know what the word impairment is? One drink and someone is impaired. That is drunk. It doesn't matter the amount. you goof. Go to a judge and say you had one beer and drove, fine immediately. I had a judge tell me that personally.

 

[jc456]

Prove that's how you do things. It's not whether or not you do, it's whether or not you can prove you do.

I don't need to "prove" jack shit. I simply reviewed what was already posted. Dumbass.

so only everyone else has to. Funny.

Make a claim and Pogo will demand proof. Let Pogo make a claim and proof is refused.

409, Bubba. It was already there.

Oopsie.

Sounds like a justified shooting.

if the facts back the correct scenario, I'm not stepping out until the facts are indeed known. That is still an 'if' statement.

 

[Correll]

Which part? The breaking glass? The guy was drunk? They were trying to get in? Brain left it out? It is funny?

The "trying to get in" part. Read the thread. Better yet, read the article.
For that matter, although it wasn't the point, there's no evidence he was "drunk" either. The report was that they were "drinking alcohol". They never said how much.


...

1. R-i-g-h-t... They just had a teenie tiny sip, and then became so disoriented that they tried to enter the wrong house and didn't stop when the people inside yelled at them. Want to bet that when we get the autopsy is released that he was HAMMERED? Or just bet on HOW hammered? I take 3 times the legal limit.


2. You don't break a window with normal knocking. That's either they pounding so hard that it was, or could reasonable considered to be an attempt to break down the door, OR they purposefully broke a window so they could reach in and unlock the door.

3. There was communication between the people inside and those outside. Want to bet that in the conversation insults were exchanged and by the time of the window being broken that the drunk guy knew that his friend was not inside and was trying to get inside to attack the man that insulted him?

1. No idea. I'm saying people are jumping to conclusions of "drunk" from the report of "drinking alcohol", which is obviously scant information. And that's not verifiable at this point. One of several fabrications that have come up here, including making the kid an "adult sized" "thug" who magically became "17 years old" and was "trying to get in" ---- ALL of which are hypotheses contrary to fact.

We are both viewing this though the filter of our preconceived notions and biases. You, being a liberal and anti-gun, want to spin events to the detriment of the homeowner. As a conservative I want to spin events in favor of the poor guy sitting at home minding his own business.

The difference is, that as more information becomes available, my position will be vindicated and your will be undermined.

And you just did the same thing again in 434 "the two drunks". You weasels constantly try to insert these little micro-myths to make a story go the way you want it to go, and unfortunately I call you on it.

When young guys get together to drink, they drink TOGETHER. This is an obvious truth that you are hiding from.

2. You don't unlock a door by breaking the TOP window of a three-window door. You DO knock on that window because it's up at eye level. As for what shape the glass was in before it broke, that's another thing we don't know --- likely this guy sent more on his gun fetish than on his house maintenance. Who knows.

If you think you are at your friends house and some guy screams at you from inside that you are at the wrong house and to go way, you STOP knocking and go away.

Unless you are an asshole of some type.

And Gun Fetish is your spin and assumption of facts.

3. We already know what the conversation entailed. I posted it yesterday. And not only did the police conclude the kid was not "breaking in" --- the killer himself said that.

So, when he was informed he was at the wrong house, why did he keep pounding? Why not leave?

 

[Pogo]

Which part? The breaking glass? The guy was drunk? They were trying to get in? Brain left it out? It is funny?

The "trying to get in" part. Read the thread. Better yet, read the article.
For that matter, although it wasn't the point, there's no evidence he was "drunk" either. The report was that they were "drinking alcohol". They never said how much.


...

1. R-i-g-h-t... They just had a teenie tiny sip, and then became so disoriented that they tried to enter the wrong house and didn't stop when the people inside yelled at them. Want to bet that when we get the autopsy is released that he was HAMMERED? Or just bet on HOW hammered? I take 3 times the legal limit.


2. You don't break a window with normal knocking. That's either they pounding so hard that it was, or could reasonable considered to be an attempt to break down the door, OR they purposefully broke a window so they could reach in and unlock the door.

3. There was communication between the people inside and those outside. Want to bet that in the conversation insults were exchanged and by the time of the window being broken that the drunk guy knew that his friend was not inside and was trying to get inside to attack the man that insulted him?

1. No idea. I'm saying people are jumping to conclusions of "drunk" from the report of "drinking alcohol", which is obviously scant information. And that's not verifiable at this point. One of several fabrications that have come up here, including making the kid an "adult sized" "thug" who magically became "17 years old" and was "trying to get in" ---- ALL of which are hypotheses contrary to fact.

We are both viewing this though the filter of our preconceived notions and biases. You, being a liberal and anti-gun, want to spin events to the detriment of the homeowner. As a conservative I want to spin events in favor of the poor guy sitting at home minding his own business.

The difference is, that as more information becomes available, my position will be vindicated and your will be undermined.

Wanna bet?

And you just did the same thing again in 434 "the two drunks". You weasels constantly try to insert these little micro-myths to make a story go the way you want it to go, and unfortunately I call you on it.

When young guys get together to drink, they drink TOGETHER. This is an obvious truth that you are hiding from.

There's no contradiction here. What's your point? And btw one of these "young guys" was a girl. Still is in fact.

2. You don't unlock a door by breaking the TOP window of a three-window door. You DO knock on that window because it's up at eye level. As for what shape the glass was in before it broke, that's another thing we don't know --- likely this guy sent more on his gun fetish than on his house maintenance. Who knows.

If you think you are at your friends house and some guy screams at you from inside that you are at the wrong house and to go way, you STOP knocking and go away.

Unless you are an asshole of some type.

And Gun Fetish is your spin and assumption of facts.

3. We already know what the conversation entailed. I posted it yesterday. And not only did the police conclude the kid was not "breaking in" --- the killer himself said that.

So, when he was informed he was at the wrong house, why did he keep pounding? Why not leave?

Maybe he would have, had he been so informed.
He never got the chance.

That's kinda what the phrase "shoot first, ask questions later" points out.

 

[2aguy]

Bad news and worse news for you gun fetishists:
The bad: the kid now has a name: Dylan Francisco.

The worse --- he's a white kid who "made friends and did well in school"

Cue mass exodus.

And the Gentle giant was going to medical school...and we had saintly photos of the young Trayvon...then people actually started looking into who the kid was....


So don't get all happy that you have a dead kid you can use to attack all gun owners.....you have no idea what actually happened....

I've got your "attack all gun owners" right here, pal. This is from a Second Amendment/firearms advocacy site. Read and learn.

=> The number of people I continue to come across who treat firearms as a talisman against evil never ceases to amaze me. They buy or inherit a firearm, stick it in a nightstand or on a closet shelf or in a gun safe, and then leave the gun there—often times for years—thinking that, “I’ve got a gun. I’m safe.” Nothing could be further from the truth.

As Col. Jeff Cooper once noted, “Owning a handgun doesn’t make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.” He’s entirely right. Owning a firearm that you don’t know how to run is like owning a car, and having never learned how to drive.

People who don’t train and who fail to develop confidence and competence with their firearms tend to panic and think that they “need” that gun to solve a problem when that is not the best or the legal option. Terrified beyond reason, suddenly aware of their glaring incompetence with the gun they possess, they routinely panic and make bad, tragic and often criminal decisions.

Every single month we cover at least one of these stories, and the saddest thing is that almost all of these instances would have been preventable if the person who fired the gun had simply gone to quality defensive firearm classes, learned the law, developed a moderate level of competence, and practiced regularly to maintain a level of familiarity and skill with their firearm (shooting well is a very perishable skill).

There is no justifiable reason for Jeffery Lowell to shoot through his door because teens were knocking on it, looking for a friend. He panicked, and made a series of deadly choices. The story here is little different than than that of the idiot in Florida who opened fire at Pokemon Go players who weren’t even on his property.

When the Founding Fathers reflected the pre-existing human right to armed self-defense in the Second Amendment, they made perfectly clear that they expected the people to be both well-armed and well-trained. That’s precisely what they meant when they said the militia (the people) should be “well-regulated.” <=
​

--- which is exactly what I noted here way back asking "where are the proponents of 'responsible firearm use'? That seems to have been thrown out a broken window. This goon makes an appalling judgment and y'all gun nuts bend over backward to ignore it simply because he employed the services of Almighty Gun, Even though it meant a child's life, the fetish is more important to you asshats. Because Almighty Gun (Power be unto It, Inshallah) is always right.

--- Which again demonstrates the purely emotional and irrational base of your wacko demagoguery.

This guy I quoted above is exactly right. He's voicing what I mean by 'responsible firearm use' while you're taking the side of what I call "gun nuts" -- a childish fetish rather than a responsibility. --- Bearing Arms

Hey twit....who is not advocating training......name one here........what we know...for a fact, is that gun control nuts like you will use any attempt at a training requirement to prevent access to guns.....just like they do in Europe.....

And.......considering that guns are not complicated.....that most of the defensive uses in the country are by people who are not trained Navy SEALs.......training is important but will not be used to prevent the exercise of a Right.....

You have no idea what happened that night...what was said or what was done.......

the only people who make guns a fetish are the anti gunners on this site who immediately talk about sex with guns and men's sex organs....

 

[2aguy]

Which part? The breaking glass? The guy was drunk? They were trying to get in? Brain left it out? It is funny?

The "trying to get in" part. Read the thread. Better yet, read the article.
For that matter, although it wasn't the point, there's no evidence he was "drunk" either. The report was that they were "drinking alcohol". They never said how much.


...

1. R-i-g-h-t... They just had a teenie tiny sip, and then became so disoriented that they tried to enter the wrong house and didn't stop when the people inside yelled at them. Want to bet that when we get the autopsy is released that he was HAMMERED? Or just bet on HOW hammered? I take 3 times the legal limit.


2. You don't break a window with normal knocking. That's either they pounding so hard that it was, or could reasonable considered to be an attempt to break down the door, OR they purposefully broke a window so they could reach in and unlock the door.

3. There was communication between the people inside and those outside. Want to bet that in the conversation insults were exchanged and by the time of the window being broken that the drunk guy knew that his friend was not inside and was trying to get inside to attack the man that insulted him?

1. No idea. I'm saying people are jumping to conclusions of "drunk" from the report of "drinking alcohol", which is obviously scant information. And that's not verifiable at this point. One of several fabrications that have come up here, including making the kid an "adult sized" "thug" who magically became "17 years old" and was "trying to get in" ---- ALL of which are hypotheses contrary to fact.

We are both viewing this though the filter of our preconceived notions and biases. You, being a liberal and anti-gun, want to spin events to the detriment of the homeowner. As a conservative I want to spin events in favor of the poor guy sitting at home minding his own business.

The difference is, that as more information becomes available, my position will be vindicated and your will be undermined.

Wanna bet?

And you just did the same thing again in 434 "the two drunks". You weasels constantly try to insert these little micro-myths to make a story go the way you want it to go, and unfortunately I call you on it.

When young guys get together to drink, they drink TOGETHER. This is an obvious truth that you are hiding from.

There's no contradiction here. What's your point? And btw one of these "young guys" was a girl. Still is in fact.

2. You don't unlock a door by breaking the TOP window of a three-window door. You DO knock on that window because it's up at eye level. As for what shape the glass was in before it broke, that's another thing we don't know --- likely this guy sent more on his gun fetish than on his house maintenance. Who knows.

If you think you are at your friends house and some guy screams at you from inside that you are at the wrong house and to go way, you STOP knocking and go away.

Unless you are an asshole of some type.

And Gun Fetish is your spin and assumption of facts.

3. We already know what the conversation entailed. I posted it yesterday. And not only did the police conclude the kid was not "breaking in" --- the killer himself said that.

So, when he was informed he was at the wrong house, why did he keep pounding? Why not leave?

Maybe he would have, had he been so informed.
He never got the chance.

That's kinda what the phrase "shoot first, ask questions later" points out.

Hey.....he just did what Joe Biden said to do........you know...the democrat who said to shoot through the door......you nuts are the ones advocating for irresponsible gun use...because it serves your purpose........

 

[Pogo]

Drunk teenager starts breaking windows in someone's home. Looks like a good shoot to me.

You should go house to house banging on doors. Let us know who's a 'good shot'.

Don't forget breaking windows.

Yes, good point. Death penalty for breaking a window. That's important.

 

[jc456]

Which part? The breaking glass? The guy was drunk? They were trying to get in? Brain left it out? It is funny?

The "trying to get in" part. Read the thread. Better yet, read the article.
For that matter, although it wasn't the point, there's no evidence he was "drunk" either. The report was that they were "drinking alcohol". They never said how much.


...

1. R-i-g-h-t... They just had a teenie tiny sip, and then became so disoriented that they tried to enter the wrong house and didn't stop when the people inside yelled at them. Want to bet that when we get the autopsy is released that he was HAMMERED? Or just bet on HOW hammered? I take 3 times the legal limit.


2. You don't break a window with normal knocking. That's either they pounding so hard that it was, or could reasonable considered to be an attempt to break down the door, OR they purposefully broke a window so they could reach in and unlock the door.

3. There was communication between the people inside and those outside. Want to bet that in the conversation insults were exchanged and by the time of the window being broken that the drunk guy knew that his friend was not inside and was trying to get inside to attack the man that insulted him?

1. No idea. I'm saying people are jumping to conclusions of "drunk" from the report of "drinking alcohol", which is obviously scant information. And that's not verifiable at this point. One of several fabrications that have come up here, including making the kid an "adult sized" "thug" who magically became "17 years old" and was "trying to get in" ---- ALL of which are hypotheses contrary to fact.

We are both viewing this though the filter of our preconceived notions and biases. You, being a liberal and anti-gun, want to spin events to the detriment of the homeowner. As a conservative I want to spin events in favor of the poor guy sitting at home minding his own business.

The difference is, that as more information becomes available, my position will be vindicated and your will be undermined.

Wanna bet?

And you just did the same thing again in 434 "the two drunks". You weasels constantly try to insert these little micro-myths to make a story go the way you want it to go, and unfortunately I call you on it.

When young guys get together to drink, they drink TOGETHER. This is an obvious truth that you are hiding from.

There's no contradiction here. What's your point? And btw one of these "young guys" was a girl. Still is in fact.

2. You don't unlock a door by breaking the TOP window of a three-window door. You DO knock on that window because it's up at eye level. As for what shape the glass was in before it broke, that's another thing we don't know --- likely this guy sent more on his gun fetish than on his house maintenance. Who knows.

If you think you are at your friends house and some guy screams at you from inside that you are at the wrong house and to go way, you STOP knocking and go away.

Unless you are an asshole of some type.

And Gun Fetish is your spin and assumption of facts.

3. We already know what the conversation entailed. I posted it yesterday. And not only did the police conclude the kid was not "breaking in" --- the killer himself said that.

So, when he was informed he was at the wrong house, why did he keep pounding? Why not leave?

Maybe he would have, had he been so informed.
He never got the chance.

That's kinda what the phrase "shoot first, ask questions later" points out.

so, isn't that what #409 stated, the home owner told them to get the 'f....' out of his yard? So he was informed.

 

[Pogo]

Hey twit....who is not advocating training......name one here........

My point is, and always was, who IS advocating it? I noted that the silence was eloquent. And still is.
As you see ------- I'm the only one who even BROUGHT UP the idea.

The guy in my link gets it. You apparently do not.

what we know...for a fact, is that gun control nuts like you will use any attempt at a training requirement to prevent access to guns.....just like they do in Europe.....

Yuh huh. Link?

You have no idea what happened that night...what was said or what was done.......

All we know is what was reported. We do not get to make up what we don't know. That's why I quashed:

• "Two drunks"
• "Kid was breaking in"
• "Kid was 17 years old"
• "Kid was 'adult sized'

Tell your fellow travellers about "having no idea". And by the way it was broad daylight, not "night". Read much?

 

[Conservative65]

I don't need to "prove" jack shit. I simply reviewed what was already posted. Dumbass.

so only everyone else has to. Funny.

Make a claim and Pogo will demand proof. Let Pogo make a claim and proof is refused.

409, Bubba. It was already there.

Oopsie.

Sounds like a justified shooting.

if the facts back the correct scenario, I'm not stepping out until the facts are indeed known. That is still an 'if' statement.

Pogo speculated and calls it proof before the entire situation is known. It may just be me but I recall Liberals telling us that we shouldn't make decisions without all the evidence.

 

[2aguy]

357,000,000 guns in private hands........they need shootings like this to push gun control.......one of these and they can conflate it into all gun owners.....vs...

356,999,999 to 1

 

[Pogo]

357,000,000 guns in private hands........they need shootings like this to push gun control.......one of these and they can conflate it into all gun owners.....vs...

356,999,999 to 1

sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo....... no link.

Stop da presses.

 

[2aguy]

357,000,000 guns in private hands........they need shootings like this to push gun control.......one of these and they can conflate it into all gun owners.....vs...

356,999,999 to 1

sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo....... no link.

Stop da presses.

Moron..this is how they limit access to guns for the law abiding......in Europe....and why it is a non starter here...

Getting a gun legally in Europe may be hard, but terrorists have little trouble

Here in Denmark, handguns and semiautomatic rifles are all but banned. Hunting rifles are legally available only to those with squeaky-clean backgrounds who have passed a rigorous exam covering everything from gun safety to the mating habits of Denmark’s wildlife.

“There’s a book about 1,000 pages thick,” said Tonni Rigby, one of only two licensed firearms dealers in Copenhagen. “You have to know all of it.”


But if you want an illicit assault rifle, such as the one used by a 22-year-old to rake a Copenhagen cafe with 28 bullets on Saturday, all it takes are a few connections and some cash.

“It’s very easy to get such a weapon,” said Hans Jorgen Bonnichsen, a former operations director for the Danish security service PET. “It’s not only a problem for Denmark. It’s a problem for all of Europe.”

 

[Papageorgio]

Drunk teenager starts breaking windows in someone's home. Looks like a good shoot to me.

You should go house to house banging on doors. Let us know who's a 'good shot'.

Don't forget breaking windows.

Yes, good point. Death penalty for breaking a window. That's important.

I don't know all the facts. Until I do, I withhold my opinion.

You think he was shot just for knocking on a door, which we already know isn't the only thing he did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk