Boy, 11, accused of killing father's pregnant girlfriend

[Makelith]

Missed this bit, and wasn't sure if you can quote and edit, iFail.

On topic: Does a gun made for children not fit into the bracket of a recreational gun? I know 0 about guns by the way, serious question.

Yes it would be a recreational gun, and as such has much less power than guns made to kill people. Those types of guns are made for shooting targets more than anything. I doubt the type of gun he used would even kill a deer from a distance. The reason that the woman died is because he was point blank.

 

[Linhjah]

Jordan’s father, Christopher Brown, told police that the Harrington & Richardson shotgun police suspect as the murder weapon belonged to his son, who used it the previous Saturday, Feb. 14, to win a turkey shoot, according to an affidavit filed by state police to support the criminal charges.

Turkey shoot

 

[Thelona]

I'm not entirely sure how much blame you can put on the father really. You can't have it both ways, with "guns are ok if you're trained properly" etc etc, and then say "A child's gun (MADE FOR CHILDREN) should be kept in a cabinet under lock and key." When would this gun be brought out? Special occasions? lol.

people are saying the father is at fault for improper storage, because a childs gun isnt made to just be GIVEN to a child and kept under thier bed or in the closet.
ANY time you get a gun for a child its supposed to be locked up when they arnt activly shooting them with thier parents. Thats the law in most states. The kids only supposed to have it "Under Adult Supervision!" infact I'll bet you near anything the gun and gun box had exactly that on em.


Oh and the whole argument that this wouldnt have happened if the father HADNT taught the kid to use the gun is complete BS. any kid whos watched tv or played a few video games could easily operate a gun without training. And then to say "well the dad didn't teach him to kill someone with a knife" are you freakin kidding me? a MONKEY could kill a sleeping person with a knife.


the whole "banning guns" argument isnt going anywhere, because that will never happen in America and the idea of taking the guns away from the police is flatout laughable.

The prob is the guns are already here. no amount of laws is gonna "clean the streets of guns" just look at how the whole "war on drugs" is going. if you were to just up and ban guns out of the blue then guess what. the ONLY people that are actually going to turn in their guns are going to be the law abiding responsible people, the exact people that you WANT to be armed. Its the people that ARNT gonna turn thier guns over that the problem.

Take a country that's completely saturated with firearms (there are more guns in this country then people) and then take away those firearms from all the law abiding people and police officers. Sounds like a recipe for a complete disaster to me.

 

[Skaw]

Pfft... need I say more??

Why the fuck are there firearms designed for children..? Why.. god damn fucking "right to bare arms" bullshit. This shit will continue to happen. Hope you all enjoy your GOD given right.

Because theres a very large difference between "Designed for" and "Sold to." All it is, is a shotgun with a smaller stock so a child can hold it comfortably. Let's all just forget this was a premeditated murder, meaning he could've grabbed daddy's gun and pulled it off just as well, and harp on the fact that he had a legitimate item his father bought for him to share common father-son activities together.

Do you not think it may have been JUST a bit easier for this grown woman to defend herself against a knife wielding child??

Considering she was sleeping...? Those who have mentioned it aren't bring up a "what if." She was found in her bed. I don't know about you, but I usually sleep in mine. It's okay to be emotional about the subject, but don't ignore key facts about it. You're right that the one shot killed her instantly where as one stab or slash likely wouldn't have, but the real question to ask is if she would've still had ended up dead. If he slashed her throat to begin with, the answer would be an indefinite yes. Any other kind of action, the end result can still be the same. Sure, she could have survived, but that's only if the child would have let her. He was determined to kill her, and he was calm and collective about it. What weapon he used or might have used isn't a factor in this case, as he was going to make sure she was dead at the end of his attack.

This isn't a story of gun safety gone terribly wrong, or how guns are out of control. It's a story of murder. Plain and simple. To believe otherwise is nothing short of being foolish.

Even if you want to blame guns, that should come after blaming the American society. Switzerland has a high gun count per capita, but an extremely low amount of gun crime.Link. Just an example of guns don't kill people, people kill people.

 

[Khajit]

One of the more ironic things I've heard about police and guns is that criminals didn't start using guns very often until after the police had them. I just find that kinda funny.

 

[bigbroon]

people are saying the father is at fault for improper storage, because a childs gun isnt made to just be GIVEN to a child and kept under thier bed or in the closet.
ANY time you get a gun for a child its supposed to be locked up when they arnt activly shooting them with thier parents. Thats the law in most states. The kids only supposed to have it "Under Adult Supervision!" infact I'll bet you near anything the gun and gun box had exactly that on em.


Oh and the whole argument that this wouldnt have happened if the father HADNT taught the kid to use the gun is complete BS. any kid whos watched tv or played a few video games could easily operate a gun without training. And then to say "well the dad didn't teach him to kill someone with a knife" are you freakin kidding me? a MONKEY could kill a sleeping person with a knife.


the whole "banning guns" argument isnt going anywhere, because that will never happen in America and the idea of taking the guns away from the police is flatout laughable.

The prob is the guns are already here. no amount of laws is gonna "clean the streets of guns" just look at how the whole "war on drugs" is going. if you were to just up and ban guns out of the blue then guess what. the ONLY people that are actually going to turn in their guns are going to be the law abiding responsible people, the exact people that you WANT to be armed. Its the people that ARNT gonna turn thier guns over that the problem.

Take a country that's completely saturated with firearms (there are more guns in this country then people) and then take away those firearms from all the law abiding people and police officers. Sounds like a recipe for a complete disaster to me.

Addressing the points in bold:

1) Right, so if the kid didn't have access to a gun, he would still have killed his father's girlfriend by shooting her at pointblank range. No. You can't shoot someone without a gun.

The Gun vs. Knife argument is a moot point to me. Killing someone with a gun, versus killing someone with a knife, not that I would know, are in my opinion two completely different things. To kill someone with a gun, you have to pull a trigger. To kill someone with a knife, you have to be right up close and personal, you have to insert the knife into the person, and you probably have to do it more than once, depending on where you insert said object.

2) I'd say the country "with more firearms than human beings" is more of a recipe for disaster.

EDIT: at what point did anyone suggest taking guns away from the police? If I missed a post, apologies. But I don't think I did.

 

[Thelona]

you didn't even address what I said. please READ my post. I SAID that the kid shouldn't have had access to the gun earlier in that post, the part you bolded wasn't even about there being a gun in the house in the first place it was saying that most children don't need training to know how to pickup a gun and shoot it. same with a knife.

as to the second part

Other than the police, and even they push it, I fail to see much - if any - good that comes from guns.

yeah i know you didn't say police should have there guns taken away, I'm just saying the idea that cops shouldn't have them is ridiculous, how do they "Push it"
I sure as hell want the people that are sworn to serve and protect me having something other then pepper spray and a club.

your missing my point entirely, im not saying that the country having more guns then people is a good thing, it just IS. its a fact. and when the country has that many guns then who in their right mind could really think they could get rid of all those guns?
yeah if someone could snap there fingers and have every gun in the world dissapear, the world just might be a better place (aside from all the people whos daily lives depend on guns, ie hunters, farmers, people that live in places where you really do need a gun to protect yourself from wildlife. )
but that cant happen, you just cant get the guns out of the hands of the people that don't wanna give them up at this point, so you might as well have it balanced so that the avg criminal minded person cant go on a robbery spree cause he knows noone can stop him cause none of the people hes robbing can have a gun.


some people seems to think that if they outlawed guns they all just magically vanish.

when it comes right down to it, YES i would rather have 75% of Americans owning guns instead of 15%, 14% of that 15 being criminals.

yeah thats all theoretical but we're all talking "coulda woda shouda" here so its all theoretical.

 

[Skaw]

1) Right, so if the kid didn't have access to a gun, he would still have killed his father's girlfriend by shooting her at pointblank range. No. You can't shoot someone without a gun.

Bows and Crossbows, Slings and Slingshots. Certainly aren't guns, yet capable of shooting projectiles.

^^^^ Sarcasm.

The kid is fucked up. The gun discussion shouldn't be going on, since this was a planned out murder. He would have used anything to kill her. Why isn't anyone outraged over that, but over the fact that a gun was used? An 11 year old killing someone in cold blood is shocking, who gives a flipping fuck how he did it? Why are you guys so hung up over the word "gun," and not the subject "11 year old murderer?"

I swear, the internet is so full of retard arm chair politicians completely oblivious to root stories when certain issues come up. Fucked up priorities, the lot of you.

 

[bigbroon]

you didn't even address what I said. please READ my post. I SAID that the kid shouldn't have had access to the gun earlier in that post, the part you bolded wasn't even about there being a gun in the house in the first place it was saying that most children don't need training to know how to pickup a gun and shoot it. same with a knife.

as to the second part


yeah i know you didn't say police should have there guns taken away, I'm just saying the idea that cops shouldn't have them is ridiculous, how do they "Push it"
I sure as hell want the people that are sworn to serve and protect me having something other then pepper spray and a club.

your missing my point entirely, im not saying that the country having more guns then people is a good thing, it just IS. its a fact. and when the country has that many guns then who in their right mind could really think they could get rid of all those guns?
yeah if someone could snap there fingers and have every gun in the world dissapear, the world just might be a better place (aside from all the people whos daily lives depend on guns, ie hunters, farmers, people that live in places where you really do need a gun to protect yourself from wildlife. )
but that cant happen, you just cant get the guns out of the hands of the people that don't wanna give them up at this point, so you might as well have it balanced so that the avg criminal minded person cant go on a robbery spree cause he knows noone can stop him cause none of the people hes robbing can have a gun.


some people seems to think that if they outlawed guns they all just magically vanish.

when it comes right down to it, YES i would rather have 75% of Americans owning guns instead of 15%, 14% of that 15 being criminals.

yeah thats all theoretical but we're all talking "coulda woda shouda" here so its all theoretical.

I'm not *missing your point*, I just didn't feel the need to address all of them in my post. However, you seem to want me to do so, so I will.

You said that the kid shouldn't have had access to the gun, and that kids, even without training, still know how to pick up a gun and shoot it. My point, which I already made, was that, with no gun in the house, the kid can't shoot anyone. I might not have assigned that answer to that particular question, but for me, it covers it. Without a gun, all you can do is throw bullets at people.

Moving on...

The police having guns pushes the boundaries of what should and shouldn't be allowed, in my opinion. I didn't say it was wrong, because it's not. Policing America without guns would be near-on impossible in most cases. But why does police having guns push the boundaries for me? Well, do I really have to post links to cases of police brutality/wrongful shootings etc? No, I don't think so. It's part of their job, which is why they're just on the right side of the line, for me. The police thing has very little to do with this discussion anyway, I'm happy to be moving on...

For me, using "it just IS" as an excuse for the amount of guns in the USA is... well, it's not really an excuse. It's like saying "because" when someone asks a question.

"When the country has that many guns, who in their right mind could really think they could get rid of all those guns?" Well...uh... the government? The people who pass the laws? Deterrents make people stop doing bad things. Some deterrents work, some don't. Do you honestly think that, if a law were passed banning citizens from owning firearms, only good people would hand them in? That may be the case if the punishment for not complying is "$10 fine kthx". If the punishment is jailtime, or something similarly "harsh", people will stop doing it. Not everyone, but more than your "good guys."

"you might aswell have it balanced out" - by implying that guns are actually protection? So that... you have MORE guns? Are you serious? You think America needs more guns? Guns are protection for 1 person. But for the 1 person they protect, they harm someone else. More harm is bad.


"none of the people he's robbing have a gun" - you don't need a gun to stop a robber.

"some people think that if you outlawed guns they'd all just magically vanish" - I'm struggling to cope with whether you're talking about me, or other people you've talked to. I don't believe that, but a reduction is a good thing. You seem to think it's a bad thing.

I'd say we're actually discussing whether or not America needs more guns or not. I'd say not. You'd say it does. That's what discussions are for.

 

[bigbroon]

Bows and Crossbows, Slings and Slingshots. Certainly aren't guns, yet capable of shooting projectiles.

^^^^ Sarcasm.

The kid is fucked up. The gun discussion shouldn't be going on, since this was a planned out murder. He would have used anything to kill her. Why isn't anyone outraged over that, but over the fact that a gun was used? An 11 year old killing someone in cold blood is shocking, who gives a flipping fuck how he did it? Why are you guys so hung up over the word "gun," and not the subject "11 year old murderer?"

I swear, the internet is so full of retard arm chair politicians completely oblivious to root stories when certain issues come up. Fucked up priorities, the lot of you.

The priority here is a discussion.

The kid, if he indeed shot her, is fucked up. Correct. Why should the gun discussion not be going on? I still don't understand this "if he didn't have a gun, he would have used something else" bullshit. "It was a planned out murder." And you're basing these statements on... what exactly? What the boy told the day before he did it? None of us really have any idea of the family circumstances.

I'm "hung up" (lol) on the word gun, because it's an important point in this case. Like I already said, I don't believe it's a case of "he was going to kill her anyway." How do you know he didn't walk into his room, see his gun sitting there after a heated argument and years of built up rage, and think "fuck this shit, i'mma shoot that bitch?" You don't. And unless he keeps knives, 3000lb cars, or any other potentially lethal weapons in his bedroom, you can't disprove the possiblity. The point is, we have to deal with what we know. We know she was shot, probably by him. The gun is not a small issue in this case.

 

[Skaw]

I'm "hung up" (lol) on the word gun, because it's an important point in this case. Like I already said, I don't believe it's a case of "he was going to kill her anyway." How do you know he didn't walk into his room, see his gun sitting there after a heated argument and years of built up rage, and think "fuck this shit, i'mma shoot that ++++?" You don't.

"Gun" is only important as far as how the murder was carried out is concerned. The fact that evidence suggests he killed her, put his gun back where it was, and removed the shell casing instead of running the fuck away like a scared child would after realizing he did something wrong is a pretty strong suggestion that he planned this all out. I can't tell for certain, because I'm not conjoined to the kid at the brain, but it's not hard to come to the conclusion from what happened that he would've done it regardless had there been a gun around or not. I mean, unlike you, I've read the article beyond the word "gun."

The gun discussion going on doesn't need to be, because this is a topic about a cold blooded murder, that seems to have been planned out, and not a spur of the moment shooting with a panicking assaulter realizing he fucked up and shitting himself over what he did. Yes, a gun was the weapon. Thats it. End of the gun discussion. Let's get back on the real topic of how an 11 year old turns in to a monster and murders an 8 month pregnant woman his dad was seeing with no remorse, which unless you're trying desperately to put your political views out in public, is a far more important topic than him using a gun.

Or you can continue to be an armchair politicial, shitting up this thread with an unneeded gun control discussion.

 

[bigbroon]

"Gun" is only important as far as how the murder was carried out is concerned. The fact that evidence suggests he killed her, put his gun back where it was, and removed the shell casing instead of running the fuck away like a scared child would after realizing he did something wrong is a pretty strong suggestion that he planned this all out. I can't tell for certain, because I'm not conjoined to the kid at the brain, but it's not hard to come to the conclusion from what happened that he would've done it regardless had there been a gun around or not. I mean, unlike you, I've read the article beyond the word "gun."

No. The fact he did what is in bold suggests that he had time to think about what he had done after shooting her. How him puting the gun back and removing the casing makes it pre-meditated is beyond me. Pre-meditated means he thought it out, in case you're wondering Skaw. It means he planned this shit, he didn't just do it in the spur of the moment. What is bolded out is no evidence of this.

Evidence of a pre-meditated attack would be a bank robbery. You see, they have their getaway vehicle, route, and final destination already planned out. What did this boy have planned out after he killed her? You have no idea. You're speculating.

I'm unsure what you're trying to achieve by incinuating that I didn't read the OP past "gun", but you just look like someone who ran out of things to say.

 

[Thelona]

I'm not *missing your point*, I just didn't feel the need to address all of them in my post. However, you seem to want me to do so, so I will.

You said that the kid shouldn't have had access to the gun, and that kids, even without training, still know how to pick up a gun and shoot it. My point, which I already made, was that, with no gun in the house, the kid can't shoot anyone. I might not have assigned that answer to that particular question, but for me, it covers it. Without a gun, all you can do is throw bullets at people.

Moving on...

The police having guns pushes the boundaries of what should and shouldn't be allowed, in my opinion. I didn't say it was wrong, because it's not. Policing America without guns would be near-on impossible in most cases. But why does police having guns push the boundaries for me? Well, do I really have to post links to cases of police brutality/wrongful shootings etc? No, I don't think so. It's part of their job, which is why they're just on the right side of the line, for me. The police thing has very little to do with this discussion anyway, I'm happy to be moving on...

For me, using "it just IS" as an excuse for the amount of guns in the USA is... well, it's not really an excuse. It's like saying "because" when someone asks a question.

"When the country has that many guns, who in their right mind could really think they could get rid of all those guns?" Well...uh... the government? The people who pass the laws? Deterrents make people stop doing bad things. Some deterrents work, some don't. Do you honestly think that, if a law were passed banning citizens from owning firearms, only good people would hand them in? That may be the case if the punishment for not complying is "$10 fine kthx". If the punishment is jailtime, or something similarly "harsh", people will stop doing it. Not everyone, but more than your "good guys."

"you might aswell have it balanced out" - by implying that guns are actually protection? So that... you have MORE guns? Are you serious? You think America needs more guns? Guns are protection for 1 person. But for the 1 person they protect, they harm someone else. More harm is bad.


"none of the people he's robbing have a gun" - you don't need a gun to stop a robber.

"some people think that if you outlawed guns they'd all just magically vanish" - I'm struggling to cope with whether you're talking about me, or other people you've talked to. I don't believe that, but a reduction is a good thing. You seem to think it's a bad thing.

I'd say we're actually discussing whether or not America needs more guns or not. I'd say not. You'd say it does. That's what discussions are for.

when did i ever say America needed more guns? and the as to the "you don't need a gun to stop a robber" when that robber has a gun you do. thats the point i was trying to make.

and no Im not IMPLYING that guns are protection I'm SAYING that guns are protection. (when used by someone protecting themselves ofcourse) In what way are they not?

and no, i dont automaticlly see more harm = bad. given its the person who broke into the house to do who knows what being harmed.

sorry I just dont see a robber/murder/rapist/ all around hard criminal getting a bullet in the ass as a bad thing.


and no i wouldn't trust the government to get the guns off the street (see war on drugs) because its illegal for felons to have guns already and already punishable with jail time not a "$10 fine kthks" and yet there's still plenty of felons with guns. Go figure

 

[Skaw]

No. The fact he did what is in bold suggests that he had time to think about what he had done after shooting her. How him puting the gun back and removing the casing makes it pre-meditated is beyond me. Pre-meditated means he thought it out, in case you're wondering Skaw. It means he planned this shit, he didn't just do it in the spur of the moment. What is bolded out is no evidence of this.

Evidence of a pre-meditated attack would be a bank robbery. You see, they have their getaway vehicle, route, and final destination already planned out. What did this boy have planned out after he killed her? You have no idea. You're speculating.

I know what pre-meditated means, asshole. Think as an 11 year old would. If you seriously grabbed a shotgun in sudden passionate anger and shot somebody, would your thought process honestly be to stick around and tidy up? Or would you high tail it out and hide in a tree? Me, and likely everybody else, I'd do the latter. The only explanation as to why he would stick around is he's either incredibly OCD, or had thought this thing through.

Let's also continue to ignore the facts that he did it while she was in bed, likely sleeping, and his father gone. Meaning it couldn't possibly have been a spur of the moment shooting, because GUNS!!!!!! Seriously, do you honestly believe what you're saying?

Because a gun shows up, the topic on everybodies mind magically shifts from "Wow, what a monster," to "HOLY FUCK GUNS NEED TO BE BANNED!" That's incredibly messed up.

Evidence of a pre-meditated attack would be a bank robbery. You see, they have their getaway vehicle, route, and final destination already planned out. What did this boy have planned out after he killed her? You have no idea. You're speculating.

And it's no more speculation than saying he wouldn't have done it if he didn't have access to a gun, except that theres strong evidence to support that he had this all planned from the beginning, that you're square peg-circle hole claiming works towards the idea that he did this spontaneously for some unknown reason.

 

[bigbroon]

"Gun" is only important as far as how the murder was carried out is concerned. The fact that evidence suggests he killed her, put his gun back where it was, and removed the shell casing instead of running the fuck away like a scared child would after realizing he did something wrong is a pretty strong suggestion that he planned this all out. I can't tell for certain, because I'm not conjoined to the kid at the brain, but it's not hard to come to the conclusion from what happened that he would've done it regardless had there been a gun around or not. I mean, unlike you, I've read the article beyond the word "gun."

The gun discussion going on doesn't need to be, because this is a topic about a cold blooded murder, that seems to have been planned out, and not a spur of the moment shooting with a panicking assaulter realizing he fucked up and shitting himself over what he did. Yes, a gun was the weapon. Thats it. End of the gun discussion. Let's get back on the real topic of how an 11 year old turns in to a monster and murders an 8 month pregnant woman his dad was seeing with no remorse, which unless you're trying desperately to put your political views out in public, is a far more important topic than him using a gun.

Or you can continue to be an armchair politicial, shitting up this thread with an unneeded gun control discussion.

Since you added this drivel after I posted, I'll now address it.

Firstly, "seems to have been planned out" is a little different from "this was a planned out murder" in your first post. It may "seem" many things, to you it seems pre-meditated, to me, I'd like to keep more of an open mind considering the evidence that is actually on show.

It may be the "end of gun discussion" for you, that doesn't mean it has to be for everyone else. You sound like the spoiled kid who doesn't like what's on TV, but doesn't watch it when they get the channel they want.

The political thing doesn't really hold up, considering - as I have stated on numerous occasions - I don't even live in the country. I'm just stating my opinion on an issue relevant to the topic. Why is it relevant? Because some people say that he would have killed her anyway, and others believe this to be false, leading on to "if there were no guns, there was no murder." Quit your bitching about armchair politicians, it's called stating your opinion. Don't like it, go live in a cave.

"Think as an 11-year old..." "If you seriously grabbed a shotgun...would you stick around?" Well...for a start, I couldn't really comment with any real evidence to support my statement, because I have never shot someone, let alone fatally, and I've never had to think about what the fuck I'm going to do to not get caught. But what do I think I'd do? If I planned it, I'd ditch the weapon in a river. If I hadn't planned it, I'd probably either give the fuck up already as my chances are slim to none of getting away with it, or if I really wanted to get away with it, I'd still clear the fuck up and ditch it in a river. I know this because I've had 20 seconds to think about it, and came up with the same solution. Granted, I'm not 11. But that's the best I can do to your question.

 

[bigbroon]

I know what pre-meditated means, asshole. Think as an 11 year old would. If you seriously grabbed a shotgun in sudden passionate anger and shot somebody, would your thought process honestly be to stick around and tidy up? Or would you high tail it out and hide in a tree? Me, and likely everybody else, I'd do the latter. The only explanation as to why he would stick around is he's either incredibly OCD, or had thought this thing through.

Let's also continue to ignore the facts that he did it while she was in bed, likely sleeping, and his father gone. Meaning it couldn't possibly have been a spur of the moment shooting, because GUNS!!!!!! Seriously, do you honestly believe what you're saying?

Because a gun shows up, the topic on everybodies mind magically shifts from "Wow, what a monster," to "HOLY FUCK GUNS NEED TO BE BANNED!" That's incredibly messed up.



And it's no more speculation than saying he wouldn't have done it if he didn't have access to a gun, except that theres strong evidence to support that he had this all planned from the beginning, that you're square peg-circle hole claiming works towards the idea that he did this spontaneously for some unknown reason.

Alrighty.

1) If you edit your posts 10 times per, it makes it difficult to generate an appropriate response.

2) Show me this *strong* evidence that it was pre-meditated, and when I wake up (It's now 2:52am), if it's strong enough to make me believe he planned it, then you'll have convinced me.

3) What's with all the hostility? Calling me an asshole? We share different opinions on a matter, does that offend you so much that you have to sling insults at me? Seriously, let's keep this to a discussion.

 

[Skaw]

"Think as an 11-year old..." "If you seriously grabbed a shotgun...would you stick around?" Well...for a start, I couldn't really comment with any real evidence to support my statement, because I have never shot someone, let alone fatally, and I've never had to think about what the fuck I'm going to do to not get caught. But what do I think I'd do? If I planned it, I'd ditch the weapon in a river. If I hadn't planned it, I'd probably either give the fuck up already as my chances are slim to none of getting away with it, or if I really wanted to get away with it, I'd still clear the fuck up and ditch it in a river. I know this because I've had 20 seconds to think about it, and came up with the same solution. Granted, I'm not 11. But that's the best I can do to your question.

That's no where near to thinking like how an 11 year old would handle the situation. That's thinking like an adult. Are you honestly devoid of any juvenile experience of doing something wrong and hiding from your parents? How about a friend doing that? Television or Movies where a kid screws up and does the same thing? Or hell, do you not have any personal experience with children yourself? That's a pretty isolated instance of growing up then.

Alrighty.

1) If you edit your posts 10 times per, it makes it difficult to generate an appropriate response.

2) Show me this *strong* evidence that it was pre-meditated, and when I wake up (It's now 2:52am), if it's strong enough to make me believe he planned it, then you'll have convinced me.

3) What's with all the hostility? Calling me an asshole? We share different opinions on a matter, does that offend you so much that you have to sling insults at me? Seriously, let's keep this to a discussion.

2) The evidence of him cleaning up and not immediately running from the situation after realizing what he had did. This isn't normal child "Oh shit, I fucked up" behavior. I'd actually say any adult who snaps and kills someone suddenly wouldn't do this as well, they'd just flee the scene as well.

3) You assumed I didn't know what pre-meditated means. If I did this to you, would you not take this as an extremely thinly veiled insult on your intelligence that only a smug asshole would say?

Just to add, even if it was done in a moment of passion, the lack of a gun doesn't mean he wouldn't have pulled it off.

 

[bigbroon]

That's no where near to thinking like how an 11 year old would handle the situation. That's thinking like an adult. Are you honestly devoid of any juvenile experience of doing something wrong and hiding from your parents? How about a friend doing that? Television or Movies where a kid screws up and does the same thing? Or hell, do you not have any personal experience with children yourself? That's a pretty isolated instance of growing up then.



2) The evidence of him cleaning up and not immediately running from the situation after realizing what he had did. This isn't normal child "Oh shit, I fucked up" behavior. I'd actually say any adult who snaps and kills someone suddenly wouldn't do this as well, they'd just flee the scene as well.

3) You assumed I didn't know what pre-meditated means. If I did this to you, would you not take this as an extremely thinly veiled insult on your intelligence that only a smug asshole would say?

Just to add, even if it was done in a moment of passion, the lack of a gun doesn't mean he wouldn't have pulled it off.

1) I have children, one of whom is an 11-year old boy. I know a lot more than you might think about "juvenile behaviour".

2) So you're basing your presumption that this was a premeditated attack on the fact that he didn't bail and run the fuck away? That's a pretty large leap to make. Let's see... he could have... locked himself in the toilet, he could have stood there for god-knows how many minutes before he thought clearly... or, as has been said before, he's just a fucked up child. Maybe, just maybe, he picked up the gun, shot the woman, then did what he did. You're not showing me this "strong evidence" here, you're telling me what I already read. It's still not evidence of any type of pre-meditation to me, not matter how many times you feel like saying it.

3) Take a quick scan back at your first post. The one with ^^^^^ sarcasm in it. You called anyone with an opinion on guns in this thread "retarded armchair politicians oblivious to root stories", then said we all had "fucked up priorities." I'd called these insults, and they weren't veiled at all, let alone thinly. You dish out bullshit, you can expect at least 1 snide comment back, no?

 

[Skaw]

1) I have children, one of whom is an 11-year old boy. I know a lot more than you might think about "juvenile behaviour".

Really? Has your kid ever done something they really* weren't supposed to? Doesn't seem like it if you can't relate to how a child would act in this case. If that's so, congrats on raising such a fine child, but realize, that's an extremely, extremely rare case. Yeah, anyone who puts forth the effort can raise a kid to not be a pile of garbage, but kids fuck up. It just happens.

2) So you're basing your presumption that this was a premeditated attack on the fact that he didn't bail and run the fuck away? That's a pretty large leap to make. Let's see... he could have... locked himself in the toilet, he could have stood there for god-knows how many minutes before he thought clearly... or, as has been said before, he's just a fucked up child. Maybe, just maybe, he picked up the gun, shot the woman, then did what he did. You're not showing me this "strong evidence" here, you're telling me what I already read. It's still not evidence of any type of pre-meditation to me, not matter how many times you feel like saying it.

It's also not evidence that he just saw white, came to, and noticed his dad's girlfriend was dead and said "Huh, wouldjya look at that," picked up the casing, put his gun away, and went about his business. But it's better evidence in favor of him thinking this thing through from the start than the opposite.

3) Take a quick scan back at your first post. The one with ^^^^^ sarcasm in it. You called anyone with an opinion on guns in this thread "retarded armchair politicians oblivious to root stories", then said we all had "fucked up priorities." I'd called these insults, and they weren't veiled at all, let alone thinly. You dish out bullshit, you can expect at least 1 snide comment back, no?

So then why get up in arms when you just snowball it? OH GEEZ WHY CALL ME AN ASSHOLE WHEN I TRY TO SMUGLY INSULT YOU AFTER YOU MAKE GENERALIZATIONS ABOUT PEOPLE GEEEEEZ. Kinda dumb way to act, to be honest.

*Emphasis here. I don't mean just spilling juice on the carpet. I mean something that scares them when they think about what kind of punishment awaits them. Not killing your dads girlfriend and possibly future sibling level. Something more in line with breaking something they weren't supposed to be messing with in the first place.

 

[Thelona]

idk I'm sitting here trying to think of a way in wich this Couldn't have been premeditated, and im drawing blanks. i mean he shot her in her sleep. Him walking down the hall, seeing here lying in bed, and being suddenly overcome with unbearable rage and anger toward her and suddendly snaped and grabed his gun and shot her, just doesnt sound very plausible to me,

I mean i just cant see how he could have done something like this if he HADN'T thought it out.

I'm not saying he should spend the rest of his life in prison or get the death penalty (correct me if im wrong but i'm pretty sure theres a federal law that minors CANT be sentenced to death, even in texas)

but this sure as hell needs to be on his record for the rest of his life, and he sure as hell needs more then counseling, and therapy.