Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/3/2007 7:32:00 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:48:17 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:57:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 7:58:10 AM EDT by jasonfin1128]



Family and friends of the victims said all they want is justice.



IMO, Justice was served...
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:06:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 8:07:15 AM EDT by CrownAndSeven]

Originally Posted By jasonfin1128:


Family and friends of the victims said all they want is justice.



IMO, Justice was served...



While I'm not going to shed a tear over the two douchebags robbing people and getting thiers in the end. There is a line between protecting yourself and your property and going vigilante.



ETA: In before Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpten make the rounds!


Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:16:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jasonfin1128:


Family and friends of the victims said all they want is justice.



IMO, Justice was served...


And WTF are they called "victims". They are the perps, not the victims. If they didn't want to be dead they shouldn't have burgled the house.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:26:42 AM EDT
Good shoot.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:28:07 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:36:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 7:11:00 PM EDT by bigscrun]
Looks like I was right, people are getting tired of this shit. Maybe after a few more dead felons, they will get it. Hard working people are tired of being victims to the animals that are allowed on our streets.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:36:31 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:45:53 AM EDT
Good shoot, and fuck "Quanell X".
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:51:02 AM EDT
My sympathies lie with the shooter.

However, in terms of keeping himself safe from legal woes, he pretty much did everything wrong. I'd like to see him make it out okay, but I don't think he will.

Still, Texas is Texas.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:54:44 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 9:26:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 9:27:01 AM EDT by CrownAndSeven]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:

Originally Posted By DirtyBird:
My sympathies lie with the shooter.

However, in terms of keeping himself safe from legal woes, he pretty much did everything wrong. I'd like to see him make it out okay, but I don't think he will.

Still, Texas is Texas.


Thats pretty much where I'm at.

The text of the 911 call reads very badly for Horn, the audio may tell the story differently.

Other than that it seems to be a a "Hey what are you fellas doing?" and a they where coming right at me defense.

It could all come down to what the forensics turns up.


He better start practicing that! The 911 text is going to hurt. While he was in the heat of the moment, his "i'm going to kill them" might make a pretty good case of premeditative homicide.

Link Posted: 12/3/2007 9:36:03 AM EDT
heard the 911 tape, sounded to me like he screwed himself with some of the comments he made, Don't think I would've done what he did, but then again I wasn't there, so its hard to say. Don't think he should be prosecuted under their laws, but believe he'll probably get hosed in the inevitable civil trial (wrongful death suit)
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 9:57:12 AM EDT
From what I have gathered it seems they were shit when they stepped foot onto his property. If that is the case, they were fair game.

However, this is America where Criminals have more rights than victims.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 10:14:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SCRIOS:
heard the 911 tape, sounded to me like he screwed himself with some of the comments he made, Don't think I would've done what he did, but then again I wasn't there, so its hard to say. Don't think he should be prosecuted under their laws, but believe he'll probably get hosed in the inevitable civil trial (wrongful death suit)


Tx law has preemption from civil prosecution if it is found to be a good shoot. Most Castle doctrine states do.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 11:01:45 AM EDT
I don't understand how you guys can be sympathetic to someone that killed two people that weren't threating his life nor his property. He could have stopped them and held them until the police came, but he just completely screwed himself when he popped 'em.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 11:41:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By forrestd:
I don't understand how you guys can be sympathetic to someone that killed two people that weren't threating his life nor his property. He could have stopped them and held them until the police came, but he just completely screwed himself when he popped 'em.



We are not 100% sure they wern't threatening him. While the 911 transcript looks bad, there is nothing saying he didn't walk outside with his shotgun and yell "Hey what are you two doing". If they start to approach him, he MAY HAVE felt he was in danger, So he shot...

I have 0% compassion for those who lose their lives while commiting a crime. Have you ever had your house robbed? It feels like a gut punch. Even worse is being robbed at gunpoint over a few hundred bucks in the cash register. I have ZERO, NONE, ZILCH, ZIPPO, NADA, NO compassion for thugs...

Link Posted: 12/3/2007 11:46:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By forrestd:
I don't understand how you guys can be sympathetic to someone that killed two people that weren't threating his life nor his property. He could have stopped them and held them until the police came, but he just completely screwed himself when he popped 'em.


I hope young me is not already becoming "back in the good ol days..." but back in the day of our founding fathers, these pricks would have been shot on the spot 5 burglaries ago...
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 12:07:47 PM EDT
height=8
Originally Posted By CrownAndSeven:

We are not 100% sure they wern't threatening him. While the 911 transcript looks bad, there is nothing saying he didn't walk outside with his shotgun and yell "Hey what are you two doing". If they start to approach him, he MAY HAVE felt he was in danger, So he shot...



Right, but he left his house and went out of his way to approach two guys with a shotgun. Even if they were committing a crime (that was in no way against him), he was still the aggressor in the situation regardless if they threatened him after that.

height=8


I have 0% compassion for those who lose their lives while commiting a crime. Have you ever had your house robbed? It feels like a gut punch. Even worse is being robbed at gunpoint over a few hundred bucks in the cash register. I have ZERO, NONE, ZILCH, ZIPPO, NADA, NO compassion for thugs...



They should be locked the hell up for what they did, of course. The guy who lived next door had absolutely no business confronting them with his shotgun. He has no castle doctrine justification in any of it. These guys were huge punks and should have been locked up, but killing them over what they did is ridiculous and unjustifiable.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 12:34:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 12:37:09 PM EDT by CrownAndSeven]

Originally Posted By forrestd:
Right, but he left his house and went out of his way to approach two guys with a shotgun. Even if they were committing a crime (that was in no way against him), he was still the aggressor in the situation regardless if they threatened him after that.


Except this part:
"Get the law over here quick. I had no choice," a frantic-sounding Horn says. "They came in the front yard with me. I had no choice."

While I'm not discounting this guy went LOOKING for trouble. If they approached him at all, in his yard or the neighbors, THEY become the agressor. All he has to say is "I felt my life was in danger".

Here is another senario. What if... In this guys mind, he thought there was a chance his neighbor had been harmed or killed amist this robbery. If this guy goes out to confront the robbers and check to insure his neighbor is ok and shoots these guys, could he be justified in preventing further harm or injury to someone else?





They should be locked the hell up for what they did, of course. The guy who lived next door had absolutely no business confronting them with his shotgun. He has no castle doctrine justification in any of it. These guys were huge punks and should have been locked up, but killing them over what they did is ridiculous and unjustifiable.


If I heard the glass shatter on my neighbors car, I would probably go outside to investigate what is going on. Being that I'm a gun owner, I would probably have a gun with me. If I said "hey what the hell is going on out here" and suddenly two dudes come running at me, I'd shoot first and ask later. That would in a sense be the same or similar senario. Would my case be justified?

The unfortunate part is this poor bastard called 911, had an entire conversation with the operator. THEN went out after being advised not to.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 12:54:38 PM EDT
height=8
Originally Posted By CrownAndSeven:
Except this part:
"Get the law over here quick. I had no choice," a frantic-sounding Horn says. "They came in the front yard with me. I had no choice."

While I'm not discounting this guy went LOOKING for trouble. If they approached him at all, in his yard or the neighbors, THEY become the agressor. All he has to say is "I felt my life was in danger".


He can say that, but if nobody believes him he's pretty screwed.

height=8

Here is another senario. What if... In this guys mind, he thought there was a chance his neighbor had been harmed or killed amist this robbery. If this guy goes out to confront the robbers and check to insure his neighbor is ok and shoots these guys, could he be justified in preventing further harm or injury to someone else?


I really doubt a scenario like that would hold up in court, but I'm not a lawyer (and would never admit to being one if I was! height=8

If I heard the glass shatter on my neighbors car, I would probably go outside to investigate what is going on. Being that I'm a gun owner, I would probably have a gun with me. If I said "hey what the hell is going on out here" and suddenly two dudes come running at me, I'd shoot first and ask later. That would in a sense be the same or similar senario. Would my case be justified?

The unfortunate part is this poor bastard called 911, had an entire conversation with the operator. THEN went out after being advised not to.


If you didn't know what was going on and wanted to check THEN the SHTF, sure you're probably justified. If you KNEW what was going on, called 911, was told by the operator to stay inside and wait for the police but went out anyway, then I'd say no, probably not.

This guy probably had good intentions, but he totally botched the entire scenario.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 1:30:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By forrestd:
I don't understand how you guys can be sympathetic to someone that killed two people that weren't threating his life nor his property. He could have stopped them and held them until the police came, but he just completely screwed himself when he popped 'em.


Wow, just wow.

He reported that he attempted to effect a lawful arrest of the two criminals, but that they resisted and advanced toward him. That justifies the use of lethal force as there were two of them and he had reason to fear GBH or death. The fact that you're so sympathetic to a couple of violent criminals that invade the home of another is distressing.

While it may not have been the most prudent move due to the legal risk, he was justified in trying to place them under arrest for committing a felony in plain sight. The fact that anyone opposes this shooting tells just how pathetic, weak, and unworthy this nation has become. Two evil men were killed during their evil actions. Boo-fucking-hoo. The fact that they have previous convictions makes it pretty clear that the current criminal "justice" system was ineffective in deterring them from violating the rights of others.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 2:09:01 PM EDT
the dispatcher cautions. "Don't be shooting nobody." = Go ahead and shoot!

Everyone knows the double negative rule. I say charge the dispatcher!
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 2:23:11 PM EDT
height=8
Originally Posted By SARS:
height=8
Originally Posted By forrestd:
I don't understand how you guys can be sympathetic to someone that killed two people that weren't threating his life nor his property. He could have stopped them and held them until the police came, but he just completely screwed himself when he popped 'em.


Wow, just wow. He
While it may not have been the most prudent move due to the legal risk, he was justified in trying to place them under arrest for committing a felony in plain sight. The fact that anyone opposes this shooting tells just how pathetic, weak, and unworthy this nation has become. Two evil men were killed during their evil actions. Boo-fucking-hoo. The fact that they have previous convictions makes it pretty clear that the current criminal "justice" system was ineffective in deterring them from violating the rights of others.


Did you read the 911 call log? This guy said he was going to kill them. I'm all for concealed carry laws, castle doctrine laws, and defense of property laws, but this guy went psycho on two thieves when the police were already on their way.

height=8

The man became upset as he described seeing two men leaving his neighbor's home.

Caller: "They got a bag of something."

Operator: "Don't go outside the house."

Caller: "I'm doing it."

Operator: "Do not go outside the house."

Caller: "I'm sorry. This ain't right, buddy."

Operator: You're going to get yourself shot if you go outside that house with the gun."

Caller: "You wanna make a bet? I'm going to kill them."

Moments later a shotgun was heard firing at least twice.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 2:41:55 PM EDT
I listened to the audio, too. It does not change the fact that it was justified. Two burglars got what they had coming for breaking into a home, stealing, and then reportedly threatening/attempting to resist arrest. It quite possibly was a Freudian slip on his part, and I will certainly not hang him out to dry over merely some silly statement made while under the effect of adrenaline.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 3:34:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 3:35:46 PM EDT by migradog]
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 3:49:53 PM EDT
Yippee! Two less punks...

No­te to self: Remember to NOT stay on the line w/911 if investigating a break-in @ the neighbors.

Link Posted: 12/3/2007 3:54:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By forrestd: They should be locked the hell up for what they did, of course.
Great, so now it's the tax payers of Texas who pay the price for their crimes!

I'm not "death penalty for B&E," but good neighbors look out for each other, and two less home invasion specialists is a good thing. If they had stopped & dropped, then they'd be eating institutional food in a warm building on some one else's dime.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 4:56:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Rune75:
the dispatcher cautions. "Don't be shooting nobody." = Go ahead and shoot!

Everyone knows the double negative rule. I say charge the dispatcher!


I caught that too!


If his statement of premeditation counts during a time of increased adrenaline, so should the fact that a 911 operator told him to shoot someone (or to not shoot nobody).
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 5:08:51 PM EDT
The guy talked way to much, should have kept most of his "feelings" to himself.

I dont know about where he was at, but if you call 9-1-1 and talk to me. ( you would be lucky, and I would not put you into a position like that other dispatcher did) I do not think you have any obligation to follow any of my "commands"...
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 5:24:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By R-32:
The guy talked way to much, should have kept most of his "feelings" to himself.

I dont know about where he was at, but if you call 9-1-1 and talk to me. ( you would be lucky, and I would not put you into a position like that other dispatcher did) I do not think you have any obligation to follow any of my "commands"...



Yeah, I could see how this would go...

Operator: "911 what is your emergency"
Me: "I think My neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "CrownAndSeven???"
Me: "Scrios??"
Operator: "No stupid it's R-32... I really don't sound like him do I?"
Me: "Ohh shit, sorry, no.. Not at all"
Operator: "Anyhow, whats the problem"
Me: "Neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "Why are you calling me... Let them go, shoot them, or go help them load the TV"
<Shotgun rack>
Me: "Yeah, I'll go get the TV, you want anything?"
Operator: "Nah, thanks though. See you on ARFcom"
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 5:35:00 PM EDT
Well, I'm clearly in the minority here. I've always thought that punishments ought to fit the crimes and that criminals should be tried by a jury of their peers instead of being shot on sight. The exceptions being in cases of self-defense and defense of others to stop murder, kidnapping, rape, etc. Maybe I eat too much veggie meat or something.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 6:07:40 PM EDT
Well forrestd, if the homeowner had shot the robbers, instead of the neighbor, would that have been excusable?

I agree that he will be hung out to dry in a civil court because he handled everything wrong, but there are several things to remember.

1. Burglery is a dangerous "profession" and that bad guys know that before they begin their nefarious activities. They chose to gamble their physical well being. The consequences of thir actions are their own fault.

2. The burglarized homeowner would have a right to defend his home. If burglars are escaping, it's entirely plausible that they have harmed the homeowner. If the neighbor sees them leaving, he can reasonably assumed the homeowner is dead/injured or not home.

3. The neighbor would have a right to defend his own home. If they stepped on his property, he'll most likely be acquitted in a criminal trial.

Now, the next door neighbor sees these burglars and KNOWS they are VIOLENT CRIMINALS. He has a right to defend himself, his property, and goes outside to prevent them from turning on his house. If they approach them, especially after he's made it known he's armed, it's entirely reasonable to assume they intend to harm him. Shooting at that point would be understandable.

4. Citizens arrests may be legal in TX. If so, the neighbor may very well have been attempting one. Many criminals would flee an arrestor, or maybe even attack back, in order to prevent the arrest. I'm confident a KNOWN VIOLENT CRIMINAL might attempt to attack an arresting citizen. If the neighbor was being attacked, he could shoot out of self-defense.

I noticed charges had not yet been filed. I take this to mean that preliminary evidence indicates the robbers were NOT running AWAY from the shooter or "stoping and dropping" when they were shot. So given the limited info, at this time I would ASSUME they were advancing on the nieghbor when he shot.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 6:39:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 6:40:28 PM EDT by forrestd]
height=8
Originally Posted By BusySquirrel:
Well forrestd, if the homeowner had shot the robbers, instead of the neighbor, would that have been excusable?

I agree that he will be hung out to dry in a civil court because he handled everything wrong, but there are several things to remember.

1. Burglery is a dangerous "profession" and that bad guys know that before they begin their nefarious activities. They chose to gamble their physical well being. The consequences of thir actions are their own fault.

2. The burglarized homeowner would have a right to defend his home. If burglars are escaping, it's entirely plausible that they have harmed the homeowner. If the neighbor sees them leaving, he can reasonably assumed the homeowner is dead/injured or not home.

3. The neighbor would have a right to defend his own home. If they stepped on his property, he'll most likely be acquitted in a criminal trial.

Now, the next door neighbor sees these burglars and KNOWS they are VIOLENT CRIMINALS. He has a right to defend himself, his property, and goes outside to prevent them from turning on his house. If they approach them, especially after he's made it known he's armed, it's entirely reasonable to assume they intend to harm him. Shooting at that point would be understandable.

4. Citizens arrests may be legal in TX. If so, the neighbor may very well have been attempting one. Many criminals would flee an arrestor, or maybe even attack back, in order to prevent the arrest. I'm confident a KNOWN VIOLENT CRIMINAL might attempt to attack an arresting citizen. If the neighbor was being attacked, he could shoot out of self-defense.

I noticed charges had not yet been filed. I take this to mean that preliminary evidence indicates the robbers were NOT running AWAY from the shooter or "stoping and dropping" when they were shot. So given the limited info, at this time I would ASSUME they were advancing on the nieghbor when he shot.


Yes, the homeowner would have been completely justified under castle doctrine law. Yes, burglary is a risky act, but it was committed against the home owner and not against the neighbor. The neighbor did the right thing calling the cops, but he should have stopped there. I disagree with point number two. The neighbor can't assume the homeowner has been injured when he decides to shoot the burglars. That's too risky of an assumption in my opinion. It's just not prudent. Maybe he sold the stuff to them on Craigslist, who knows for sure? There's just too many variables in the rest of the questions to be sure. I can't say they didn't happen in a completely lawful way for the neighbor, but since there was so much variability, if I were the him I would have stayed inside and let the cops deal with it. I'm not going to rot in prison to save my neighbor's TV from being stolen.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:08:15 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:11:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By migradog:

If we are to have a "War on Crime"
Let's start making as dangerous for the criminals
as they make it for their victims.



A-FUCKING-MEN !!!
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:11:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 7:12:41 PM EDT by BusySquirrel]

Originally Posted By forrestd:
I disagree with point number two. The neighbor can't assume the homeowner has been injured when he decides to shoot the burglars.


I did not say the neighbor should shoot at number two. That came later, in three after he knew they were violent criminals and advancing on him, on his property.

Number two said that if burglars were leaving the homeowners house, it was reasonable to assume either:

  • A. The homeowner is dead or injured.

  • B. The homeowner was not home.

Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:23:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GrabMyWrist:

Originally Posted By migradog:

If we are to have a "War on Crime"
Let's start making as dangerous for the criminals
as they make it for their victims.



A-FUCKING-MEN !!!
I agree with this statement. I have not been keeping
up on this story but I thought that that the perps came at him with a pry bar and
Mr Horn droped them after the came at him. The other thing is his neighbor asked
him to watch his house and according to the attorney on the Xm radio show I was
listining to stated that the castle doctrine law will apply in this case.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:25:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/3/2007 7:27:31 PM EDT by forrestd]
height=8
Originally Posted By migradog:
height=8
Originally Posted By forrestd:
Yes, the homeowner would have been completely justified under castle doctrine law. Yes, burglary is a risky act, but it was committed against the home owner and not against the neighbor. The neighbor did the right thing calling the cops, but he should have stopped there. I disagree with point number two. The neighbor can't assume the homeowner has been injured when he decides to shoot the burglars. That's too risky of an assumption in my opinion. It's just not prudent. Maybe he sold the stuff to them on Craigslist, who knows for sure? There's just too many variables in the rest of the questions to be sure. I can't say they didn't happen in a completely lawful way for the neighbor, but since there was so much variability, if I were the him I would have stayed inside and let the cops deal with it. I'm not going to rot in prison to save my neighbor's TV from being stolen.


I'm sure that burglers sleep better at night knowing that there are neighbors like you,
that will take no other steps than calling the police.

Sure, confronting a burgler is dangerous.

But, why should we as citizens, roll over and lets criminals have their way with us?
Remember, the police have no obligation to protect us.
They respond to crimes that have already occured.

height=8
Originally Posted By forrestd:
if I were the him I would have stayed inside and let the cops deal with it.


How many people practiced this, while Kitty Genovese was being stabbed to death?

If we are to have a "War on Crime"
Let's start making as dangerous for the criminals
as they make it for their victims.




If a burglar comes in my house, he's gonna get shot. If he's in someone else's house, I'm calling the cops. If they were killing my neighbor, I'd do whatever I could to stop them even if it meant shooting them. Do you understand now what I'm saying? I won't stick my neck out for my neighbor's stuff, but I will for their life.

height=8
Originally Posted By BusySquirrel:
I did not say the neighbor should shoot at number two. That came later, in three after he knew they were violent criminals and advancing on him, on his property.


Him telling the 911 operator that he was going to kill them made it sound like he made up his mind whether they advanced on him or not. None of us have all the facts, but from what I've gathered this guy is walking a pretty thin in a really small gray area.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:51:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By forrestd:

Him telling the 911 operator that he was going to kill them made it sound like he made up his mind whether they advanced on him or not.


You betcha...


None of us have all the facts,


Damn right...



but from what I've gathered this guy is walking a pretty thin in a really small gray area.


Sometimes that is good enough.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 7:59:12 PM EDT



"They came in the front yard with me. I had no choice."



Have you noticed how you only read this part in about 1 ouf of 10 articles on the story---and you only hear it on tape if you listen to the full recording that was out when it happened--never in an excerpt during TV/radio coverage
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:03:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CrownAndSeven:

Originally Posted By R-32:
The guy talked way to much, should have kept most of his "feelings" to himself.

I dont know about where he was at, but if you call 9-1-1 and talk to me. ( you would be lucky, and I would not put you into a position like that other dispatcher did) I do not think you have any obligation to follow any of my "commands"...



Yeah, I could see how this would go...

Operator: "911 what is your emergency"
Me: "I think My neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "CrownAndSeven???"
Me: "Scrios??"
Operator: "No stupid it's R-32... I really don't sound like him do I?"
Me: "Ohh shit, sorry, no.. Not at all"
Operator: "Anyhow, whats the problem"
Me: "Neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "Why are you calling me... Let them go, shoot them, or go help them load the TV"
<Shotgun rack>
Me: "Yeah, I'll go get the TV, you want anything?"
Operator: "Nah, thanks though. See you on ARFcom"




Want a job?
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:06:52 PM EDT
height=8
Originally Posted By R-32:
height=8
Originally Posted By CrownAndSeven:
height=8
Originally Posted By R-32:
The guy talked way to much, should have kept most of his "feelings" to himself.

I dont know about where he was at, but if you call 9-1-1 and talk to me. ( you would be lucky, and I would not put you into a position like that other dispatcher did)hink



Yeah, I could see how this would go...

Operator: "911 what is your emergency"
Me: "I think My neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "CrownAndSeven???"
Me: "Scrios??"
Operator: "No stupid it's R-32... I really don't sound like him do I?"
Me: "Ohh shit, sorry, no.. Not at all"
Operator: "Anyhow, whats the problem"
Me: "Neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "Why are you calling me... Let them go, shoot them, or go help them load the TV"
<Shotgun rack>
Me: "Yeah, I'll go get the TV, you want anything?"
Operator: "Nah, thanks though. See you on ARFcom"


hone
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:11:13 PM EDT
21 posts, most in this thread, I wonder if this is a troll account?
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:14:00 PM EDT
Not a troll, just an ARFCOM non-conformist! Besides, what's wrong with a little healthy discussion?
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:14:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By forrestd:

Originally Posted By R-32:

Originally Posted By CrownAndSeven:

Originally Posted By R-32:
The guy talked way to much, should have kept most of his "feelings" to himself.

I dont know about where he was at, but if you call 9-1-1 and talk to me. ( you would be lucky, and I would not put you into a position like that other dispatcher did) I do not think you have any obligation to follow any of my "commands"...



Yeah, I could see how this would go...

Operator: "911 what is your emergency"
Me: "I think My neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "CrownAndSeven???"
Me: "Scrios??"
Operator: "No stupid it's R-32... I really don't sound like him do I?"
Me: "Ohh shit, sorry, no.. Not at all"
Operator: "Anyhow, whats the problem"
Me: "Neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "Why are you calling me... Let them go, shoot them, or go help them load the TV"
<Shotgun rack>
Me: "Yeah, I'll go get the TV, you want anything?"
Operator: "Nah, thanks though. See you on ARFcom"




Want a job?


Phone sex operator?


Shit yeah, you haven't heard R-32's voice???
There is a reason 10 other dudes suddenly got their HAM
license when R-32 let it known he was on there frequently.

Link Posted: 12/3/2007 8:21:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By forrestd:
Not a troll, just an ARFCOM non-conformist! Besides, what's wrong with a little healthy discussion?




Nothing at all. NON-Conformist nice to meet you, I get in a bit of trouble for being a NON-Apologist.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 9:00:09 PM EDT
<Homer> I never apologize. I'm sorry, but that's just the way I am.<Homer>
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:10:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By migradog:

Originally Posted By forrestd:
I don't understand how you guys can be sympathetic to someone that killed two people that weren't threating his life nor his property. He could have stopped them and held them until the police came, but he just completely screwed himself when he popped 'em.


I'm always sympathetic to someone that rids society of low-life, worthless, pieces of shit like burglerizing asshats.

The world is a better place without them in it.

More burglers get smoked, less burgleries are gonna happen.

There can't be a war on crime until we start fighting back.
The burglers knew exactly what they were doing when they commited their crime.

The shooter didn't. Looks to me like he shot 2 felons during the commision of a felony.
Good shoot in most states.

I guess if I walk into a McDonald during a robbery, I should wait to see if the robbers threaten my life or property before taking action.


+1 Well said.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:11:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/4/2007 7:13:07 AM EDT by Da_Bunny]

Originally Posted By CrownAndSeven:

Originally Posted By R-32:
The guy talked way to much, should have kept most of his "feelings" to himself.

I dont know about where he was at, but if you call 9-1-1 and talk to me. ( you would be lucky, and I would not put you into a position like that other dispatcher did) I do not think you have any obligation to follow any of my "commands"...



Yeah, I could see how this would go...

Operator: "911 what is your emergency"
Me: "I think My neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "CrownAndSeven???"
Me: "Scrios??"
Operator: "No stupid it's R-32... I really don't sound like him do I?"
Me: "Ohh shit, sorry, no.. Not at all"
Operator: "Anyhow, whats the problem"
Me: "Neighbors house is getting robbed"
Operator: "Why are you calling me... Let them go, shoot them, or go help them load the TV" DRAW DOWN!!!!
<Shotgun rack>
Me: "Yeah, I'll go get the TV, you want anything?"
Operator: "Nah, thanks though. See you on ARFcom""See if he has any ammo"
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top