And nothing of value was lost.

[-bogart-]

um just wanted to point out that most of the peeps in da hood know each other , or of each other.

i would bet money the shooter know exactly whom he was killing. and the reporter need to go back to fact finding school. this story tells you no real facts beside 1 guy shot another guy(while other guy was hiting a woman) and ran.

 

[Lilavati]

Yes, I understand that a title including "BRANDISHING A KNIFE" gets a lot more attention than a title of "SHOWED A KNIFE TO FRIENDS" :lol-sign:

Though that's true, that's not exactly what I meant.

I meant that there are at least some people today who seem not to see a difference between actively threatening someone with a knife, or at least waiving one around (i.e. brandishing) and passively displaying that knife for viewing in a friendly way (i.e. showing). They literally do not see the distinction, because they view the mere presence of a knife (especially in the hands of someone who in their opinion should not have it) as so inherently threatening and dangerous that the conduct of the person in possession of the knife is irrelevant. Therefore, someone, for example, producing a folded pocket knife and laying it flat on their palm, saying "Hey guys, look at my new pocket knife, pretty sweet wood inlay, don't you think?" is not significantly different from someone whipping out an open switchblade and saying "Do you feel lucky, punk?"

 

[sparks19]

Yes, I understand that a title including "BRANDISHING A KNIFE" gets a lot more attention than a title of "SHOWED A KNIFE TO FRIENDS" :lol-sign:

Still messed up and misleading though.........I'm sure the same goes for TV news, online news, and any actual news paper. Take this one for example from a few weeks back.....commercial comes on that exclaims---"What strange side effect doctors have discovered following a tonsillectomy! We'll tell you at 11:00!"---- Well that got my attention because Zac had his tonsils out! I stayed up, tuned in, and waited! Know what it was? INCREASED APPETITE! Huh...........the kid's throat doesn't hurt anymore and now they eat more, who the hell would have guessed that one!!!

LOL I HATE that.

But... it can be more than "their throat hurt and now they can eat more"

Brians cousins son had his tonsils and adnoids out... not because theyw ere causing him pain but they were causing him to stop breathing when he was sleeping (scary)

Since he got them out he just eats non stop. he's getting fat and he's only 5. now of course that's not the adnoids fault lol it's his parents fault and they let him eat nothing but junk. But having them out REALLY increased his appetite for no apparent reason

Ok that was my off topic post for the day

 

[Jules]

:rofl1::rofl1::rofl1:

gotta have priorities lol

Of course :rofl1:

Whether this 'Samaritan' did right or wrong, the title of this thread is accurate IMO and that is what keeps me coming back here I think, LOL

Well, THAT is something we can absolutely agree on

 

[Romy]

I will never understand people who are so willing to let victims die.

This guy was a piece of ****, with a history of being a piece of **** and was going to continue to be a piece of ****. He's dead now for being a piece of **** to the wrong person. The world is now slightly better off because of this. Why lament the death of a scumbag? His life was worthless. He served to bring pain into other people's lives. How in the hell can anyone think the world would be better if he could still beat his girlfriend?

This. Having been in the exact same situation as the woman in the article (only I didn't get beat on in public) I would have been so relieved and happy if someone had shot him in the head in the midst of a beating. As it was I was lucky to get out alive (left me with traumatic brain injury though....fun)

 

[Zoom]

um just wanted to point out that most of the peeps in da hood know each other , or of each other.

i would bet money the shooter know exactly whom he was killing. and the reporter need to go back to fact finding school. this story tells you no real facts beside 1 guy shot another guy(while other guy was hiting a woman) and ran.

This.

The article is incredibly poorly written and seems to be cobbled together from one word answers from the few people who would say something. My money is on the fact that the shooter knew the neighborhood, possibly knew the guy and there is a whooooole lotta backstory to this that we're just not going to get. No one is talking, which tells me the dead guy got exactly what was coming to him and people in that neighborhood are GLAD that someone had the balls to stand up to him. I really can't bring myself to be at all sorry that the beater is dead.

 

[ACooper]

This.

The article is incredibly poorly written and seems to be cobbled together from one word answers from the few people who would say something. My money is on the fact that the shooter knew the neighborhood, possibly knew the guy and there is a whooooole lotta backstory to this that we're just not going to get. No one is talking, which tells me the dead guy got exactly what was coming to him and people in that neighborhood are GLAD that someone had the balls to stand up to him. I really can't bring myself to be at all sorry that the beater is dead.

Yep, I said similar a few pages ago.............My gut says that guy is not some random person to the neighborhood, some or many probably know exactly who it is but they aren't going to turn over on him for more than one reason most likely.

It's supposedly a "crime magnet" hood, at night, and this person is randomly walking around a strange hood and happens to have his gun on hand? 2 + 2 is not tallying up to 4........more like 7.5, LOL

 

[MPP]

Another bit of OT trivia: The "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" thing did not originate in the Bible. It's part of the Code of Hammaurabi from what, 4,000? years ago. I have read that it was intended not only as justice, but also as mercy. If someone damaged your eye, you could put out his eye in retaliation--but that was all you could do. You could not beat him half to death or kill his child or cut off his hand or do any other violent escalation.

I have no idea how this could apply to the given situation, but what the heck. Sounds like an incredibly violent neighborhood, and none of the characters appear to be upright citizens. There's just not enough information to make any decent judgement. And I wouldn't read too much into the reluctance of neighbors to say anything. In neighborhoods like that, keeping your mouth shut is usually a survival trait.

 

[Renee750il]

Another bit of OT trivia: The "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" thing did not originate in the Bible. It's part of the Code of Hammaurabi from what, 4,000? years ago. I have read that it was intended not only as justice, but also as mercy. If someone damaged your eye, you could put out his eye in retaliation--but that was all you could do. You could not beat him half to death or kill his child or cut off his hand or do any other violent escalation.

I have no idea how this could apply to the given situation, but what the heck. Sounds like an incredibly violent neighborhood, and none of the characters appear to be upright citizens. There's just not enough information to make any decent judgement. And I wouldn't read too much into the reluctance of neighbors to say anything. In neighborhoods like that, keeping your mouth shut is usually a survival trait.

Dead-on post, MPP

 

[Renee750il]

Time for a musical interlude

Outside a Small Circle of Friends

 

[Lilavati]

Another bit of OT trivia: The "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" thing did not originate in the Bible. It's part of the Code of Hammaurabi from what, 4,000? years ago. I have read that it was intended not only as justice, but also as mercy. If someone damaged your eye, you could put out his eye in retaliation--but that was all you could do. You could not beat him half to death or kill his child or cut off his hand or do any other violent escalation.

That was actually exactly what it was intended for . . . to prevent blood feuds. It perhaps a sign of how civilized most people have become that they see "eye for and eye" as being harsh justice . . . there was a time, as you point out, that it was considered the height of restraint.