Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: Teen shoots and kills his father to save his mother.
  • Subject: Teen shoots and kills his father to save his mother.
Subject: Teen shoots and kills his father to save his mother.


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: Garland
Posted by: Infinate Virtues
Why did he not shoot him in the leg?

I'm sure he'll be asking himself the same thing.
"Shoot to wound" is BS. If you're shooting someone, you're accepting that you could kill them. If it so happens that you end their ability to threaten others without killing them, then great, but it's not something you can aim to do (no pun intended).

I don't see the logic in this. It's a bullet that goes in an almost perfect straight path. You can easily shoot someone without killing them.


And you can easily kill someone by shooting them in the arm or leg.

Ask anyone in law enforcement or the military about this. They'll tell you the same thing.

  • 11.27.2012 8:24 PM PDT

It's not my fault, I was just trying to tie my shoe!

Join TFS, the grooviest private group on bungie.net! We r cewl gaiz who dun fraid of nething. Join for heated debates, game nights, and lols. We're waiting! (Be a man) We must be swift as the coursing river. (Be a man), With all the force of a great typhoon. (Be a man), With all the strength of a raging fire. Mysterious as the dark side of the moon!


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: Garland
Nobody does this, and certainly not in the situation described in the OP.

Go troll elsewhere.

How am I troll? Because I broke your logic?

You didn't break anyone's logic, you bumbling buffoon.

  • 11.27.2012 8:24 PM PDT

Boltshot = mini shotgun

I don't think Channing had much of a choice in this situation. He sees his mother about to die and has to save her somehow.
5 shots may have been too many, though.

  • 11.27.2012 8:25 PM PDT

Gamers don't die, they just go offline.

"...and the fanboys will unite to slay the Call of Duty threat for the greater good of gaming."

Its easy to say that the teen should have shot him in the leg or arm. But I doubt any of us would have been able to have a steady aim with a rational mindset in that situation unless we had infantry training which I doubt the teen had. The father may have not stopped at the first shot and the teen, clearly not thinking straight decided to shoot until his father stopped. Which he did at five shots.

[Edited on 11.27.2012 8:26 PM PST]

  • 11.27.2012 8:25 PM PDT

Da Husk.


Posted by: Leafie

Posted by: petitminou
Proof of Oedipus Complex

Hurr durr I took a psych class now I'm a psychologist and can analyze every1!!!!



*facedesk*

  • 11.27.2012 8:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: AgentCOP1
Posted by: Heart of Stone
He deserves to go to jail. He killed someone, thus broke the law, thus he gets prison time. This is pretty simple.

So much stupidity in this single post, that should do me for a couple years.

Nice ad hominem argument.

  • 11.27.2012 8:26 PM PDT

Mreh.


Posted by: Leafie

Posted by: petitminou
Proof of Oedipus Complex

Hurr durr I took a psych class now I'm a psychologist and can analyze every1!!!!




Hurr durr, I have yet to realize that Petit Minou jokes around a lot!1!!!11!

  • 11.27.2012 8:26 PM PDT

Please do not send me group invites.


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: AgentCOP1
Posted by: Heart of Stone
He deserves to go to jail. He killed someone, thus broke the law, thus he gets prison time. This is pretty simple.

So much stupidity in this single post, that should do me for a couple years.

Nice ad hominem argument.
Should cops go to jail when they shoot a criminal?

  • 11.27.2012 8:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: coolmike699

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: Garland
Posted by: Infinate Virtues
Why did he not shoot him in the leg?

I'm sure he'll be asking himself the same thing.
"Shoot to wound" is BS. If you're shooting someone, you're accepting that you could kill them. If it so happens that you end their ability to threaten others without killing them, then great, but it's not something you can aim to do (no pun intended).

I don't see the logic in this. It's a bullet that goes in an almost perfect straight path. You can easily shoot someone without killing them.


And you can easily kill someone by shooting them in the arm or leg.

Ask anyone in law enforcement or the military about this. They'll tell you the same thing.

That's not true at all. The chances of you nicking an artery in either limb is very slim, if you're using a small caliber round.

  • 11.27.2012 8:27 PM PDT

Religion breeds hate


How about Shooting him in the leg if he cared about him that much... or just shoot it at no one to get his attention


[Edited on 11.27.2012 8:27 PM PST]

  • 11.27.2012 8:27 PM PDT

Posted by: Gen Petitt
ME2 was known for stupidity and being retarded

Happens all the time...

[Edited on 11.27.2012 8:29 PM PST]

  • 11.27.2012 8:27 PM PDT


Posted by: Heart of Stone
He deserves to go to jail. He killed someone, thus broke the law, thus he gets prison time. This is pretty simple.

Shut up.

He killed someone in defense of someone else. I feel bad for the kid having to make a decision like this.

  • 11.27.2012 8:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: AgentCOP1
Posted by: Heart of Stone
He deserves to go to jail. He killed someone, thus broke the law, thus he gets prison time. This is pretty simple.

So much stupidity in this single post, that should do me for a couple years.

Nice ad hominem argument.
Should cops go to jail when they shoot a criminal?

That's entirely different. You all should stop using fallacies.

  • 11.27.2012 8:28 PM PDT

Please do not send me group invites.


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: coolmike699

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: Garland
Posted by: Infinate Virtues
Why did he not shoot him in the leg?

I'm sure he'll be asking himself the same thing.
"Shoot to wound" is BS. If you're shooting someone, you're accepting that you could kill them. If it so happens that you end their ability to threaten others without killing them, then great, but it's not something you can aim to do (no pun intended).

I don't see the logic in this. It's a bullet that goes in an almost perfect straight path. You can easily shoot someone without killing them.


And you can easily kill someone by shooting them in the arm or leg.

Ask anyone in law enforcement or the military about this. They'll tell you the same thing.

That's not true at all. The chances of you nicking an artery in either limb is very slim, if you're using a small caliber round.

Not to mention that's not what they teach. I've never taken a firearm course where they taught you to shoot to wound. EVERY course teaches shoot to kill/destroy.

  • 11.27.2012 8:28 PM PDT

Please do not send me group invites.


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: AgentCOP1
Posted by: Heart of Stone
He deserves to go to jail. He killed someone, thus broke the law, thus he gets prison time. This is pretty simple.

So much stupidity in this single post, that should do me for a couple years.

Nice ad hominem argument.
Should cops go to jail when they shoot a criminal?

That's entirely different. You all should stop using fallacies.
No fallacies here; I'm trying to understand your logic. The boy did not break the law - he stopped a criminal. Spousal abuse is a crime.

  • 11.27.2012 8:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: MadMax888
No fallacies here; I'm trying to understand your logic. The boy did not break the law - he stopped a criminal. Spousal abuse is a crime.

He still killed someone when it was unnecessary. He deserves a sentence. By the logic of everyone here, you should be able to kill someone because they're a threat to someone else as if alternatives don't exist. It's barbarism.

  • 11.27.2012 8:30 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Sup.


Posted by: ankerd123

I know.

Also @T1D3

Not trolling.

I was being sarcastic.

  • 11.27.2012 8:30 PM PDT

Key

Things like this usually don't happen sporadically or just one time, especially to this extent. There was probably a history of abuse and thus a built up animosity for his father which was all released probably at the one point in time when he thought he could express his animosity/hatred/contempt and get away with it while also, benevolently, saving his mother's life. I believe, in this situation, that benevolence away from any malevolence the act may have in respect to his feelings towards his father, though the animosity, I'm sure, made it easier to pull that trigger*.

*I am in no way saying something like this is ever easy, just that it may have been easier when his feelings towards his father were taken into account.

©

[Edited on 11.27.2012 8:31 PM PST]

  • 11.27.2012 8:30 PM PDT

Please do not send me group invites.


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: MadMax888
No fallacies here; I'm trying to understand your logic. The boy did not break the law - he stopped a criminal. Spousal abuse is a crime.

He still killed someone when it was unnecessary. He deserves a sentence. By the logic of everyone here, you should be able to kill someone because they're a threat to someone else as if alternatives don't exist. It's barbarism.
At what point would shooting his father be acceptable?

  • 11.27.2012 8:31 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: MadMax888
No fallacies here; I'm trying to understand your logic. The boy did not break the law - he stopped a criminal. Spousal abuse is a crime.

He still killed someone when it was unnecessary. He deserves a sentence. By the logic of everyone here, you should be able to kill someone because they're a threat to someone else as if alternatives don't exist. It's barbarism.
At what point would shooting his father be acceptable?

When he has a weapon and is undoubtedly going to kill him or someone else. Beating someone doesn't constitute a death.

  • 11.27.2012 8:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag: ankerd
  • user homepage:

Bringing in Fikst. Bringing back lmao.
Inheritor # 475 world,

#6 In the Country.

Halocharts.com


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: AgentCOP1
Posted by: Heart of Stone
He deserves to go to jail. He killed someone, thus broke the law, thus he gets prison time. This is pretty simple.

So much stupidity in this single post, that should do me for a couple years.

Nice ad hominem argument.
Should cops go to jail when they shoot a criminal?

That's entirely different. You all should stop using fallacies.


Yes.

If it was the same situation. The cop being the boy.

He should have used non lethal force. If the police had shot multiple times and murdered the man then yes he should go to jail.

  • 11.27.2012 8:33 PM PDT

Unto the Fray we go

It had to be done

  • 11.27.2012 8:33 PM PDT

"There's this theory that if there were an infinite number of monkeys pecking away at typewriters, they would eventually write the great works of Shakespeare, but thanks to the internet we now know that's not true." -Adam Savage

"Time is not made out of lines. It is made out of circles. That is why clocks are round." -Caboose

NOTE: This is my new primary account. My old account was AgentCOPP1, and I changed it because it was linked to a gamertag that I no longer use.

Posted by: Edmi Wohusee

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: Garland
Nobody does this, and certainly not in the situation described in the OP.

Go troll elsewhere.

How am I troll? Because I broke your logic?

You didn't break anyone's logic, you bumbling buffoon.

Watch out guys, we've got a bad ass over here.

  • 11.27.2012 8:33 PM PDT

Please do not send me group invites.


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: MadMax888
No fallacies here; I'm trying to understand your logic. The boy did not break the law - he stopped a criminal. Spousal abuse is a crime.

He still killed someone when it was unnecessary. He deserves a sentence. By the logic of everyone here, you should be able to kill someone because they're a threat to someone else as if alternatives don't exist. It's barbarism.
At what point would shooting his father be acceptable?

When he has a weapon and is undoubtedly going to kill him or someone else. Beating someone doesn't constitute a death.
So..gun loaded and aimed, finger on the trigger? Anything else, and the boy goes to jail for defending his mother from his abusive father?

Okay..

  • 11.27.2012 8:34 PM PDT

It's not my fault, I was just trying to tie my shoe!

Join TFS, the grooviest private group on bungie.net! We r cewl gaiz who dun fraid of nething. Join for heated debates, game nights, and lols. We're waiting! (Be a man) We must be swift as the coursing river. (Be a man), With all the force of a great typhoon. (Be a man), With all the strength of a raging fire. Mysterious as the dark side of the moon!


Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: Heart of Stone

Posted by: MadMax888
No fallacies here; I'm trying to understand your logic. The boy did not break the law - he stopped a criminal. Spousal abuse is a crime.

He still killed someone when it was unnecessary. He deserves a sentence. By the logic of everyone here, you should be able to kill someone because they're a threat to someone else as if alternatives don't exist. It's barbarism.
At what point would shooting his father be acceptable?

When he has a weapon and is undoubtedly going to kill him or someone else. Beating someone doesn't constitute a death.

lolno

  • 11.27.2012 8:34 PM PDT