Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Don't worry, Troy -- wikipedia will suffice to meet the reading requirements Journeyman Grakmar mentioned.

Avatar 720 wrote:If you win the 'unlucky lottery' aren't you actually a loser?

Heh. I suppose so.

I'm just wondering, out of all of the cars in the US (and probably the world) that you could throw a rock at, what are the odds that the owner of the one car you decide to mess with has a crossbow locked and loaded.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:Don't worry, Troy -- wikipedia will suffice to meet the reading requirements Journeyman Grakmar mentioned.

Wikipedia?

That isn't a scholarly resource!

This will help him understand. All of you should watch it, really.

http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6579356/game-of-thrones-rpg

Grakmar wrote:Another thread successfully executing BLAME THE VICTIM!

I don't think anyone's blaming the guy who got rocks thrown at his car...

Avatar 720 wrote:

purplefood wrote:Ha quarrel...

Yay! Someone got it!

And first time too

It's totally a Horatio Kane moment...
Wait until they put it into CSI: Miami...

He needs to aim better.

purplefood wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:

purplefood wrote:Ha quarrel...

Yay! Someone got it!

And first time too

It's totally a Horatio Kane moment...
Wait until they put it into CSI: Miami...

Yep, if I had been more on the ball with keeping up with this thread, I would've posted:

Little gak got what was coming to him; just shows how you shouldn't quarrel with an SUV.

YEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!

I estimate that half of you saying "he deserved it" did similarly stupid stuff when you were kids. Just be thankful there wasn't some nutjob with a crossbow present.

1. Hell no I didn't throw rocks at cars or deliberately damage other peoples' property.

2. He's 16. If he was 8 then perhaps I would be singing a different tune. But he's not 8. He's 16. He should damn well know better at his age.

Stupid youngsters.

I got chased around our small town by an irate driving instructor once. I cut up him and his student whilst on my pushbike.

A tirade of infantile abuse from my teenage mouth resulted in an hour long game of hide and get beat in various alleyways, drive ways, public pavements and the like.

It was a lark back then but now, god help any little fether that messes with me when I am driving!.

@Melissia: touché

@chowderhead: Manchu is correct to be an angry flamingo. Aliens is not gak, you crazy badger.

I think those of you who are exalting the guy that shot his crossbow at the kid are being a bit blinkered. I know it was wrong for the kid to throw rocks at the car, and a boot up the arse would be an appropriate reward for that sort of behaviour, possibly a clip round the earhole as well. Or, if possible, a better response would be reporting him to the authorities, but yeah, I know that generally gets you nowhere.

But the only thing that makes this an "amusing story" instead of "tragic tale of why you shouldn't fire lethal weapons at children, even if they are being dicks" is that the bolt didn't hit anything vital. If the guy had killed the kid, nobody would be cheering him (I hope) we'd be thinking "christ, what an over-reaction!" And the line between that happening and the kid escaping with an injury is thin.

Of course, maybe you're okay with lethal force towards minors making a nuisance of themselves, whatever. I'm bloody well not, though.

Da Boss wrote:I think those of you who are exalting the guy that shot his crossbow at the kid are being a bit blinkered. I know it was wrong for the kid to throw rocks at the car, and a boot up the arse would be an appropriate reward for that sort of behaviour, possibly a clip round the earhole as well. Or, if possible, a better response would be reporting him to the authorities, but yeah, I know that generally gets you nowhere.

But the only thing that makes this an "amusing story" instead of "tragic tale of why you shouldn't fire lethal weapons at children, even if they are being dicks" is that the bolt didn't hit anything vital. If the guy had killed the kid, nobody would be cheering him (I hope) we'd be thinking "christ, what an over-reaction!" And the line between that happening and the kid escaping with an injury is thin.

Of course, maybe you're okay with lethal force towards minors making a nuisance of themselves, whatever. I'm bloody well not, though.

He's 16. he's not a kid. He can be tried as an adult and executed as an adult for crimes. As noted, "throwing stones" can amount to a whole range of items, including dropping masonry bricks onto oncoming cars. The waste of skin has no one to blame but himself.

Also, throwing stones can kill people, even smaller stones, and even if they don't they can cause brain damage.

To me, this was essentially "one guy attacked another with a weapon, and then the other defended themselves with a weapon". Perfectly legit.

Let he who wears Crossbow resistant t-shirts throw the first stone...

kronk wrote:Let he who wears Crossbow resistant t-shirts throw the first stone...

Son I like what you've done there.

Wow.
Loving the justification here guys.

Manchu wrote:

Chowderhead wrote:Like Aliens. That movie was such gak...

Wait what.

That was a worrisome non sequitur, lad. I'm reaching for my crossbow.

I'm sorry. It just was... Boring, you know? It was very cliche and I predicted every death, every plot point, and just felt like yawning after the movie was over.

Da Boss wrote:Wow.
Loving the justification here guys.

For the record, I agree with you that the teen didn't deserve to get shot and that the shooter should see serious jail time.

With this same post, I'd like to point out that throwing rocks at people is not only dumb, but also considered assault.

Absolutely, I don't dispute that throwing rocks is scummy. Kid deserves a kick in the arse or some police intervention, whichever is gonna happen.

kronk wrote:

Da Boss wrote:Wow.
Loving the justification here guys.

For the record, I agree with you that the teen didn't deserve to get shot and that the shooter should see serious jail time.

With this same post, I'd like to point out that throwing rocks at people is not only dumb, but also considered assault.

Or attempted murder depending on where and when. We are forgetting there was a rash of copycat attacks on cars by "kids throwing stones": aka dropping bricks onto car windshields from overpasses, that killed a few people.

You don't tug on Superman's cape.
You don't spit into the wind.
You don't pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with Sl...er some guy with a crossbow.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Da Boss wrote:Absolutely, I don't dispute that throwing rocks is scummy. Kid deserves a kick in the arse or some police intervention, whichever is gonna happen.

or a crossbow bolt.

Maybe when RT was first being thought about, Andy Chambers was looking at a guy giving him the finger and thought "I wish I had gun or something to shoot bolts at him, some sort of bolt flinging gun..."

Yes, the kid could've died, but the rocks he was throwing could've caused the driver and passenger to crash and die, or to possibly cause multiple people multiple injuries, some of which could have been life-threatening.

We can throw around hyptohetical situations all day, but as it stands, nobody died, and the kid was taught the hard way, which is the only way i'd imagine he would've learned; something tells me a stern talking to wouldn't have stopped him doing it again. If you're 16 and you still think throwing rocks at cars is cool, then I doubt you're someone who learns from simply being told off.

kronk wrote:Let he who wears Crossbow resistant t-shirts throw the first stone...

Love it.

Da Boss wrote:I think those of you who are exalting the guy that shot his crossbow at the kid are being a bit blinkered. I know it was wrong for the kid to throw rocks at the car, and a boot up the arse would be an appropriate reward for that sort of behaviour, possibly a clip round the earhole as well. Or, if possible, a better response would be reporting him to the authorities, but yeah, I know that generally gets you nowhere.

But the only thing that makes this an "amusing story" instead of "tragic tale of why you shouldn't fire lethal weapons at children, even if they are being dicks" is that the bolt didn't hit anything vital. If the guy had killed the kid, nobody would be cheering him (I hope) we'd be thinking "christ, what an over-reaction!" And the line between that happening and the kid escaping with an injury is thin.

Of course, maybe you're okay with lethal force towards minors making a nuisance of themselves, whatever. I'm bloody well not, though.

That's a very reasonable, mature response...so WTF is it doing on this forum? You woulda scored more points with the groundlings if you'd played the internet tough guy and said you woulda twisted the bolt in the kid after you shot him. Maybe even followed up with a roundhouse kick or something. Because, you know, the kid was apparently chucking VW-sized chunks of masonry around like the Hulk. It's a miracle he didn't kill an entire school bus of young children like that.

Da Boss wrote:Absolutely, I don't dispute that throwing rocks is scummy. Kid deserves a kick in the arse or some police intervention, whichever is gonna happen.

Pffft. Everyone and by that I mean EVERYONE (even women), know the best way to resolve any conflict is to immediately escalate it with as much violence as possible. It almost sounds like you think they should have explored other readily available options first, like some kind of goddamn pussy! Wtf? Why are you telling people to be pansy ass powder-puff pussies?

gorgon wrote:

Da Boss wrote:I think those of you who are exalting the guy that shot his crossbow at the kid are being a bit blinkered. I know it was wrong for the kid to throw rocks at the car, and a boot up the arse would be an appropriate reward for that sort of behaviour, possibly a clip round the earhole as well. Or, if possible, a better response would be reporting him to the authorities, but yeah, I know that generally gets you nowhere.

But the only thing that makes this an "amusing story" instead of "tragic tale of why you shouldn't fire lethal weapons at children, even if they are being dicks" is that the bolt didn't hit anything vital. If the guy had killed the kid, nobody would be cheering him (I hope) we'd be thinking "christ, what an over-reaction!" And the line between that happening and the kid escaping with an injury is thin.

Of course, maybe you're okay with lethal force towards minors making a nuisance of themselves, whatever. I'm bloody well not, though.

That's a very reasonable, mature response...so WTF is it doing on this forum? You woulda scored more points with the groundlings if you'd played the internet tough guy and said you woulda twisted the bolt in the kid after you shot him. Maybe even followed up with a roundhouse kick or something. Because, you know, the kid was apparently chucking VW-sized chunks of masonry around like the Hulk. It's a miracle he didn't kill an entire school bus of young children like that.

The Troll King called. He wants his toilet seat back.

Because, you know, the kid was apparently chucking VW-sized chunks of masonry around like the Hulk.

The size of something doesn't make it any more or less deadly. Even a small stone can make a sound that causes the driver to jump or a similar reaction, and thus causes him to make a grave error; how would you react if a stone suddenly struck your windshield out of nowhere? I highly doubt you'd be oblivious to it.

Troy wrote:

gorgon wrote:

Da Boss wrote:I think those of you who are exalting the guy that shot his crossbow at the kid are being a bit blinkered. I know it was wrong for the kid to throw rocks at the car, and a boot up the arse would be an appropriate reward for that sort of behaviour, possibly a clip round the earhole as well. Or, if possible, a better response would be reporting him to the authorities, but yeah, I know that generally gets you nowhere.

But the only thing that makes this an "amusing story" instead of "tragic tale of why you shouldn't fire lethal weapons at children, even if they are being dicks" is that the bolt didn't hit anything vital. If the guy had killed the kid, nobody would be cheering him (I hope) we'd be thinking "christ, what an over-reaction!" And the line between that happening and the kid escaping with an injury is thin.

Of course, maybe you're okay with lethal force towards minors making a nuisance of themselves, whatever. I'm bloody well not, though.

That's a very reasonable, mature response...so WTF is it doing on this forum? You woulda scored more points with the groundlings if you'd played the internet tough guy and said you woulda twisted the bolt in the kid after you shot him. Maybe even followed up with a roundhouse kick or something. Because, you know, the kid was apparently chucking VW-sized chunks of masonry around like the Hulk. It's a miracle he didn't kill an entire school bus of young children like that.

The Troll King called. He wants his toilet seat back.

That isn't trolling...
If it is it's such a poor attempt i suggest he gives it up straight away before he breaks the universe with his fail...

I, too, seem to recall several stories in the past few years of kids dropping chunks of concrete, not wee little stones, but 20 pound chunks off of overpasses because it was funny. People died.

This isn't quite the same, but he could've cracked a windshield or beaned someone in the head and caused serious harm to many innocent people.


Look, if he was something like 8 or 10, I'd be outraged. If he had died, I'd be a lot less smug. But he was 16, and he lived. He should know better, and if it takes a crossbow bolt to the ribcage for him to learn, so be it.

gorgon wrote: Because, you know, the kid was apparently chucking VW-sized chunks of masonry around like the Hulk.

David killed Goliath with a simple stone.

How about them apples? Or stones, as it were.

Da Boss wrote:I think those of you who are exalting the guy that shot his crossbow at the kid are being a bit blinkered. I know it was wrong for the kid to throw rocks at the car, and a boot up the arse would be an appropriate reward for that sort of behaviour, possibly a clip round the earhole as well. Or, if possible, a better response would be reporting him to the authorities, but yeah, I know that generally gets you nowhere.

But the only thing that makes this an "amusing story" instead of "tragic tale of why you shouldn't fire lethal weapons at children, even if they are being dicks" is that the bolt didn't hit anything vital. If the guy had killed the kid, nobody would be cheering him (I hope) we'd be thinking "christ, what an over-reaction!" And the line between that happening and the kid escaping with an injury is thin.

Of course, maybe you're okay with lethal force towards minors making a nuisance of themselves, whatever. I'm bloody well not, though.

Tricky situation, and really, to make an informed decision whether or not the level of response was "justified", we'd need a lot more detail on the event.

In the UK a few years back, "kids" decided that it was a fun thing to do, to drop concrete slabs off of motorway bridges. On one occassion, if my memory serves, one such slab was dropped on a car doing around 70mph (motorway speed) and went through the windscreen, killing the driver instantly......not to mention putting every other road user at danger as the (now) dead drivers car went out of control.

Do those kids deserve a crossbow bolt? I dare say if you asked their parents, probably not.....ask the love ones of the driver, and I imagine they'd happily line up, load the bolt and take turns firing.....

Lethal force towards minors is not something that I think can be viewed from the point of view of the "criminals" age (Jamie Bulger incident comes to mind), if a minors action are the product of their upbringing, then really, so too are the actions of adults further on in life......and what really is a criminal adult, but a child who managed to "get away with it" grown up.

I do believe, being a father myself now, that there is certainly an age where children do not know any better, but I strongly believe that age to be around 5 or 6 years of age....beyond that, unless the child was raised by Apes, monkeys or wolves (some council parents qualify for this title) then they should have a fair understanding of socially acceptable behaviour.

Of course, having said all of that, if the kid was throwing small pebbles int he general direction of the car, and the owner lost it and went all Rambo on the kids ass....well, I'd suggest that's a different discussion altogether.

Delephont wrote:

In the UK a few years back, "kids" decided that it was a fun thing to do, to drop concrete slabs off of motorway bridges. On one occassion, if my memory serves, one such slab was dropped on a car doing around 70mph (motorway speed) and went through the windscreen, killing the driver instantly......not to mention putting every other road user at danger as the (now) dead drivers car went out of control..

I remember that. Wasn't there an uproar because they basically got off scot free with "Oh, kids'll be kids" being an excuse?

Wolfun wrote:

Delephont wrote:

In the UK a few years back, "kids" decided that it was a fun thing to do, to drop concrete slabs off of motorway bridges. On one occassion, if my memory serves, one such slab was dropped on a car doing around 70mph (motorway speed) and went through the windscreen, killing the driver instantly......not to mention putting every other road user at danger as the (now) dead drivers car went out of control..

I remember that. Wasn't there an uproar because they basically got off scot free with "Oh, kids'll be kids" being an excuse?

From my extremely limited and incomplete knowledge of the UK's criminal justice system, this seems to be the attitude toward a lot of juvenile offenders in the UK. Can anyone confirm/deny?