BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,976
|
Post by BRV on Jan 4, 2012 15:41:21 GMT -5
I have nothing against defending one's self, but this is no situation in which stabbing someone 12 times is deemed a reasonable means to defending yourself. This sets an AWFUL precedent in our country, essentially telling people, "It's open season on bullies. It's okay, go ahead and kill someone. Provided they were bullying you, our hands are tied." Look, I'm not one for bullying. I have absolutely no problem with fighting back and defending yourself. However, to brandish a weapon and murder someone in cold blood is taking this to unwanted extremes. Like someone previously said, this won't be the end of bullying in the United States or abroad, because if the Columbine massacre didn't altogether stop bullying, nothing will. However, this is just unsettling, that a person could get away with what was essentially First-Degree Murder, because he was the victim of bullying. Did you actually read the story? This wasn't a case of the kid snapping and charging into the school stabbing the bully, he was being attacked at the time, 3 on 1 by older kids. He didn't pick the fight, he tried to avoid it. This is in no way setting a precedent that you get to kill anyone making fun of you. I did read the story, beginning to end. While he did try to avoid the fight, he did flash the knife that he had on him, which tells me that he knew that he had the weapon, and that he would not hesitate to use it. I'm not trying to turn the attackers into the victims here, as they got into the fight knowing full well that the kid had a knife on him. Personally, I think it's stupid to attack someone whom you know is carrying a weapon, but that's neither here nor there. The fact that he merely showed the knife to the bullies was reason enough for me to believe he had the full intention of using it if needed. Again, I think that all goes back to the initial moment when he showed them the knife. He went to the knife, not as a means of protection, but as a means of force. I don't know whether there was one millisecond or one minute between stab number one and stab number twelve, at the end of the day, he used it as a deadly weapon, possibly with the intent to kill. I can't say whether or not the three attackers intended on beating him to death, but I feel secure in the knowledge that this kid used the knife with premeditated and potentially deadly force.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 4, 2012 15:58:44 GMT -5
Bullying is bad, murder is worse. You don't resolve a situation by commiting an act thats worse. And that is an AWFUL precident to set. Maybe Jorge would have gotten his ass kicked and that would have been terrible, but nobody would be dead. I understand self defense and I understand when someone is phsyically harming you you generally will do whatever possible to stop the situation. But by introducing a weapon and using it with the intent to kill Jorge made the situation worse and someone is dead because of it. It's more of a situation of whether it was premeditated murder or manslaughter in the heat of the moment. This kid getting off for killing someone is ridiculous. See, to me, this is scarier. It's a scarier precedent to set for me to show that you have to allow yourself to be victimized rather than being able to defend yourself. It's scarier to me that people think that some kid should be have to be beaten at the complete mercy of 3 older kids rather than being allowed to defend himself when his well being is threatened. We don't know how far they'd go, if they'd have caused permanent injury to him (which isn't difficult to do unarmed). So arguing that he should have to be a victim is unsettling to me. I did read the story, beginning to end. While he did try to avoid the fight, he did flash the knife that he had on him, which tells me that he knew that he had the weapon, and that he would not hesitate to use it. I'm not trying to turn the attackers into the victims here, as they got into the fight knowing full well that the kid had a knife on him. Personally, I think it's stupid to attack someone whom you know is carrying a weapon, but that's neither here nor there. The fact that he merely showed the knife to the bullies was reason enough for me to believe he had the full intention of using it if needed. Unless I missed it, the story doesn't say he showed it to the attackers, but to two teens on the bus. While that shows that he knew he had it and that he would be willing to use it, however, the fact that he twice tried to avoid it would show, to me, that he wasn't just waiting for an excuse. He didn't want to, and brought it as a last resort which he unfortunately had to use. It's unsettling to me that he had it, as I said before, because that means he had it on school grounds. But as for making it premeditated murder? I don't think that's so much the case, unless you want to say anyone who carries a legally concealed firearm or who has a weapon in their home is also guilty of premeditated murder if they ever have to use it.
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Jan 4, 2012 16:09:06 GMT -5
How do you guys know that Dylan and his friends weren't trying to kill Jorge this time? Or wouldn't have caused his death? These were not nice people. I can't believe anyone could criticize Jorge for what he did. I'm happy he made it out alive. I'm happy that Dylan won't be terrorizing anyone else ever again.
|
|
|
Post by FUNK_US/BRODUS on Jan 4, 2012 16:13:39 GMT -5
While its hardly ok to stab someone to death in retaliation, i really hope a lot of bullies around the world read this story, and realise that they drive people to such extremes.
|
|
jobber2thestars
Hank Scorpio
Buy the Simon System. You'll thank yourself.
Posts: 7,097
|
Post by jobber2thestars on Jan 4, 2012 16:13:48 GMT -5
This is complete bullshit. The war on bullying is complete bullshit. This kid stabbed someone, kills him, but gets off because he was bullied. I'm sure the bully made this kids life hard, but that's no excuse to kill.
|
|
Frosty
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 3,800
|
Post by Frosty on Jan 4, 2012 16:23:25 GMT -5
This is complete bulls***. The war on bullying is complete bulls***. This kid stabbed someone, kills him, but gets off because he was bullied. I'm sure the bully made this kids life hard, but that's no excuse to kill. Not sure if you paid attention to what happened, but the kid didn't go out hunting his bully. He didn't "get off because he was bullied," he defended himself from an attack by means within the law. It really sucks that another child had to die because of this, but there's no reason to make him out to be some cold, calculated killer.
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Jan 4, 2012 16:28:41 GMT -5
The law is sketchy. You have to remember that laws are arbitrary. Stop talking about laws as if they are commandments from a god or something. They change all the time. No where did I indicate or imply that I think the law is infallible and perfect, but I do think the way it was applied here is correct in terms of the spirit of it. And no, I'm not going to stop talking about it just because random internet person thinks it's wrong. I get it, you disagree. Noted. That doesn't change my opinion on it. This isn't the first Stand Your Ground case I've ever seen, I used to be a crime reporter, these cases cropped up. And despite your constant insistence that all laws are arbitrary, every time I saw it, it was applied pretty consistently. I think I have more than enough experience being able to call it as I see it. Does that mean every case ever it will be the same? Of course not, but that doesn't mean I don't have cause to state what I feel is the spirit of the law based on my experiences. You don't have to agree, but I'm not going to stop giving my opinion on the law and how it's applied just because you want to harp on how arbitrary you think everything is. What you think doesn't affect my opinion. I have nothing against defending one's self, but this is no situation in which stabbing someone 12 times is deemed a reasonable means to defending yourself. This sets an AWFUL precedent in our country, essentially telling people, "It's open season on bullies. It's okay, go ahead and kill someone. Provided they were bullying you, our hands are tied." Look, I'm not one for bullying. I have absolutely no problem with fighting back and defending yourself. However, to brandish a weapon and murder someone in cold blood is taking this to unwanted extremes. Like someone previously said, this won't be the end of bullying in the United States or abroad, because if the Columbine massacre didn't altogether stop bullying, nothing will. However, this is just unsettling, that a person could get away with what was essentially First-Degree Murder, because he was the victim of bullying. Did you actually read the story? This wasn't a case of the kid snapping and charging into the school stabbing the bully, he was being attacked at the time, 3 on 1 by older kids. He didn't pick the fight, he tried to avoid it. This is in no way setting a precedent that you get to kill anyone making fun of you. And people are too hung up on the number of times he stabbed the attacker. That's not really that relevant, what matters is the time between the attacks. There was a highly publicized case here. A man coerced two kids to try to rob a pharmacy. The kids put on masks, got guns, and charged in, waving their guns and screaming. The pharmacist shot one of them and tried to chase the other one. The one he shot didn't die, and he didn't catch the other, but when he came back and saw the other one on the ground, unconscious, he walked to the back, grabbed another gun, came back, and fired several more shots into him, killing him. He was convicted of murder, not for the first shot, but for the others (forensics showed the robber was alive after the first shot). The time in between shootings, and the fact that he turned his back to the robber to get another gun, provided evidence that he no longer felt he was immediately threatened, according to the prosecutors. About this time, there was another case where a robber broke into a guy's house, but his victim was home. The robber charged and the guy shot him several times, killing him right then. He wasn't charged for the same reason the pharmacist was, he felt he was reasonably threatened. That's the standard I think people need to look at in this case. The fact that he stabbed him 12 times only really matters if there was a lot of time between them. But you can stab someone 12 times in the spur of the moment as easily as you can stab them once. You're still in fight or flight mode at that moment. I don't know why people aren't listening to you, because you're the only person in this thread who is even attempting to back up their opinion with any facts, information, or even intellectual insight. Everyone who is arguing with you is doing it based on knee-jerk emotion alone. And what's more, a Judge who heard the case obviously agreed too. I find that a lot more compelling than "what?? So now you can kill someone because they bullied you?" which is so clearly a knee-jerk reaction that fails to consider any facts related to this incident. In the end everyone will have their opinion regardless, but I think it'd be fair to say that by any objective standard your side of the debate wins by a landslide.
|
|
|
Post by rapidfire187 on Jan 4, 2012 16:39:26 GMT -5
Stabbing someone 12 times seems a bit beyond defense. That was an act of rage and anger. Well...yea. Wouldn't you be angry if some asshole wouldnt leave you alone and kept hitting you for no reason? Not saying that stabbing the kid was the right option but he probably knew he would get his ass kicked if he tried to actually fight him, so he went with the option that would solve the problem the easiest. I feel bad for dylans family and friends, but that kid was asking for it.
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Jan 4, 2012 16:42:42 GMT -5
Stabbing someone 12 times seems a bit beyond defense. That was an act of rage and anger. Well...yea. Wouldn't you be angry if some asshole wouldnt leave you alone and kept hitting you for no reason? Not saying that stabbing the kid was the right option but he probably knew he would get his ass kicked if he tried to actually fight him, so he went with the option that would solve the problem the easiest. I feel bad for dylans family and friends, but that kid was asking for it. You feel bad for Dylan's friends? I don't feel one bit bad for Dylan's friends. I hope this caused them to reconsider their behavior.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2012 16:48:33 GMT -5
Some could say that him showing the knife to other students was a vague attempt at hoping someone would stop him from having to use it...a form of dry snitching so to speak...
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,976
|
Post by BRV on Jan 4, 2012 17:02:45 GMT -5
How do you guys know that Dylan and his friends weren't trying to kill Jorge this time? Or wouldn't have caused his death? These were not nice people. I can't believe anyone could criticize Jorge for what he did. I'm happy he made it out alive. I'm happy that Dylan won't be terrorizing anyone else ever again. Defending one's self is worth applause. Protecting yourself against a group of attackers is admirable. But to celebrate someone's death? Come on. It's reactions like this that are going to create more copycat incidents. Victims of bullying are going to look at this kid, who is being celebrated like some sort of real-life Charles Bronson vigilante character, and are going to try to use lethal force the next time they encounter their attackers, and as long as the defense says they "stood their ground", they are walking. If the guy got a few stab wounds and had to sit in the hospital for a day or two and got a few stitches, then yeah, it's probably eye-for-an-eye. Bruises and broken bones heal and some wounds scar, but there's no coming back from six feet under. There is no way to put bullying and murder on the same level. Ever.
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Jan 4, 2012 17:09:20 GMT -5
Defending one's self is worth applause. Protecting yourself against a group of attackers is admirable. But to celebrate someone's death? Come on. It's reactions like this that are going to create more copycat incidents. Victims of bullying are going to look at this kid, who is being celebrated like some sort of real-life Charles Bronson vigilante character, and are going to try to use lethal force the next time they encounter their attackers, and as long as the defense says they "stood their ground", they are walking. Victims of bullying should seek appropriate support from school and law officials. Victims of direct assault should be free to do anything they can to remove themselves from peril. If someone hunts someone down and kills them and tries to make up a fake story then I hope that comes out and they're meted the appropriate punishment. But real life victims of assault need to be free to protect themselves. I can't imagine myself in Jorge's place, being able to go "ok three's a crowd, I'm sure I'll be able to get away now", and I don't care about imaginary people. Jorge is a real person and he survived a situation no one should be placed in and that is a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Jan 4, 2012 17:10:52 GMT -5
The kid tried everything to avoid this outcome but, was forced into it by the bully. Should it have come to this? Obviously not but, the bully and his friends attacked the kid and left him no other choice than to defend himself.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Jan 4, 2012 17:13:11 GMT -5
I don't know why people aren't listening to you, because you're the only person in this thread who is even attempting to back up their opinion with any facts, information, or even intellectual insight. Everyone who is arguing with you is doing it based on knee-jerk emotion alone. And what's more, a Judge who heard the case obviously agreed too. I find that a lot more compelling than "what?? So now you can kill someone because they bullied you?" which is so clearly a knee-jerk reaction that fails to consider any facts related to this incident. In the end everyone will have their opinion regardless, but I think it'd be fair to say that by any objective standard your side of the debate wins by a landslide. 100% this. I still have my doubts anyone who actually read the article would still have the kneejerk reaction a lot of people have had, despite prior claims. This kid is no "vigilante." Vigilantes take the law into their own hands. The killer here was clearly forced into this situation and seemed to do everything he could to get out of it. He was backed into a corner. It's not like he hunted down the bullies and stabbed them to dish out justice. And unless this kid was f***ing Bruce Lee, there's no way he could adequately defend himself against a group without a weapon. Again, not only did the judge dismiss the charges based on self-defense, but the prosecutors aren't pursuing it any further. That to me is a sign that the case is ironclad. Prosecutors are hungry for that type of conviction and would pursue it for all it's worth unless they knew there was no way they couldn't win.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,976
|
Post by BRV on Jan 4, 2012 17:18:51 GMT -5
100% this. I still have my doubts anyone who actually read the article would still have the kneejerk reaction a lot of people have had, despite prior claims. What about the people who have read the article, beginning to end, and still don't share that opinion? What of the people who have digested the entire article and still think the kid got away with murder? It's not a kneejerk reaction, it's a differing opinion, and it's what makes this country great, the fact that we're allowed to have disputing opinions on such a hot-button subject. When it comes right down to it, the best quote from the article is from Donald Day, "My reaction is there is no winner at all in this case." Everyone comes out looking horribly, it's just a miserable story from top to bottom.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 4, 2012 17:22:45 GMT -5
How do you guys know that Dylan and his friends weren't trying to kill Jorge this time? Or wouldn't have caused his death? These were not nice people. I can't believe anyone could criticize Jorge for what he did. I'm happy he made it out alive. I'm happy that Dylan won't be terrorizing anyone else ever again. Defending one's self is worth applause. Protecting yourself against a group of attackers is admirable. But to celebrate someone's death? Come on. It's reactions like this that are going to create more copycat incidents. Victims of bullying are going to look at this kid, who is being celebrated like some sort of real-life Charles Bronson vigilante character, and are going to try to use lethal force the next time they encounter their attackers, and as long as the defense says they "stood their ground", they are walking. If the guy got a few stab wounds and had to sit in the hospital for a day or two and got a few stitches, then yeah, it's probably eye-for-an-eye. Bruises and broken bones heal and some wounds scar, but there's no coming back from six feet under. There is no way to put bullying and murder on the same level. Ever. If there weren't circumstances that supported it, they'd have a lot harder time walking. The reason this kid did walk was because of all the evidence that supported the scenario presented. You can't just claim "it was self defense" and suddenly get carte blanch. As much as we can try to play slippery slope with what this says, I seriously doubt we're going to see a rash of bully deaths and kids that get off scot free. And yes, you can heal bruises and broken bones. But what if one of the three slammed his head into concrete and gave him brain damage? What if they broke ribs that pierced internal organs? We don't know what was going to happen if they were able to beat him up, so we can't say for sure which scenario would have been worse. It's all part of the what-ifs, and we can't judge a scenario based on the ways we could imagine it happening, we have to judge it based on what did. Its' tragic that it came down to this, but I'm not going to put Jorge into the cold-blooded killers slot based on anything said in this story, especially when it seems like he did everything to avoid a fight. This isn't murder to me, it's someone defending themselves in a situation where they literally had no way to win. We shouldn't force people to be victims just because defending yourself might lead to someone else's death.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Jan 4, 2012 17:22:47 GMT -5
100% this. I still have my doubts anyone who actually read the article would still have the kneejerk reaction a lot of people have had, despite prior claims. What about the people who have read the article, beginning to end, and still don't share that opinion? What of the people who have digested the entire article and still think the kid got away with murder? It's not a kneejerk reaction, it's a differing opinion, and it's what makes this country great, the fact that we're allowed to have disputing opinions on such a hot-button subject. I think they're either reading what they wanted to read, or are outright lying about reading the entire article (let's face it: people lie to look smart all the time). Because the opinions expressed aren't supported at all by the situation as reported in the article. If you get that after what was reported, that "people making fun of me = license to kill," as some have expressed here, you really need to re-read the article. Or read it better. This went far beyond simple bullying.
|
|
|
Post by YAKMAN is ICHIBAN on Jan 4, 2012 17:39:17 GMT -5
Defending one's self is worth applause. Protecting yourself against a group of attackers is admirable. But to celebrate someone's death? Come on. It's reactions like this that are going to create more copycat incidents. Victims of bullying are going to look at this kid, who is being celebrated like some sort of real-life Charles Bronson vigilante character, and are going to try to use lethal force the next time they encounter their attackers, and as long as the defense says they "stood their ground", they are walking. If the guy got a few stab wounds and had to sit in the hospital for a day or two and got a few stitches, then yeah, it's probably eye-for-an-eye. Bruises and broken bones heal and some wounds scar, but there's no coming back from six feet under. There is no way to put bullying and murder on the same level. Ever. If there weren't circumstances that supported it, they'd have a lot harder time walking. The reason this kid did walk was because of all the evidence that supported the scenario presented. You can't just claim "it was self defense" and suddenly get carte blanch. As much as we can try to play slippery slope with what this says, I seriously doubt we're going to see a rash of bully deaths and kids that get off scot free. And yes, you can heal bruises and broken bones. But what if one of the three slammed his head into concrete and gave him brain damage? What if they broke ribs that pierced internal organs? We don't know what was going to happen if they were able to beat him up, so we can't say for sure which scenario would have been worse. It's all part of the what-ifs, and we can't judge a scenario based on the ways we could imagine it happening, we have to judge it based on what did. Its' tragic that it came down to this, but I'm not going to put Jorge into the cold-blooded killers slot based on anything said in this story, especially when it seems like he did everything to avoid a fight. This isn't murder to me, it's someone defending themselves in a situation where they literally had no way to win. We shouldn't force people to be victims just because defending yourself might lead to someone else's death. I recall a few years before I was at my high school, a couple of guys jumped someone from the rival school. Ended up stomping him to death. Even if we assume they don't mean to seriously injure or kill him, people are squishy.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jan 4, 2012 17:42:39 GMT -5
I'm not shedding a tear for either of them, though I was brought up to learn that sometimes a decision you make in a split second can affect you for the ret of your life, so tread carefully. This is a case of that happening.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,976
|
Post by BRV on Jan 4, 2012 17:50:03 GMT -5
I think they're either reading what they wanted to read, or are outright lying about reading the entire article (let's face it: people lie to look smart all the time). Because the opinions expressed aren't supported at all by the situation as reported in the article. If you get that after what was reported, that "people making fun of me = license to kill," as some have expressed here, you really need to re-read the article. Or read it better. This went far beyond simple bullying. If we're talking about reading what people want to read, then let's talk about how multiple people have referenced how this kid was jumped by numerous people, when, in the article, it makes absolutely no mention whatsoever, of him being attacked by anyone other than the initial attacker. In fact, the only time it makes any reference to a physical attack, is the initial punch to the back of the head. There's no reference to the cronies circling him like sharks, or brutally assaulting him in a gang-like manner. What is says is that he was punched in the back of the head, made one attempt to escape the situation, then stabbed the other person 12 times. So, if we're criticizing people for jumping to conclusions without fully reading the article, because they want to appear smart, as you've put it, then don't forget to place the blame on those who've mislabeled this as some sort of gang mentality attack on one person.
|
|