ChiefsPlanet
Page 3 of 3 12 3
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Poop New Jersey kids randomly knock people out. (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=278501)

Rausch 11-13-2013 08:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby Lee (Post 10183281)
So you're going to randomly assault your strongest ally in finally attaining equal rights?

Smart...

Dayze 11-13-2013 08:49 AM
someone made a good point; throw their ass into the military.
they'll learn within about 15 minutes into boot camp that they're nowhere near as 'bad'/tough as they think.

I was in the Navy; and while boot camp in the Navy is nowhere nearly as physical as the Marines or Army, it was still a mind-**** 24/7.

throw their asses out into some god forsaken spot in the world where people shoot at them.

mommy can't come to get you here Junior.

Rausch 11-13-2013 08:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dayze (Post 10183307)
someone made a good point; throw their ass into the military.
No.

The US military doesn't need more idiots...

Dayze 11-13-2013 08:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rausch (Post 10183311)
No.

The US military doesn't need more idiots...
they could use a few to lead the charge; Pawns.

Rausch 11-13-2013 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dayze (Post 10183321)
they could use a few to lead the charge; Pawns.
You want to lead that charge?...

Imon Yourside 11-13-2013 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rausch (Post 10183323)
You want to lead that charge?...
Remotely? sure.

Dayze 11-13-2013 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rausch (Post 10183323)
You want to lead that charge?...
hell no. get an entire platoon of them and drop them into Afghanistan.

Rausch 11-13-2013 09:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dayze (Post 10183326)
hell no. get an entire platoon of them and drop them into Afghanistan.
I doubt their stealth methods work there...

Dayze 11-13-2013 09:03 AM
tell them there are lots of unsuspecting people there for them to knockout.

frankotank 11-13-2013 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace (Post 10181709)
No. Mike Tyson didn't walk down the street with a bunch of kids, and randomly knock people out.
Mike Tyson, street fought with dudes. For money, much the same as dog fighting.
This is completely different.
I'm a Tyson freak. always have been. love his show by the way. I think the dude has really grown up....changed.
anyways....I thought this article was pretty good.

http://nymag.com/news/features/mike-tyson-2013-10/

Fairplay 11-13-2013 09:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10182078)
Making poor people more poor usually helps matters.


Let's give them money for nothing that will change them, good intentions make me feel good.

Strongside 11-13-2013 09:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rausch (Post 10183329)
I doubt their stealth methods work there...
I would love to see these kids try and punch a Jihadi in the face. Heh.

Inferior weapons? Yes. Inferior technology? Yes. Pussies? Far from it.

TLO 11-13-2013 10:04 AM
OBAMA PHONE!

Dayze 11-13-2013 10:05 AM
easy to be 'tough' when the thing your punching doesn't punch back.

they're bad asses.

Iowanian 11-13-2013 11:11 AM
These should be punished as hate crimes.

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 11:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish (Post 10181952)
I don't hate the idea. But what effect are you expecting out of that scenario? Who pays the bill if you prosecute the parent? You think these kids' parents can afford to pay damages? Then what? Take the parents to jail? So the taxpayer is paying to jail the parent, and provide care for the child. We can hold the parents to whatever responsibility level you can dream up. The problem is that it wouldn't do any good and would likely cause even more of a strain on the system.
ok, think about it this way: if there is even a possibility of prosecuting the parents and holding them liable for their kid's actions, I think that will force many parents (who have kids who are out of control) to become better parents, that is, to not just kick the can down the street. They have to get involved or there is the possibility that if little Johnny kills someone drunk driving that they may in fact, be held responsible.

That's all I'm saying. Make it an option for the prosecution to go after said parents. I'm not saying it will work every time. But what I am saying is that in a case-by-case basis, if the prosecution has this option, it may indeed force parents to be way more active and responsible for their kid's lives.

|Zach| 11-13-2013 11:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183642)
ok, think about it this way: if there is even a possibility of prosecuting the parents and holding them liable for their kid's actions, I think that will force many parents (who have kids who are out of control) to become better parents, that is, to not just kick the can down the street. They have to get involved or there is the possibility that if little Johnny kills someone drunk driving that they may in fact, be held responsible.

That's all I'm saying. Make it an option for the prosecution to go after said parents. I'm not saying it will work every time. But what I am saying is that in a case-by-case basis, if the prosecution has this option, it may indeed force parents to be way more active and responsible for their kid's lives.
LMAO

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10183650)
LMAO
again, if you have a better suggestion I'm all ears...

|Zach| 11-13-2013 11:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183657)
again, if you have a better suggestion I'm all ears...
Keep doing what we are doing...

The 2012 National Crime Victimization Survey by the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that 26 of every 1,000 people experienced violent crime. 1993 80 of every 1,000 people reported being victims of violent crime. The homicide rate declined 48% from 1993 to 2011.

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 11:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10183670)
Keep doing what we are doing...

The 2012 National Crime Victimization Survey by the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that 26 of every 1,000 people experienced violent crime. 1993 80 of every 1,000 people reported being victims of violent crime. The homicide rate declined 48% from 1993 to 2011.
but crimes like Columbine are happening more and more with younger and younger kids. It's at a whole different level now. 20-30 years ago you didn't hear about kids taking guns to schools and shooting everyone up.

The Franchise 11-13-2013 11:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183686)
but crimes like Columbine are happening more and more with younger and younger kids. It's at a whole different level now. 20-30 years ago you didn't hear about kids taking guns to schools and shooting everyone up.
But do you honestly think that punishing the parents is going to make them better at it?

King_Chief_Fan 11-13-2013 11:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183642)
ok, think about it this way: if there is even a possibility of prosecuting the parents and holding them liable for their kid's actions, I think that will force many parents (who have kids who are out of control) to become better parents, that is, to not just kick the can down the street. They have to get involved or there is the possibility that if little Johnny kills someone drunk driving that they may in fact, be held responsible.

That's all I'm saying. Make it an option for the prosecution to go after said parents. I'm not saying it will work every time. But what I am saying is that in a case-by-case basis, if the prosecution has this option, it may indeed force parents to be way more active and responsible for their kid's lives.
I wished that would happen and work. Half of these kids probably only have one parent who has to work a couple of jobs to make ends meet.

If that happened to me or a family member, i return to the scene of the crime and let the Louisville Slugger hit a few home runs.

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10183691)
But do you honestly think that punishing the parents is going to make them better at it?
I was living in Denver when Columbine happened. It was horrific. Parents of the victoms who were killed wanted to blame someone other than Harris and Klebold. They tried to blame the cops (Harris and Klebold had records), they tried to blame the school, they tried to blame the everyone except the people most responsible, the parents.

Harris's room was loaded with bomb making material, hate speech, guns and ammo. He was a ticking time bomb. His parent's ignored it. His parents were not involved in his life.

Now, you tell me, if Harris's parents could have been prosecuted and liable for Eric Harris's insane behavior do you think that maybe, just maybe, Harris's dad might have done an intervention or something?

frankotank 11-13-2013 11:43 AM
honestly I can't even believe throwing parents in jail is even being debated.
lots of kids have good parents and a good home life and choose to do things that are wrong. my son is a high schooler. if he dumbasses and goes out and plays knockout....that's not MY fault. it's HIS. I ain't going to jail because my son made a stupid wreckless thoughtless bitch ass decision. he can pay for that himself.
AFTER I knock his ass out!

yeah I understand some of these kids doing this crap have shitty parents and a shitty life. but not all of them. as someone already said......slippery slope.....

Fish 11-13-2013 11:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183642)
ok, think about it this way: if there is even a possibility of prosecuting the parents and holding them liable for their kid's actions, I think that will force many parents (who have kids who are out of control) to become better parents, that is, to not just kick the can down the street. They have to get involved or there is the possibility that if little Johnny kills someone drunk driving that they may in fact, be held responsible.

That's all I'm saying. Make it an option for the prosecution to go after said parents. I'm not saying it will work every time. But what I am saying is that in a case-by-case basis, if the prosecution has this option, it may indeed force parents to be way more active and responsible for their kid's lives.
Again, I'm not against trying something different. And I'm not even against some less popular draconian solutions. But I just really don't see any punishment making the people in these situations better parents. You can't force someone to be a better parent if they're resistant to it or just flat don't care. Most of these people have nothing, and they know they have nothing. It's hard to convince someone to change, when the motivation you're using is punishment by taking things away from them. About the only thing they have left to take is their freedom. And besides the ethics of that situation, we're still left to financially support them and their offspring, likely to a greater degree than we already are.

|Zach| 11-13-2013 11:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183686)
but crimes like Columbine are happening more and more with younger and younger kids. It's at a whole different level now. 20-30 years ago you didn't hear about kids taking guns to schools and shooting everyone up.
Do you have anything to back that statement up?

I think the age of 24 hour news and social media and constant need for narratives is clouding your judgement. Violence is down overwhelmingly.

Fish 11-13-2013 11:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183723)
I was living in Denver when Columbine happened. It was horrific. Parents of the victoms who were killed wanted to blame someone other than Harris and Klebold. They tried to blame the cops (Harris and Klebold had records), they tried to blame the school, they tried to blame the everyone except the people most responsible, the parents.

Harris's room was loaded with bomb making material, hate speech, guns and ammo. He was a ticking time bomb. His parent's ignored it. His parents were not involved in his life.

Now, you tell me, if Harris's parents could have been prosecuted and liable for Eric Harris's insane behavior do you think that maybe, just maybe, Harris's dad might have done an intervention or something?
No, I don't believe for a second that the fear of liability would have changed the way Harris's parents raised him.

"I better spend some quality time with little Billy. Otherwise he may grow up to be insane and kill a bunch of people. Then I'd have to pay damages and go to jail."

That's not a logical thought.

|Zach| 11-13-2013 11:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183723)
Harris's dad might have done an intervention or something?
What would we have intervened?

I have no doubt if he knew this rule was around he wouldnt have thought it applied to him.

He obviously wasn't listening to his kid.

stevieray 11-13-2013 11:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183686)
but crimes like Columbine are happening more and more with younger and younger kids. It's at a whole different level now. 20-30 years ago you didn't hear about kids taking guns to schools and shooting everyone up.
..30 shootings since Columbine..

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 11:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish (Post 10183759)
No, I don't believe for a second that the fear of liability would have changed the way Harris's parents raised him.

"I better spend some quality time with little Billy. Otherwise he may grow up to be insane and kill a bunch of people. Then I'd have to pay damages and go to jail."

That's not a logical thought.
If Harris's father thought he might end up in prison because his son was a total psycho? I think he would have done something more. Hell, even if he got into Eric's face and Eric killed him, then Eric would have never been able to do the Columbine thing.

Totally logical.

|Zach| 11-13-2013 11:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183793)
If Harris's father thought he might end up in prison because his son was a total psycho? I think he would have done something more. Hell, even if he got into Eric's face and Eric killed him, then Eric would have never been able to do the Columbine thing.

Totally logical.
Did he think his kid was a total psycho?

|Zach| 11-13-2013 11:58 AM
What exactly should parents be on the look out for in regards to their kids being potential school shooters.

The Franchise 11-13-2013 11:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183793)
If Harris's father thought he might end up in prison because his son was a total psycho? I think he would have done something more. Hell, even if he got into Eric's face and Eric killed him, then Eric would have never been able to do the Columbine thing.

Totally logical.
So your logical thought is that if Eric killed his Dad....then Columbine wouldn't have happened.

Yep....totally logical. :spock:

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 11:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10183761)
What would we have intervened?

I have no doubt if he knew this rule was around he wouldnt have thought it applied to him.

He obviously wasn't listening to his kid.
He could have told Eric something like this: "Hey Eric, I notice you are trying to build a bomb, can you tell me why you are doing that? Also, why do you have all this hate speech laying around? Who do you hate so much and why? Oh, and what are all these semi-auto guns doing here, and all this ammunition? Hey, if you want to go hunting, or go to the range (because I'm a former military guy myself) why don't we go this weekend? Eric, I love you and I want what is best for you, can we spend some more time together?"

something like that?

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 12:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10183803)
So your logical thought is that if Eric killed his Dad....then Columbine wouldn't have happened.

Yep....totally logical. :spock:
well you tell me what is better buddy.

|Zach| 11-13-2013 12:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183806)
He could have told Eric something like this: "Hey Eric, I notice you are trying to build a bomb, can you tell me why you are doing that? Also, why do you have all this hate speech laying around? Who do you hate so much and why? Oh, and what are all these semi-auto guns doing here, and all this ammunition? Hey, if you want to go hunting, or go to the range (because I'm a former military guy myself) why don't we go this weekend? Eric, I love you and I want what is best for you, can we spend some more time together?"

something like that?
Did he know about the existence of all these things?

This is my main point. You can't legislate the turn around of an apathetic parent. And someone who isn't listening obviously doesn't think that worse case scenario applies to them.

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 12:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10183824)
Did he know about the existence of all these things?

This is my main point. You can't legislate the turn around of an apathetic parent. And someone who isn't listening obviously doesn't think that worse case scenario applies to them.
The point is that Eric's dad never went into Eric's room!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When the police went into Eric's room after the tragedy they found all this stuff all over his rooom, it was everywhere.

Eric's dad was not involved in his life. Period. End of story.

The Franchise 11-13-2013 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183835)
The point is that Eric's dad never went into Eric's room!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When the police went into Eric's room after the tragedy they found all this stuff all over his rooom, it was everywhere.

Eric's dad was not involved in his life. Period. End of story.
So prosecuting his Dad after the fact would have done what? Scared other parents into caring? Punished him even more than he already has been?

|Zach| 11-13-2013 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183835)

Eric's dad was not involved in his life. Period. End of story.
That is my point as well.

Yet for some reason you think that some weird law would make this not be the case.

"oh hey, I am pretty apathetic about this parenting thing...but i saw on tv parents can get in trouble if their kids are. That is it...I am going to start getting involved"

LMAOLMAOLMAO

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10183843)
So prosecuting his Dad after the fact would have done what? Scared other parents into caring? Punished him even more than he already has been?
No, the possibility of prosecuting Eric's father would have perhaps PREVENTED this tragedy. That's the point.

The Franchise 11-13-2013 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183858)
No, the possibility of prosecuting Eric's father would have perhaps PREVENTED this tragedy. That's the point.
If the parent is not in the kid's life.....the threat of prosecution is not going to force them to be.

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10183844)
That is my point as well.

Yet for some reason you think that some weird law would make this not be the case.

"oh hey, I am pretty apathetic about this parenting thing...but i saw on tv parents can get in trouble if their kids are. That is it...I am going to start getting involved"

LMAOLMAOLMAO
Eric Harris had a police record buddy, you tell me what kind of warning signs are needed for a parent to be involved.

good lord you are a class A moron.

Fish 11-13-2013 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183793)
If Harris's father thought he might end up in prison because his son was a total psycho? I think he would have done something more. Hell, even if he got into Eric's face and Eric killed him, then Eric would have never been able to do the Columbine thing.

Totally logical.
No, I still completely disagree. Your typical parent would completely deny their own child has a problem as long as possible. In many cases the parents would deny it even after the child had done something horrible.

I have no idea where you're going with the Eric killing Dad line though... WTF?

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10183863)
If the parent is not in the kid's life.....the threat of prosecution is not going to force them to be.
How do you know?

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 12:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish (Post 10183866)
No, I still completely disagree. Your typical parent would completely deny their own child has a problem as long as possible. In many cases the parents would deny it even after the child had done something horrible.

I have no idea where you're going with the Eric killing Dad line though... WTF?
see post 203

|Zach| 11-13-2013 12:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183867)
How do you know?
Because we are people who live in reality.

King_Chief_Fan 11-13-2013 12:17 PM
[quote=|Zach|;10183761]What would we have intervened?

I have no doubt if he knew this rule was around he wouldnt have thought it applied to him.

He obviously wasn't listening to his kid.[/quote]

see? parents fault

|Zach| 11-13-2013 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ (Post 10183865)
Eric Harris had a police record buddy, you tell me what kind of warning signs are needed for a parent to be involved.

good lord you are a class A moron.
The points you make keep backing up my main point.

You keep bringing up factors that would be MUCH more likely for a parent to get involved than a law.

The Franchise 11-13-2013 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10183874)
Because we are people who live in reality.
I was hoping I wasn't the only one. LMAO

hometeam 11-13-2013 12:18 PM
This thread has gone full reerun.

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10183874)
Because we are people who live in reality.
lol, cop out answer is a cop out answer. You cannot know because you cannot know.

Tombstone RJ 11-13-2013 12:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 10183879)
The points you make keep backing up my main point.

You keep bringing up factors that would be MUCH more likely for a parent to get involved than a law.
I'm suggesting an alternative course of action to prevent youth crime and that is to have the possibility of parents being held responsible for their kid's actions. If you have a better idea than present it. Otherwise, the current way of doing things is not working. Just ask the senator lady in AZ who got shot by that kid a few years ago.

notorious 11-13-2013 12:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hometeam (Post 10183882)
This thread has gone full reerun.
As if there was any doubt.

BIG_DADDY 11-13-2013 12:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevieray (Post 10183789)
..30 shootings since Columbine..
The media immortalized them. The whole world knows who Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold are.

BIG_DADDY 11-13-2013 01:17 PM
As far as this thread is concerned such brutal acts of violence on random helpless victims that ruin their lives should be rewarded in kind. I'll bet not one of these is even considered a hate crime. Pathetic really. Pathetic laws, pathetic people. Obviously pathetic enforcement as these guys think it's funny to video tape and post on the web.

taterhog 11-13-2013 02:55 PM
My brother in law was in jersey a while back. He was walking alone and got jumped by two dipshits. They came up from behind, but didn't realize that he was as strong as he is, nor did they realize he had tangled assholes many times in the past. They got him on the ground initially, but he beat the **** out of the one that couldn't run away.

Predarat 11-13-2013 03:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by taterhog (Post 10184350)
My brother in law was in jersey a while back. He was walking alone and got jumped by two dipshits. They came up from behind, but didn't realize that he was as strong as he is, nor did they realize he had tangled assholes many times in the past. They got him on the ground initially, but he beat the **** out of the one that couldn't run away.
Awesome hahah

|Zach| 11-13-2013 03:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by taterhog (Post 10184350)
My brother in law was in jersey a while back. He was walking alone and got jumped by two dipshits. They came up from behind, but didn't realize that he was as strong as he is, nor did they realize he had tangled assholes many times in the past. They got him on the ground initially, but he beat the **** out of the one that couldn't run away.
well now

BIG_DADDY 11-13-2013 03:32 PM
As a DA looking at some of these video's you could make a pretty solid case out of going for attempted murder. You are certainly putting their life at risk especially the women and elderly.

I just wish somebody would go back disguised and find who assaulted them and light up the whole group. I think we all know who the media would make the bad guy out to be.

Fish 11-13-2013 03:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by taterhog (Post 10184350)
My brother in law was in jersey a while back. He was walking alone and got jumped by two dipshits. They came up from behind, but didn't realize that he was as strong as he is, nor did they realize he had tangled assholes many times in the past. They got him on the ground initially, but he beat the **** out of the one that couldn't run away.
It's always the ordinary looking asshole tanglers that you have to watch out for...

Mr. Laz 11-13-2013 03:35 PM
people are scum

Dayze 11-13-2013 03:35 PM
never mess with the quiet guy at the end of the bar

Kaepernick 11-13-2013 03:36 PM
"Evil" is not a synonym for "reeruned". Get it right. These savage punks are evil.

Kaepernick 11-13-2013 03:41 PM
Nuke them from orbit, just to be sure.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:02 PM.
Page 3 of 3 12 3
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.