• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

..............NY man who says 4 kids vandalized home is charged

What if...? said:
Did he grab the kid by the throat or on the shoulder or back of the neck?

Was it in the process of disarming the kid with the hammer?

Did the kid brandish the hammer, safe in the knowledge that adults can't touch him?

I can think of scenarios where the guy could be out of line, even enough to rise to the criminal.

I can imagine far more where little bastards parents are covering for their little ****s and trying to avoid footing the bill for the brats escapades.
Click to expand...

Those are all important questions. My original statement was IF it was true that he grabbed the neck and threaten to hit the kids in the head when in the closet, then he could be charged with child endangerment. If the kids swung first with a weapon, then self-defense would kick in and grabbing the neck could be allowed.
 
soccerboy22 said:
What the kids did are not in doubt. However, this is a defense of property issue, not self-defense since the damage was being done to the house, not the person. Therefore, in NY deadly force is not allowed in those circumstances, as stated in NY Penal law,

So, if grabbing the neck was seen to be deadly force, then the defense of property will not work. And FYI I do not consider a grown man grabbing a 10 year old by the neck, if true, to be mild physical restraint.
Click to expand...

What kind of stupid **** is this ? No one is alleging "deadly force". Another poster raised the other uninformed comparison to SYG and the Zimmerman case here in FL.

No one has alleged that "grabbing a neck" was deadly force either. Otherwise, I don't give a **** what you consider it.
 
soccerboy22 said:
Those are all important questions. My original statement was IF it was true that he grabbed the neck and threaten to hit the kids in the head when in the closet, then he could be charged with child endangerment. If the kids swung first with a weapon, then self-defense would kick in and grabbing the neck could be allowed.
Click to expand...

Someone posted the rules and it appears you can put your hands on someone to protect your property there.

Not sure a verbal threat is actually endangerment.

I.would bet the charge comes from putting them in the closet, as child abuse takes that form sometimes. Sitting right outside til the cops got there seems to cover that.

Isn't it more likely the parents are trying to get out of a ten grand a head bill?
 
I don't think this has anything to do with being in a liberal state. I just think its NYPD overreacting because of threats over non-violent offenses.
 
AliHajiSheik said:
Perhaps he didn't have any duct tape to hog tie them with. Closets are scary.
Click to expand...


Apparently seeing so many celebrities come running out of theirs' screaming to the heavens "Look at me! Look at me!"........
 
Deuce said:
Sad that the police would let criminals slide "in your day," yes.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and the vandals aren't guilty of anything. It's the parents that are the criminals for disciplining their brats.
 
iacardsfan said:
I don't think this has anything to do with being in a liberal state. I just think its NYPD overreacting because of threats over non-violent offenses.
Click to expand...

Get back to us after you have informed yourself to such as the gun control laws in liberal states, such as NY (where this stupidity occurred), as compared to Conservative states, such as TX.

Liberalism favors the true criminal, seeking to turn the law-abiding into criminals. Always has. Always will.
 
What if...? said:
Someone posted the rules and it appears you can put your hands on someone to protect your property there.

Not sure a verbal threat is actually endangerment.

I.would bet the charge comes from putting them in the closet, as child abuse takes that form sometimes. Sitting right outside til the cops got there seems to cover that.

Isn't it more likely the parents are trying to get out of a ten grand a head bill?
Click to expand...

Oh I am sure the parents are trying to get out of it. And yes you are allowed to physically touch some one to defend your property, but if the father's story is true and there is a lot of reason to doubt it, grabbing a kid hard enough to leave a mark then depending on where he grabbed the neck, could be more than just physically touching some one. I think locking the kids in the closet when you found them doing damage is kind of weak, but the addition to the threat and if the father's story is true, make the child endangerment charge stronger. My bet is the State's evidence against the guy will not be strong enough and they will just drop it.
 
How is locking them in a closet any different than sitting on a robber till the cops arrive?
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Get back to us after you have informed yourself to such as the gun control laws in liberal states, such as NY (where this stupidity occurred), as compared to Conservative states, such as TX.

Liberalism favors the true criminal, seeking to turn the law-abiding into criminals. Always has. Always will.
Click to expand...

What I'm getting from you is that Liberals like mass murders and hate people how kill in self defense? Because I lean Liberal and I certainly don't.
 
iacardsfan said:
What I'm getting from you is that Liberals like mass murders and hate people how kill in self defense? Because I lean Liberal and I certainly don't.
Click to expand...

Just check the gun control laws, and see if there isn't a pattern there. As for your strawman nonsense ...........

images
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I hate vandals. If I ever catch kids doing that to my house I will dig a hole with my backhoe and give them a decent burial, they got off easy.
Click to expand...


and some people rave about the violence instigated by those 'ragheads' in the Middle East. Sounds like the prophet Elisha who didn't care for the kids who teased him for being bald
2 Kings 2:23-24, “Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up by the way, young lads came out from the city and mocked him and said to him, “Go up, you baldhead; go up, you baldhead!” 24 When he looked behind him and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two female bears came out of the woods and tore up forty-two lads of their number.”
Click to expand...
 
Rocketman said:
ONLY IN A LIBERAL STATE!-Rocketman
Click to expand...

Just so you know, only NYC proper is liberal. Upstate New York couldn't be redder if it was doused in Fire Engine Red Enamel. My adult kids live in the same very conservative, very republican county where this happened.

Since the parents of these kids are facing $40,000 in damages, I'd be willing to bet that they are dancing a legal jig to leverage the victim into dropping the charges against their kids and a potload of repair costs from them.
 
Somerville said:
In Texas the homeowner could have legally shot and killed the kids for their vandalism
Click to expand...

not really,you need to actually read texaas lawsand not follow stereotypes from liberal political cartoons.
 
beerftw said:
not really,you need to actually read texaas lawsand not follow stereotypes from liberal political cartoons.
Click to expand...

You couldn't possibly be referring to Section 9.42 of the the Texas Penal Code, could you? You know the law which says
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property;
Click to expand...
 
Somerville said:
You couldn't possibly be referring to Section 9.42 of the the Texas Penal Code, could you? You know the law which says
Click to expand...

Vandalizing isn't burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft.
 
Somerville said:
but it is "criminal mischief"
Click to expand...

Notice how they all say at nighttime. Someone is breaking in my house at night time, I'm shooting them too. I don't care if I don't live in Texas.
 
Rocketman said:
You guys make it so easy
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with liberal vs conservative. It was a pathetic reach on something that hasn't even played itself out. Because when these charges are dropped on the man, I'm sure you''ll come in here to start a new thread and say, "I'm so sorry I slammed the NY liberal state".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom