Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45

Thread: What can we do for fun?

  1. #1
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    http://www.wtov9.com/news/14256678/detail.html

    On-Campus Gun Prank Triggers Felony Charges
    Duo Arrested After Franciscan U. Students Report Threats

    POSTED: 10:17 pm EDT October 2, 2007
    UPDATED: 12:38 am EDT October 3, 2007
    STEUBENVILLE, Ohio -- [/b]Two men pointed pellet guns at several Franciscan University students Tuesday morning, police said.

    A campus security guard stopped one of the men on university property, while city police apprehended the second man on the Wellesley Avenue Extension.

    Greg Shrader and Daniel Buck have both been charged with disorderly conduct, possession of a weapon on school grounds and felonious assault.

    Police Chief Bill McCafferty said both men were just trying to scare people for fun.

    "Things like this do go on at universities today," said McCafferty. "These two subjects should know this isn't a very good prank to play."

    It was not clear Tuesday evening whether Shrader and Buck are current students at the university, but school officials are investigating the incident.

    "The university will be investigating this matter and will respond appropriately according to the student code of conduct," said Student Life director David Schmiesing.

    Shrader and Buck appeared before a city court judge Tuesday morning and were remanded to the Jefferson County Jail.

    These guys must have IQs that are about 5 under plant life. Unbelieveable!! But what if these guys really wanted to hurt someone? Yeah, they would have not been stopped until they had aren't killed people. More proof why responsible people with guns in our schools is a GOOD idea!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    Do these guys deserve retribution? Sure. Do they deserve to become felons over it? Hardly. In fact, if we had a functional system, part of their sentencing would be taking a basic NRA course. I can't speak for others, but my respect for firearms and safety went from near zero to VERY important with just step one of formal education. Once they learn the REAL seriousness of what it was they were immitating, they would not only do it again, but might turn out for the better as a result. Our current form of government is trying to make felons out of as many people as possible for the goal of control and it's our job to stop them from taking that which they are not entitled to.

  3. #3
    Regular Member reefteach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    I agree that a felony for this is out of line.

    I just watched an old 80s film called Gotcha where kids were running around paintballing each other in campus buildings.



    Additionally, I think that people don't do this sort of thing in bad parts of town because the armed response would be swift.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    269

    Post imported post

    Wow, I'm actually a student there (typing from my dorm at this very moment), and this is the first I've heard of that. I guess lurking on a gun forum pays off sometimes. I have to disagree though, these people knew exactly what they were doing, a few months in jail are defeinitly in order; I do however agree that taking away their gun and voting rights over it would be excessive.

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    reefteach wrote:
    I agree that a felony for this is out of line.
    +1. Someone I knowunintentionally hit a kid with a little air dart pistol whenthey were 15 and was convicted of felonious assault with a deadly weapon. Luckily it went away when they turned 18, but it was still ridiculous that they were charged with a felony.

    These kids probably should be punished, but more importantly, they need to be educated. Of course, that would be the RIGHT thing to do, so that probably wont happen.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here and There, Washington, USA
    Posts
    150

    Post imported post

    I really don't have that much of a problem with whatever sentence they get. I'd call them terrorists and send them off to Gitmo, if I could. They should consider themselves luck they didn't pull this "prank" on someone who could have defended themself.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Sitrep wrote:
    I really don't have that much of a problem with whatever sentence they get. I'd call them terrorists and send them off to Gitmo, if I could. They should consider themselves luck they didn't pull this "prank" on someone who could have defended themself.
    Are you F'ing serious?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    Sitrep wrote:
    I really don't have that much of a problem with whatever sentence they get. I'd call them terrorists and send them off to Gitmo, if I could. They should consider themselves luck they didn't pull this "prank" on someone who could have defended themself.
    I too have a major problem with this statement. To liken the irresponsible prank of careless jerks to actions leveled against thousands of innocent lives is uncalled for.

    Want to know what terrorism is? It's flying planes into skyscrapers. It's using that hysteria to create an environment where the people are perpetually afraid. It's damaging a nation in a way that something that would've been chuckled out of a dean's office a decade or so ago is said by that nation's people to be worthy of a felony conviction and/or the classification of the perpetrators as terrorists.

    Had they done this to somebody packing and got put down, it would've been unfortunate, but earned. If one of their "targets" had hit the decks and hit their head on the way down in a way that required medical attention, holding them responsible would be correct. Whatever happened to "all's well that ends well?"

    We have mass shootings in schools because schools are advertised gun free zones. You don't fight that REAL terrorism by punishing people who made a terrible error in judgement or even by regarding the prank of waving a fake gun around ON A CAMPUS (as if school shootings means that has to be different) as worse than what it is. You fight the REAL terrorism by restoring the rights of the law-abiding. If campuses went from gun free zones to 30% of the people there are packing, we'd have no school shooting and also nobody stupid enough to wave a fake gun around at people. When you address the ROOT of a problem, every branch that root manifests is killed in the process.

    Don't punish people who made a bad decision, but did no harm for the harm that OTHERS have done. Anti's try to do this to us every day. If WE don't know better, how can we ever expect them to?

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here and There, Washington, USA
    Posts
    150

    Post imported post

    No, Tomahawk, I'm not totally F'ing serious. But, these men were trying, and possibly succeeding, in making people fear for their lives. That is way beyond a bad decision in my book.

    Maybe I'm too literal in my definition of terrorist. But I believe a terrorist is one who tries to incite terror (ie. fear for ones life).

  10. #10
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    I agree that felonies get throw around more than they should, but these guys are grown men! They are not kids; they know what real guns do, and they know what the effect would be on someone if that person thought a real gun was being pointed at them. And I would find it really hard to believe that they don't know anything about Virginia Tech. Maybe a felony isn't the best punishment, but I don't know how else to show that this is a VERY serious matter. Or maybe they are simply guilty of being really REALLY stupid and need some serious teaching about guns; for all that matters, life in general. It's hard to say without actually talking to them and getting a vibe of what kind of people they are. That will be up to a judge. And there again, the media could be putting a spin on it, who knows?

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member OC-Glock19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    561

    Post imported post

    Here's a story about some other kids who not only pointed toy guns at people, they actually shot them with BB's. In this case they were both unlucky and at the same time lucky. Their last "victim" was a former rugby player who chased them after being shot, but they avoided being killed because their victim had left his gun at home to go to the mall.

    Two teens learned the folly of shooting a BB gun at an attorney, especially when the lawyer is a longtime rugby player who goes by the nickname "Dr. Death."

    Michael J. Breczinski was walking to his car Tuesday night outside a Burton, Mich., mall when he heard a loud pop and felt a sting on his neck.

    The 54-year-old turned to see the smirking teens, ages 14 and 15, hiding their hands.

    The teens ran when he asked if they shot him with a BB gun, Breczinski told The Flint Journal.

    As he gave chase, one of the teens pulled a BB gun and shot at him again. Pellets pinged him in the arms and torso, but Breczinski tackled the teen in a parking lot.

    The youth got away from the lawyer's grasp, but both teens were later arrested by police in a nearby restaurant. They are expected to face felonious assault charges.

    A pair of BB guns were found in the woods near the mall, about 50 miles northwest of Detroit. Police also found the teens had CO2 cartridges used in BB guns and $30 in candy that police believe may have been stolen.

    Breczinski had to get a tetanus shot for the pellet wounds, but said it was the teens who got off lucky. He had taken target practice earlier Tuesday and decided not to carry his .45-caliber Ruger to the mall, he told the newspaper.

    He said there was no guarantee he would have known the teen had pulled only a BB gun.

    "I think God was looking out for them and me," Breczinski said.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    Is a person who robs a bank with a toy pistol any less guilty than one who uses a real gun? Actually this "All's well than ends well" stuff is BS as those people who were scared by the two boys will now be looking behind every tree for a shooter which may or may not be a good thing. Either way these two deserve much more than a slap on the wrist.I had a friend that was shot in the leg with a pellet gun and the pellet went very deep into it requiring quite a bit of surgery and rehab.

  13. #13
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    Is a person who robs a bank with a toy pistol any less guilty than one who uses a real gun?
    Guilty of what? The point is not that they both robbed a bank. The point is that the one that used a toy pistol wasn't planning on hurting or killing anyone in the process. What does that mean? That means that they have a different lesson to learn than the one that used a real gun.

    Yes, these kids were wrong. Yes, they need to be punished (both so THEY learn a lesson, and also so others see that such actions do not go unpunished). MOST importantly, though, they need to to be EDUCATED. I severely doubt that these two have any mental disorders that prevent them from determining right from wrong. Yeah, they knew what they were doing wasn't right, but they probably aren't mature or educated enough to understand how serious their actions were. Who knows? Maybe their fed up with the way people are over reacting to certain things and decided to express it in the wrong way. How often do kids pull fire alarms at school? It's the same desire to make people react...

    These kids need a whole lot of teaching (and probably some hobbies) to get them on the right track. They DON'T need a felony charge on their record. Hell if I could, I'd volunteer to help educate them about firearms. They need to be given some help...not the book.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    Things getting out of hand with someone getting charged with a felonybecause someone flips out over guns? Never heard of such a thing...

    -ljp

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    269

    Post imported post

    What I don't understand is why the same people that (rightfully) slam the Brady Bunch over their "teen tragically shot (during liquor store robbery)" line keeps refering to these guys as 'kids.' While the article doesn't provide any info, the implication (especially the fact that both their names were published) is that they were both over 18. I.E. old enough to know damn well what pointing a realistic looking gun at someone will do.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    Is a person who robs a bank with a toy pistol any less guilty than one who uses a real gun? Actually this "All's well than ends well" stuff is BS as those people who were scared by the two boys will now be looking behind every tree for a shooter which may or may not be a good thing. Either way these two deserve much more than a slap on the wrist.I had a friend that was shot in the leg with a pellet gun and the pellet went very deep into it requiring quite a bit of surgery and rehab.
    - A robbery is a robbery. Both are crimes. Not at all what we're talking about here.

    - Scared? Yes. Rightfully so? Yes. The fact remains that nobody was hurt. No victim, no crime. This is a matter for the university, not the police.

    - Your friend was actually shot. All the difference in the world. And again, NOT what happened here.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    Maybe I should clarify. Is a person who robs a bank with a toy gun guilty of armed robbery? If these fellows had been pointing Glocks instead of pellet guns would it have made any difference since the people being pointed at couldn't tell the difference?

    Suppose they had been using AR-15's instead of Glocks or pellet guns, would that have made any difference. Or as long as they don't intend to shoot anyone they can point anything they want to at anyone they want to as long as they don't intend to shoot them especially since they don't know any better. Is that what I am hearing?

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    450

    Post imported post

    Well, to put the seriousness of their stupidity in perspective... if they would have done this to someone carrying a real gun, they probably would have gotten shot.

    Doing things which could justifiably get you shot are not okay... as a matter of fact, it is so 'not okay', that they should do some jail time for presenting people with a legitimate fear of death or bodily harm (otherwise known as aggravated assault, or attempted assault with a deadly weapon.)

  19. #19
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    Or as long as they don't intend to shoot anyone they can point anything they want to at anyone they want to as long as they don't intend to shoot them especially since they don't know any better. Is that what I am hearing?
    That is what I am hearing, and it is blowing my mind. Sometimes we are so engrossed with supporting guns rights, and personal freedoms, etc., that we lose sight of what is really going on. Some people are stupid, have no common sense, and honestly, don't really have any business having a gun. Just like you don't hire a child molester to work at a day care, it's not wise to allow people to have guns that think pointing a gun at someone is funny. I'm not the judge in this case, I don't know all the facts (the unbiased version without the media spin) so it's impossible to say for sure what should happen to these guys. But I think it's wrong of some of us on here to be sosympathetic of these guys if they are guilty. They need a serious punishment, not a slap on the wrist; like a firearms class or community service.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    269

    Post imported post

    Thats why I suggested non-felony level jail time. This matter certainly goes beyond "boys will be boys," but I would say that, given the facts presented to us, that felony assault charges would be too heavy handed. Of course, if it turns out that they actually threatened* people, as opposed to just pointing the pellet guns at them, then yes, I'd so go with the felony charge and let a grand jury sort it out.



    *Yes, I know that the act of pointing a weapon or imitation weapon at someoneis, in itself, considered a threatening act, but cutthe new guysome slack here.




    On an entirely unrelated note, is anyone else here going to school at Franciscan?

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    dngreer wrote:
    Some people are stupid, have no common sense, and honestly, don't really have any business having a gun.
    "...the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." If they are walking the street, they are equally subject to criminal attack and government tyranny as you, and therefore covered under the Second Amendment just as equally. The anti's try to use every excuse in the book to say YOU are unfit to carry a gun. Don't help them along by pretending that double standards are okay.

    dngreer wrote:
    Sometimes we are so engrossed with supporting guns rights, and personal freedoms, etc., that we lose sight of what is really going on.
    Look again. It's the exact opposite. People willing to control others for any reason are so engrossed with trying to define and justify those reasons that they are willing to liken two college students waving pellet guns at people with A) felons B) terrorists and C) child molestors.

    These students are not responsible for Virginia Tech. They had no hand in Columbine. Okay?


  22. #22
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    Can the Second Amendment be repealed? The answer is yes it is possible but unlikely. However there is a group trying to restrict it and doing a pretty good job at it in many places. Events like the two boys pointing pellet guns are people passing by gives the Brady Bunch plenty of ammunition to help their cause. One of the things about the VT incident was that Cho should not have been allowed to purchase a gun under present laws. If his purchase had been perfectly OK under present laws you can bet your last dollar that there would be many proposals right now to have it changed. As long as legal gun owners keep showing that there is no problem with guns and that the problems are with the outlaws, we can continue to make strides. Every time some idiot with a gun like these cause problems or even perceived problems it adds to the Brady Bunch arsenal.

    When we reach the point that the second amendment is interpreted to allow anyone to walk around with any gun they want, with no restrictions I look for the second amendment to cease to exist. The second amendment is not carved in stone but is just what it is called, and amendment that can be amended.

  24. #24
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    I guess the fact still remains that even these guys get hit withfelonies, if they really want guns, or are determined to live a life of crime, a law is not going to keep them on the straight and narrow road for the rest of their lives.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    When we reach the point that the second amendment is interpreted to allow anyone to walk around with any gun they want, with no restrictions I look for the second amendment to cease to exist. The second amendment is not carved in stone but is just what it is called, and amendment that can be amended.
    Usually, it's the anti's that predict that everybody being armed would lead to the end of civilization. We're supposed to understand that people are mostly good so more people with guns means more GOOD people with guns and more incentive for EVERYBODY to not misuse them.

    The first ten amenments are called the Bill of Rights. Some states would not ratify the Constitution without them. They are not amendments in the traditional sense and are off limits as they represent rights greater than this nation can legislate. Besides, that one will never be stricken because we're supposed to fight for it unlike the UK.

    Two college students waving pellet guns has nothing to do with the Brady Campaign. The BC is about FIREARMS. Also, modern law would not have stopped Cho. Cho was allowed to purchase firearms because his former therapist felt what he was treated for was not serious enough and they were probably right AT THAT TIME. Anti's speak as if the law failed us because they subscribe to the unrealistic belief that you can prevent everything. They're willing to blame everything/everybody EXCEPT Cho because A) Cho is dead now and B) firearms were used and that presents a political opportunity.

    What really pisses me off about this process is the way some of you will bury these guys because doing so would not touch YOUR guns. It's as if you trust that if you tell the other side that calling somebody they don't want to have guns a mental defective, making felons out of non-violent pranksters, etc, they won't come after YOUR guns next. History tells us otherwise.

    @dngreer: Let's just make you a felon because if you still wanted to have guns, you could get them. See how silly that sounds? To suspect that these guys are criminals just because of ONE example of a lapse of judgement where nobody was hurt is preposterous and elitist. Allowing elitism to thrive and flourish is the fastest way to lose all of our rights.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •