Boy who fired bottle rockets into Spanaway traffic dies fleeing driver early today [Archive] - HP Deals, Computer Coupons And Bargains

nickel

07-18-2005, 12:25 PM

this bites :(

The Associated Press

SPANAWAY, Wash. — A driver angry that a 12-year-old Tacoma boy was shooting bottle rockets at cars early today got out of his vehicle and chased the boy into traffic, where he was struck and killed by another car, authorities said.

Witnesses tried to revive the boy, identified by the Pierce County Medical Examiner's Office as Garnet Wilis II. Two men were arrested shortly afterward for investigation of manslaughter, the Washington State Patrol said.

The episode happened around midnight near an intersection on Washington 7 in Spanaway, a small town south of Tacoma. Wilis and his 12-year-old cousin had been hiding in bushes and shooting bottle rockets into traffic, trooper Johnny R. Alexander said.

A green Toyota stopped, and its passenger, Tyrone Sherrod, 22, of Tacoma, got out, chased one of the boys and started beating him, Alexander said.

The Toyota's driver, Mario N. Haley, 22, of Lakewood, made a U-turn and chased the second boy into a nearby parking lot, Alexander said. Haley then got out of the car and continued chasing the boy, who ran onto the highway and was struck by a car driven by a 17-year-old Spanaway girl, the patrol said.

Investigators determined the girl who hit Garnet was not at fault. The other boy was treated for injuries and released to his parents.

Sherrod and Haley fled, but police found them three hours later at homes in Tacoma and Lakewood.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002383836_webbottlerocket15.html

raimin

07-18-2005, 12:30 PM

i guess manslaughter since the boy died. wonder how this case will turn out. why the boy will run into the highway is beyond me. i'm smelling plea bargain

mcs328

07-18-2005, 01:26 PM

Worst outcome than the boys who shot bottle rockets at passing cars and caused a tanker truck to collide with some guard rails and other cars. In that one no one got killed. Two wrongs don't make a right in this case.

InfiniteNothing

07-18-2005, 01:38 PM

i guess manslaughter since the boy died. wonder how this case will turn out. why the boy will run into the highway is beyond me. i'm smelling plea bargain

Fear of being beat to death + seeing people do it successfully on TV time and time again.

Grimm

07-18-2005, 01:46 PM

Yossarian

07-18-2005, 01:54 PM

:stupid:

nickel

07-18-2005, 02:03 PM

I view it as someone adding a bit of chlorine to the gene pool.
Someone shoots a rocket at me, regardless of their age, they are gonna get a beating. If they run out into traffic instead of receiving their just deserts, that's on them.

When a rocket is fired at someone it is a weapon. While it might not be deadly at normal speeds, fired at a driver it gets an extra 70 mph of relative velocity. Plus, try to opperate a vehical after getting hit by one. It is a deadly weapon. A 12 year old is old enough to understand that what he is doing is wrong. The beating the 1st kid got was entirely justified. The 2nd kid made a choice, it was a very bad one, the other partied were victims of an assault, they were not the aggressors. The only crime they should be charged with is leaving the scene of an accident.
while i don't agree with the those who launched the bottle rockets , i do see that two wrongs don't make a right.
how about getting the police involved instead of taking the law into your own hands?

you think the guy who chased the kid into traffic doesn't feel like sh!t right now? only someone who is totally inhumane would writhe their hands and pat themselves on the back as they watched that boy's body being flung by that car and then landing on the ground lifeless.

Grimm

07-18-2005, 02:44 PM

while i don't agree with the those who launched the bottle rockets , i do see that two wrongs don't make a right.
how about getting the police involved instead of taking the law into your own hands?Simple. The kids would have been long gone by the time the cops would have gotten there. The kids would have just done it again later, possibly killing a family of four and closing a freeway for 6+ hours. The one thta caught and beat the kid did do something wrong, or might have... I wasn't there, did the kid start hitting him when he got caught?
The one that chased the kid out into traffic didn't do anything wrong. He chased a criminal that could have caused the death of other people if he wasn't caught.

you think the guy who chased the kid into traffic doesn't feel like sh!t right now? only someone who is totally inhumane would writhe their hands and pat themselves on the back as they watched that boy's body being flung by that car and then landing on the ground lifeless.
I didn't say that I thought the guy enjoyed it. I just don't think he should be held responsible for some stupid kid trying to avoid responsibility for his actions.

WTF were 12 year old kids doing with fireworks anyway?!?

nickel

07-18-2005, 02:52 PM

Simple. The kids would have been long gone by the time the cops would have gotten there. The kids would have just done it again later, possibly killing a family of four and closing a freeway for 6+ hours. The one thta caught and beat the kid did do something wrong, or might have... I wasn't there, did the kid start hitting him when he got caught?
The one that chased the kid out into traffic didn't do anything wrong. He chased a criminal that could have caused the death of other people if he wasn't caught.

I didn't say that I thought the guy enjoyed it. I just don't think he should be held responsible for some stupid kid trying to avoid responsibility for his actions.

WTF were 12 year old kids doing with fireworks anyway?!?
i dunno, it just seems fvcked up. i was 12 once. we did stuff to cars that we shouldn't have. at 12 you are still pretty immature and not totally aware of the consequences of your actions. i'm sure the boys didn't have an agenda to kill people by causing them to get into accidents.
i'm not excusing their behavior, it is still wrong, but i still think that beating them/getting them killed was not the answer.

i got a bunch of fireworks, bottle rockets included, in Massachusetts last summer. i dunno, probably the fireworks were bought by a parent and the kids had access to them.

eSDee

07-18-2005, 03:10 PM

It's a bad situation, but I don't think that the guys who chased the kids should be charged with anything, unless the first kid got beat to within an inch of his life. Then you might be able to get an assault charge. For the other kid who ran into traffic? It was his fault he ran out there not the guy who was chasing him.

bachviet

07-18-2005, 04:21 PM

navyones

07-18-2005, 04:33 PM

That's just stupid to throw anything at moving vehicles on the freeway. It happened before in SoCal when someone threw a brick at a moving vehicle and injured a kid on the passenger side badly. :2far: It also distracts the driver and causes accidents.

There was also the most recent incident in which a rock was thrown at a moving car. The rock killed the passenger, while her husband drove.

tupacboy

07-18-2005, 04:52 PM

hmm... i don't see why that guy who chased the kid is being charged with anything... that was the kids fault... not his... if anything charge the kid with assault with a deadly weapon (under those circumstances... they could have caused someone to die) and depending on how badly the kid was beaten... charge the other guy with assault too...

johnnymk

07-18-2005, 04:56 PM

I wouldn't want to be the guy trying to find a jury who would be sympatehetic to the kids in this incident.

GracieBayb

07-18-2005, 04:58 PM

wung

07-18-2005, 05:57 PM

i'm sure the boys didn't have an agenda to kill people by causing them to get into accidents.

and i'm sure the 2nd man didn't have an agenda to kill the kid by chasing him into traffic.

nickel

07-18-2005, 07:11 PM

and i'm sure the 2nd man didn't have an agenda to kill the kid by chasing him into traffic.
you have a point, but the fact remains.

DarkFury

07-18-2005, 07:27 PM

and i'm sure the 2nd man didn't have an agenda to kill the kid by chasing him into traffic.
I agree with this assessment...

However, him fleeing the scene will not go into his favor... Pretty much had he not fled, then most likely he wouldn't be held liable... however fleeing might weigh against him.

Burzhui

07-18-2005, 08:09 PM

i had a kid spit on my windshield so i popped a U pulled up and started running after him, he dropped his bike and ran into traffic almost got killed. I swore i saw the moment in his eyes when he shat himself... but he almost got killed, i hope i taught him a lesson

Hopper1

07-18-2005, 10:21 PM

Wow in my hometown. I don't live there now but I do go back often to visit friends.

InfiniteNothing

07-18-2005, 10:45 PM

Do they have a right to beat someone down? no that's taking the law into their own hands. They should have caught the kids and called the cops. Chasing someone after beating another is clearly assault.

Yossarian

07-19-2005, 06:06 AM

how do you figure thats assult on the second kid? maybe the kid caused damage and he was running after him to get his insurance info.

zero2dash

07-19-2005, 06:44 AM

where were the parents while their kids were out shooting rockets at cars?! :angry: i'd never say it was okay for an adult to beat a child but i do think that the tacoma drivers were right to try to apprehend the boys and stop them from endangering the drivers who were passing by. driving is dangerous enough as it is, we shouldn't have to worry about dogdging objects that are thrown by unsupervised children.

i would have thought that a 12 year old would have had more sense than to flee into a crowded highway... but it is very sad and i'm sorry for his parents' loss.

A-FRICKIN'-MEN!
That's a huge issue here...where were the parents and why was this acceptable behavior??? I'm so sick and tired of lazy ass parents who don't do anything with their kids and don't discipline their kids and don't spend time with their kids and then something like this happens and the parent is on tv "boo hoo my poor child waaaaah you killed my son" leaving blame on everyone but themselves. :rolleyes:

It's sad the kid died but the responsibility falls into the hands of the parents who were not supervising their children. :disa:

InfiniteNothing

07-19-2005, 07:42 AM

how do you figure thats assult on the second kid? maybe the kid caused damage and he was running after him to get his insurance info.
If you chase someone after beating one person down a reasonable person will assume it's to beat the second person down. That is, there is an immediate threat of violence... pretty much the definition of assault.

Lesons of the day: Don't fire bottle rockets into traffic.
If you chase someone down, keep your temper in control and simply place them under citizen's arrest.

Yossarian

07-19-2005, 07:48 AM

we don't know that the guy was going to beat him, hell, the guy could defend himself and win this case...all he needs to do is place reasonable doubt. 'i was running after him to hold him for police'

surfer

07-19-2005, 09:39 AM

If I was on the jury I wouldn't convict a guy for trying to stop another guy who was shooting bottle rockets at him.

GracieBayb

07-19-2005, 09:43 AM

that's a really good point, surfer

cheapie

07-19-2005, 10:17 AM

we don't know that the guy was going to beat him, hell, the guy could defend himself and win this case...all he needs to do is place reasonable doubt. 'i was running after him to hold him for police'

it's certainly assault.

the threat or attempt to strike another, whether successful or not, provided the target is aware of the danger. The assaulter must be reasonably capable of carrying through the attack.

but cripes. it's just an effing bottle rocket. are you saying you've never had a bottle rocket fight? :cool:

DarkFury

07-19-2005, 10:27 AM

it's certainly assault.

but cripes. it's just an effing bottle rocket. are you saying you've never had a bottle rocket fight? :cool:
Assault... maybe. Self Defense/Citizen Arrest... maybe

Either way... if a projectile (i.e. the rocket) is shot at someone's car, that is possibly considered a weapon in this case. And as a citizen, he could've been acting on the principles of citizen arrest to capture the perpetrators.

Yes... he was angry, however based on the story as presented, we can't fully know what his intent was in trying to catch the boys. In this case, this "intent" determines whether it was assualt versus self defense/citizen's arrest.

nickel

07-19-2005, 10:38 AM

see what others are saying about this:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1443811/posts?q=1&&page=1

InfiniteNothing

07-19-2005, 10:55 AM

InfiniteNothing

07-19-2005, 11:03 AM

Assault... maybe. Self Defense/Citizen Arrest... maybe

Either way... if a projectile (i.e. the rocket) is shot at someone's car, that is possibly considered a weapon in this case. And as a citizen, he could've been acting on the principles of citizen arrest to capture the perpetrators.

Yes... he was angry, however based on the story as presented, we can't fully know what his intent was in trying to catch the boys. In this case, this "intent" determines whether it was assualt versus self defense/citizen's arrest.

Chasing someone and then beating them is not self defense because if someone is running away, they don't pose an imminent risk.

Grimm

07-19-2005, 11:43 AM

Chasing someone and then beating them is not self defense because if someone is running away, they don't pose an imminent risk.
They person who chased the kid into traffic didn't beat anyone!!! Didn't you read the article?
The first man caught one of the kids and started beating him. It was wrong for him to do so, but it is much more wrong to hold his friend who was not involved in the beating in any way responsible for it.

The driver was chasing the second kid. He did not see his friend beating the kid and can not be held responsible for it. There is absolutely no evidence that he intedned to do anything other than catch the kid and hold him for the police. He got scared when the kid was killed and then found out the other had been beaten, so he ran. Can you really blame them for that?

From the first man's perspective:
The first man was angry and frightened because someone shot a rocket at him and his friend. He has adrenaline pumping and chases the first kid down and takes matters into his own hand and starts to beat down the kid. He probably feels it is self defense and that he is going to teach the kid not to shoot at people. Then his friend comes back and tells him the other kid is dead. He realizes that the situation is much more serious than he thought it was, he was beating on a minor and the other kid is dead. What he was doing wasn't really bad in and of itself (wasn't that good either) but combined with a death it is scarry, so he bails.

From the driver's perspective:
The second man, the driver, lets his freind out to catch the first miscreant, and chases after the second. He jumps out of his car and gives chase on foot. The kid runs into traffic and is killed. He has done nothing wrong, but the results are horrible. he goes to tell his friend and finds that he was beating up the other kid. Things have gone from bad to worse. His friend is going to get into trouble for beating the kid. And the driver could be considered an accomplice if people chose to ignore the fact that he wasn't evern there when it happened. The death makes it a big deal, bigger than he can handle. His friend wants to get out of there and he in a moment of panic, agrees.

The only real crimes that were commited were assault on a minor (that was justifiable in some people's eyes) and fleeing the scene. Because of the mittigating circumstances, fleeing the scene was the most serious crime. It is unfortuinate that a minor died. The minor had already shown poor judgement by shooting rockets at moving cars, running into traffic was more evidence that the child had very poor judgement.

Who is the most responsible for this occurance?
Well, consider who let their 12 year old go out at night, let them play with fireworks, failed to teach them between right and wrong, and failed to teach them to make good decisions... like don't run into traffic.

Yossarian

07-19-2005, 12:07 PM

but cripes. it's just an effing bottle rocket. are you saying you've never had a bottle rocket fight? :cool:

and when someone shoots 'an effing bottle rocket' at your kids, i'm sure you'r ejust going to look the other way and laugh it off. :rolleyes:

and no, i never did shoot bottle rockets at myself or others, i wasn't stupid enough to shoot an explosive at myself or others. maybe it was my upbrining, but i was taught range(gun) and explosive safety. mainly, respect them and what their use is. and their use isn't shooting at a vehicle, ehich could cause an accident killing people, or at someone, where someone could loose appendages, eye, hearing.

if you're gonna charge the chaser with assault, you better charge the kids too. they're lucky they didn't shoot someone with a gun who was not stable, or someone who is a skittish driver and may have crashed. i have very little sympathy for the kid who died. Darwin at work.

InfiniteNothing

07-19-2005, 12:24 PM

They person who chased the kid into traffic didn't beat anyone!!! Didn't you read the article?

The first man caught one of the kids and started beating him. It was wrong for him to do so, but it is much more wrong to hold his friend who was not involved in the beating in any way responsible for it.
The driver was chasing the second kid. He did not see his friend beating the kid and can not be held responsible for it. There is absolutely no evidence that he intedned to do anything other than catch the kid and hold him for the police. He got scared when the kid was killed and then found out the other had been beaten, so he ran. Can you really blame them for that?

From the first man's perspective:
The first man was angry and frightened because someone shot a rocket at him and his friend. He has adrenaline pumping and chases the first kid down and takes matters into his own hand and starts to beat down the kid. He probably feels it is self defense and that he is going to teach the kid not to shoot at people. Then his friend comes back and tells him the other kid is dead. He realizes that the situation is much more serious than he thought it was, he was beating on a minor and the other kid is dead. What he was doing wasn't really bad in and of itself (wasn't that good either) but combined with a death it is scarry, so he bails.

From the driver's perspective:
The second man, the driver, lets his freind out to catch the first miscreant, and chases after the second. He jumps out of his car and gives chase on foot. The kid runs into traffic and is killed. He has done nothing wrong, but the results are horrible. he goes to tell his friend and finds that he was beating up the other kid. Things have gone from bad to worse. His friend is going to get into trouble for beating the kid. And the driver could be considered an accomplice if people chose to ignore the fact that he wasn't evern there when it happened. The death makes it a big deal, bigger than he can handle. His friend wants to get out of there and he in a moment of panic, agrees.

The only real crimes that were commited were assault on a minor (that was justifiable in some people's eyes) and fleeing the scene. Because of the mittigating circumstances, fleeing the scene was the most serious crime. It is unfortuinate that a minor died. The minor had already shown poor judgement by shooting rockets at moving cars, running into traffic was more evidence that the child had very poor judgement.

Who is the most responsible for this occurance?
Well, consider who let their 12 year old go out at night, let them play with fireworks, failed to teach them between right and wrong, and failed to teach them to make good decisions... like don't run into traffic.

I wasn't talking about the driver. I was talking about the passenger. Granted the kids used bad judgement but so did the passenger. You can't chase and attack someone in self defense. There's no excuse for continuing to beat the kid after he was caught. You can call it adrenaline all you want but in the end we are responsible for our tempers

As for the driver, it's at least assault since a reasonable person would assume he was chasing to attack, not to capture. But I guess this is why we have jurries. :shrug:

and when someone shoots 'an effing bottle rocket' at your kids, i'm sure you'r ejust going to look the other way and laugh it off. :rolleyes:

and no, i never did shoot bottle rockets at myself or others, i wasn't stupid enough to shoot an explosive at myself or others. maybe it was my upbrining, but i was taught range(gun) and explosive safety. mainly, respect them and what their use is. and their use isn't shooting at a vehicle, ehich could cause an accident killing people, or at someone, where someone could loose appendages, eye, hearing.

if you're gonna charge the chaser with assault, you better charge the kids too. they're lucky they didn't shoot someone with a gun who was not stable, or someone who is a skittish driver and may have crashed. i have very little sympathy for the kid who died. Darwin at work.

I don't think bottle rockets can be considered explosives.

Grimm

07-19-2005, 12:41 PM

Chasing someone and then beating them is not self defense because if someone is running away, they don't pose an imminent risk.
Then why can cops shoot someone who is running away?

Answer: Because that person poses a risk in the future.

If you chase someone after beating one person down a reasonable person will assume it's to beat the second person down.
...
I wasn't talking about the driver. I was talking about the passenger.
Actualy, you were specificaly refering to the driver, as he was the one who did not beat a kid down. Perhaps you mis-stated.

InfiniteNothing

07-19-2005, 12:53 PM

Then why can cops shoot someone who is running away?

Answer: Because that person poses a risk in the future.

Actualy, you were specificaly refering to the driver, as he was the one who did not beat a kid down. Perhaps you mis-stated.

Well, A, because they are cops and B, I'm not sure they can. Around here they always wait until the gun pops out.

cheapie

07-19-2005, 05:17 PM

and when someone shoots 'an effing bottle rocket' at your kids, i'm sure you'r ejust going to look the other way and laugh it off. :rolleyes:

and no, i never did shoot bottle rockets

attack what i said instead of putting words in my mouth and ripping on them. it's pretty easy defeating a straw man. perhaps you'd like to step up and start debating what i actually said/meant. :rolleyes:

InfiniteNothing

07-19-2005, 05:42 PM

and i'm sure the 2nd man didn't have an agenda to kill the kid by chasing him into traffic.

Don't need to have an agenda for "manslaughter"

Markel

07-19-2005, 06:58 PM

Any decent lawyer will be able to get the guy off. Unfortunatley, he'll have to pay for a lawyer because some DA bowed to fear of community pressure because a child was killed. (It's a sad thing that a child died. but to charge the guy with manslaughter is absurd, imo.)

Yossarian

07-19-2005, 08:04 PM

I don't think bottle rockets can be considered explosives.

http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Explosive

Any explosive material has the following characteristics:

The initiation produces a sudden expansion of the material accompanied by the production of heat and large changes in pressure (and typically also a flash or loud noise) which is called the explosion.

and cheapie, i'd like to know where i didn't address your point. i ignored the one about assult, because its maily true, but as markel said, any half-ass lawyer can get this guy off.

and i addressed your point about if i ever fired bottle rockets at other people.

cheapie

07-19-2005, 08:11 PM

and when someone shoots 'an effing bottle rocket' at your kids, i'm sure you're just going to look the other way and laugh it off.

of course i'm going to be pissed if someone shoots bottle rockets at my kids. but....nobody shot bottle rockets at kids. in fact, it's a bit of a stretch to say the adults were in any danger because they were in a car. additionally, i never stated or implied i would laugh and look the other way.

understand?

Yossarian

07-19-2005, 08:15 PM

of course i'm going to be pissed if someone shoots bottle rockets at my kids. but....nobody shot bottle rockets at kids. i additionally, never stated or implied i would laugh and look the other way.

understand?
valid, and understandable

in fact, it's a bit of a stretch to say the adults were in any danger because they were in a car.

ok, so if you're driving in a car, and something, even as small as a bottle rocket, explodes in front of you, or on your car, or goes in a window, you're safe? what would have happened had the guy rahter than stopping, swerved and gone into on coming traffic, or the median, or the sidewalk, or through a store window?

a car, any civilian vehicle is hardly safe and prevents danger. what it came down to how these two guys were safe was how the driver kept his cool while driving, yes he lost it after he got out, but while one kid did die, many others could have.

cheapie

07-19-2005, 08:20 PM

it was absolutely a stupid thing for the kids to do. however, throwing rocks at cars over an overpass is a ton worse imho.

my only point is that assault happens when a person reasonably feels threatened, not only when they are harmed.

Yossarian

07-19-2005, 08:25 PM

thats understandable. but i still want to know how you think a rock is worse....depending on the size of the rock, a person could think its just regular road junk that someone kicked up. i just see an explosion as the worse thing, because its something you never see, and its also something that msot people freak over when its unexpected

cheapie

07-19-2005, 08:25 PM

a rock can cause damage in addition to scaring the crap out of someone.

DarkFury

07-19-2005, 09:01 PM

Oh well.. rather than argue this... We'll just have to see what the courts say about it.

So many "armchair lawyers" in the room... Is L.A. Law still on? :heh:

Nanotech9

07-20-2005, 07:54 AM

think of it this way... what if that was a cop car and the cops jumped out and one pinned the kid down and the other was chaseing the other kid... and the kid ran out into traffic...? oh, then its ok... cause the cop was trying to aprehend a criminal... lol. its the same.

hell, maybe the othe rguy was even trying to grab th ekid to keep him from running out into traffic and getting hit once he realized what was about to happen... you NEVER know.

InfiniteNothing

07-20-2005, 07:57 AM

Cops are peace officers. It's reasonable to assume they would not have beat down the kid who ran out in traffic therefore it's not assault.

http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Explosive

Any explosive material has the following characteristics:

The initiation produces a sudden expansion of the material accompanied by the production of heat and large changes in pressure (and typically also a flash or loud noise) which is called the explosion.

and cheapie, i'd like to know where i didn't address your point. i ignored the one about assult, because its maily true, but as markel said, any half-ass lawyer can get this guy off.

and i addressed your point about if i ever fired bottle rockets at other people.
Yes, and I don't believe there is a sudden expansion of material. It's more like a slow expansion. I'm not sure there's much heat either. We may be thinking of different kinds of bottle rockets.

zenbooty

07-20-2005, 08:04 AM

thats understandable. but i still want to know how you think a rock is worse....depending on the size of the rockIn the case of the rock scenario, we aren't talking about skipping stoned. The kids dropped large rocks from an over pass onto car windshields below.

No way can a bottle rocket break through a car window and injure somebody.

brainsmile

07-20-2005, 08:31 AM

seems like it was just a bad choice and a bad outcome for all

Grimm

07-20-2005, 09:38 AM

No way can a bottle rocket break through a car window and injure somebody.
It hasn't been ascertained that every window on every car on that highway had all their windows up.

What happens when they decide to shoot a rocket at a motorcyclist?

This was not harmless fun. It was exceedingly dangerous. You don't mess with traffic, not in any way. One kid found this out way too late. :(

SnowSurfer

07-20-2005, 10:06 AM

alright, heres my take on this,

first there is different kinds of bottle rockets, i have some called texas pop rockets that fly a football field or two into the air at a high rate of speed and then explode.

second i got shot at when i was driving home at midnight the other night, it was a pellet gun but i woulda been hella pissed if it hit my car. these kids had been apparently doing this for a little while now, they just picked the wrong car to shoot at. Don't shoot stuff at cars, i thought that was common sense in the day and age we live in, you never know when someone is going to have a gun or if the guy was a off duty cop. In another view what if both people in the car were both off duty police officers and the beating of the first kid never occured, would there still be a man slaugter charge?

third did they just stop in the middle of the street or did they pull over? and where were these kids parents? and how did they get the fireworks? i thought you had to be a certain age to purchase fireworks.

forth..what video game/tv show are we going to blame this one on ;). i know in THUG 2 you have to shoot a rocket off a barn in skatopia...that def influenced these kids

(number 4 was sarchasm)

Yossarian

07-20-2005, 10:11 AM

Yes, and I don't believe there is a sudden expansion of material. It's more like a slow expansion. I'm not sure there's much heat either. We may be thinking of different kinds of bottle rockets.

i think we're talking about two different stages of the thing. i'm talking about the end result, the bng. that is an explosion, up until then, it's jsut a projectile

and zen, thanks for clarification.

someone remind me to never have kids

mcs328

07-20-2005, 10:22 AM

Even if it didn't explode I wouldn't want to be the unlucky SOB who gets one in the eye.

zenbooty

07-20-2005, 10:27 AM

It hasn't been ascertained that every window on every car on that highway had all their windows up.

What happens when they decide to shoot a rocket at a motorcyclist?The issue was Yoss claiming there was no difference between a bottle rocket and the rocks that the kids had been dropping that we heard about. And my reaction is basically, if you don't think there's a difference, than you probably think there's no difference between THC and crack, or a pop gun and an M-16. Whether the cars all had windows up is really not pertinent to the argument.

This was not harmless fun.No, its not. But its not worthy of a vigilante beating, either. Lets face it, the guys in the car were a couple of *******s in their early 20's who went too far over something that, while wrong, was not a big deal. Could it have been a big deal if it was some old lady who had a heart attack as a result and caused a 20 car pileup? Sure. But that's not what happened. What did happen was that one boy was beaten and another killed over something that, while illegal and stupid, harmed no one. This was an issue for the police to handle, not some wannabe tough guys.

Grimm

07-20-2005, 11:10 AM

The issue was Yoss claiming there was no difference between a bottle rocket and the rocks that the kids had been dropping that we heard about. And my reaction is basically, if you don't think there's a difference, than you probably think there's no difference between THC and crack, or a pop gun and an M-16. Whether the cars all had windows up is really not pertinent to the argument.
It is ludicrous to dismiss the rockets as harmless. There has been more than one incidence of kids dropping or throwing rocks at cars. Yes, big rocks are more dangerous, but small ones can cause significant damage too. The rockets are significant enough to be a real danger. If a skilled and capable driver with the windows rolled up has his car windows rolled up then there is no danger. However, the assumtion that a driver is skilled and capable is only true in a minority of cases. While most adults know how to operate a vehical, assuming most were skilled and capable would be folley. The assumption that all the windows would be rolled up is also questionable. It's summer, a lot of windows are rolled down.
Your assertation that since I don't agree with you I must think that THC is as bad as crack and that a popgun is the same as an M-16 are prime examples of Argumentum ad hominem, straw man, and extended analogy. It's not a valid argument and has no place in the discusion.

No, its not. But its not worthy of a vigilante beating, either. Lets face it, the guys in the car were a couple of *******s in their early 20's who went too far over something that, while wrong, was not a big deal. Could it have been a big deal if it was some old lady who had a heart attack as a result and caused a 20 car pileup? Sure. But that's not what happened. What did happen was that one boy was beaten and another killed over something that, while illegal and stupid, harmed no one. This was an issue for the police to handle, not some wannabe tough guys.
I disagree. Their trespass was worthy of a vigilante beating. It doesn't make it right, but it was worthy.
The event was a "big deal". It endangered lives. They did not shoot rockets at one car. They continued to shoot rockets indiscriminately and would have eventialy caused an accident.
Someone, besides the kids, was harmed. The two young men were harmed when the kid's provocation caused them to react in a negative manner. They will suffer legal consequences. If the kids had not been out exibiting potentialy fatal behavior, the two men would have driven by and completed their journey without incident. yes, the two men are responsible for their actions, but not exclusive of holding the kids responsible.

Daversinger

07-20-2005, 11:13 AM

I want to see pictures of the kid who was so called "beat" what is he in intensive care or something, whoever testified saying the kid got beat blew it out of proportion. I'm guessing it was a slap on the wrist. (that what one side of me wanted to say.)

hmm I guess it would be hard to stay at the sceen if what you did wasn't completely just.

how old was the kid they beat up. maybe the press withheld that info to make us feel sorry for the 12yr kid. (man that is so radical, but i'll say it anyways.)

zenbooty

07-20-2005, 01:47 PM

zenbooty

07-20-2005, 03:51 PM

It is ludicrous to dismiss the rockets as harmless. There has been more than one incidence of kids dropping or throwing rocks at cars. Yes, big rocks are more dangerous, but small ones can cause significant damage too. The rockets are significant enough to be a real danger. If a skilled and capable driver with the windows rolled up has his car windows rolled up then there is no danger. However, the assumtion that a driver is skilled and capable is only true in a minority of cases. While most adults know how to operate a vehical, assuming most were skilled and capable would be folley. The assumption that all the windows would be rolled up is also questionable. It's summer, a lot of windows are rolled down.
Your assertation that since I don't agree with you I must think that THC is as bad as crack and that a popgun is the same as an M-16 are prime examples of Argumentum ad hominem, straw man, and extended analogy. It's not a valid argument and has no place in the discusion.Easy question, which do you consider the greater hazard to a driver:

1. a bottle rocket flying into the car and going POP!, maybe even hitting the driver in the face and stinging it (You ever get hit by one? Its a bit of a shock, and it stings for a bit, but that's all. Its not going to cause any burns or serious harm)

2. A large boulder (think something 6", or 8" or even 10" in diameter. That's what we're talking about with these kids) smashing down through the front windshield, quite possibly taking out the driver or passenger and sending shattered glass all about the front interior?

I say #2 by a mile, even if the bottle rocket hits the driver right in the face. This is all I was getting at with Yoss, your red herrings notwithstanding.

I disagree. Their trespass was worthy of a vigilante beating. It doesn't make it right, but it was worthy.What a way to split hairs! It wasn't right, but it was worthy? That's almost Clintonian, or even Rovian.

The event was a "big deal". It endangered lives. They did not shoot rockets at one car. They continued to shoot rockets indiscriminately and would have eventialy caused an accident.Which is why its a crime, and should be handled by the police, not vigilantes.

Someone, besides the kids, was harmed. The two young men were harmed when the kid's provocation caused them to react in a negative manner. They will suffer legal consequences.Oh please :rolleyes:. If you insult me and I turn around and kill you, can I rightfully blame you for the harm done to me in prison?

If the kids had not been out exibiting potentialy fatal behavior, the two men would have driven by and completed their journey without incident.This is no defense of their actions.

yes, the two men are responsible for their actions, but not exclusive of holding the kids responsible.You sure sounded before like the guys shouldn't be held responsible, and when did I ever say the kids weren't responsible? I only said that it didn't warrant a vigilante beating for one and a death sentence for the other.

Grimm

07-20-2005, 04:34 PM

Easy question, which do you consider the greater hazard to a driver:

1. a bottle rocket flying into the car and going POP!, maybe even hitting the driver in the face and stinging it (You ever get hit by one? Its a bit of a shock, and it stings for a bit, but that's all. Its not going to cause any burns or serious harm)

2. A large boulder (think something 6", or 8" or even 10" in diameter. That's what we're talking about with these kids) smashing down through the front windshield, quite possibly taking out the driver or passenger and sending shattered glass all about the front interior?

I say #2 by a mile, even if the bottle rocket hits the driver right in the face. This is all I was getting at with Yoss, your red herrings notwithstanding.
Ahhh... the "Your honor, I only shot him with a .38, not a 44 mag defense". WTF does the opinion that they were not hurling 200 lb boulders at oncoming cars have to with the fact they were firing incendiary devices at drivers?!?!

The fantasy that if a driver is hit in the face by a rocket that he won't lose control of the vehical is entirely naive.
My red herrings?!?! You should open up a fish market with all the ones you keep throwing around.

Red herring
This fallacy is committed when someone introduces irrelevant material to the issue being discussed, so that everyone's attention is diverted away from the points made, towards a different conclusion.
You are the one talking about rocks, when the discussion is about rockets.

What a way to split hairs! It wasn't right, but it was worthy? That's almost Clintonian, or even Rovian.
I don't think either of those examples are appropriate. I also don't agree it is splitting hairs. Things like this are not black and white, there are shades of grey.

Which is why its a crime, and should be handled by the police, not vigilantes.Oh, my bad, I missed the part about all the cops standing around waiting to help out.

Oh please . If you insult me and I turn around and kill you, can I rightfully blame you for the harm done to me in prison? No, but the court will take it into consideration when they decide on the charges and on sentancing. And your anology is incorrect in the severity. The men involved were reacting to a real threat to them and other motorists, not an insult.

This is no defense of their actions.It wasn't intended to be.

You sure sounded before like the guys shouldn't be held responsible, and when did I ever say the kids weren't responsible? I only said that it didn't warrant a vigilante beating for one and a death sentence for the other.What, you are allowed to have a complex opinion, but I am not? Four people were involved in this incident (not including other affected motorists) and at least three acted irresponsibly. The two most responsible people for this having happend were the instigators, the two 12 year olds. One of the adults chose to beat of one of the 12 year olds. That was irresponsable, not as irresponsable as continuing on his way and allowing the kids to continue their acts of violence aganist the motorists on the highway.
The other adult attempted to apprehned one of his assalants. You can only speculate as to what his intent was. The responsable thing would to have been caught him and held him for the police. He did not have the opertunity to do so. We are going to have to take his word for what he intended to do. The assault on the other kid is effectively a seperate incident. He had no control over it.

zenbooty

07-20-2005, 05:06 PM

Ahhh... the "Your honor, I only shot him with a .38, not a 44 mag defense". WTF does the opinion that they were not hurling 200 lb boulders at oncoming cars have to with the fact they were firing incendiary devices at drivers?!?!

The fantasy that if a driver is hit in the face by a rocket that he won't lose control of the vehical is entirely naive.
My red herrings?!?! You should open up a fish market with all the ones you keep throwing around.

You are the one talking about rocks, when the discussion is about rockets.LISTEN, AND GO BACK AND READ THE THREAD OVER IF YOU MUST.

Yoss made the initial mention comapring the boys to the ones who threw rocks. I engaged him and said there was no comparison. That was it. That was my point. That is all we were discussing. Then you came in with guns ablazin', and everything we've discussed outside the realm of rocks vs. rocket was brought on ALL BY YOU. YOU introduced the red herring, YOU took the argument away from what Yoss and I were discussing, you are the one going off on tangents that had nothing to do with my original point.

I don't think either of those examples are appropriate. I also don't agree it is splitting hairs. Things like this are not black and white, there are shades of grey.I don't see how something can be both not right and yet worthy, without questioning the ethics of the person who would believe such a thing to be true. Its one or the other. You can say its not right, but you have a hard time sympathizing with the 12 year olds, but to say something is both wrong and worthy to me doesn't describe gray area. It describes confusion.

Oh, my bad, I missed the part about all the cops standing around waiting to help out.Let's see how such an argument stands up in court. Oh, the cops aren't around, I guess its up to me to administer justice myself. Sorry, not how the law works here, thank God.

No, but the court will take it into consideration when they decide on the charges and on sentancing. And your anology is incorrect in the severity. The men involved were reacting to a real threat to them and other motorists, not an insult.Fine, if you shoot a rubber band at me (a real threat, it could put out my eye!) and I kill you for it, should that be taken into any real consideration?

What, you are allowed to have a complex opinion, but I am not? Four people were involved in this incident (not including other affected motorists) and at least three acted irresponsibly. The two most responsible people for this having happend were the instigators, the two 12 year olds. One of the adults chose to beat of one of the 12 year olds. That was irresponsable, not as irresponsable as continuing on his way and allowing the kids to continue their acts of violence aganist the motorists on the highway.I think you're backtracking now:

I view it as someone adding a bit of chlorine to the gene pool.
Someone shoots a rocket at me, regardless of their age, they are gonna get a beating. If they run out into traffic instead of receiving their just deserts, that's on them.

Sound familiar? Or how about this?

The only crime they should be charged with is leaving the scene of an accident.

I just don't think he should be held responsible for some stupid kid trying to avoid responsibility for his actions.

There's nothing wrong with changing you're opinion. Just admit you've changed it instead of claiming complexity.

GilbertsGrape

07-20-2005, 05:23 PM

KY law you are aloud to defend yourself with as much force as is used on you. If someone trys to kill you with a wepon you are allowed to use a wepon to defend yours self. pretty much if someone tries to come in your home and kill or endanger your life you are allowd to defend yourself and if you happen to kill the intruder the case probbly would not make it before the grand jury before it was throne out.

zenbooty

07-20-2005, 05:27 PM

InfiniteNothing

07-20-2005, 05:29 PM

Again, defense isn't really a valid here. You can't chase someone in self defense.

nickel

07-20-2005, 05:33 PM

update:

the men who chased into traffic/beat down the 12 yr old bottle rocketeers haven't been charged with anything until the investigation is complete, and are free to go, oh wait.. one of them has been kept in jail "for parole violation on another unrelated case."

Charges On Hold In Deadly Spanaway Chase

July 18, 2005
Prosecutors say they have no immediate plans to charge two men arrested for chasing a boy into traffic, where he was struck and killed, after he fired bottle rockets at their car.

http://www.komotv.com/news/images/haley_sherrod.jpg

SPANAWAY - Prosecutors say they have no immediate plans to charge two men arrested in the death of a boy from Spanaway.

Garnet Wilis and his cousin were shooting bottle rockets at cars when two men in one of the cars stopped. Troopers say the young men chased the boys, and that's when Willis ran into traffic and was killed.

The prosecutors say they need more time to figure if a crime has actually been committed, and until they do so, the two men are set free -- including Mario Haley.

Despite having a criminal record, his family says he's not the type to want to hurt a young boy.

Haley has been locked up in the Pierce County Jail ever since early Friday morning when he was arrested in the aftermath of a deadly accident.

Two 12-year-old boys were shooting fireworks at cars -- including Haley's. The two pulled over and chased after the boys.

Garnet Wilis tried to get away by running into traffic, but tripped over the median and was hit by another car.

"My heart goes out to his family," said Shawnna Blatnik, Haley's girlfriend. "As a mother, I couldn't imagine the loss of my child. That's one thing he said to me is that he would never hurt anybody's children."

She admits Haley has a criminal record for assault, but says some of that comes from trying to protect her during an attack by other women.

"They try to make the charges worse than they are but with Mario he protected me and his child that was inside of me," Blatnik said.

She says he recently got baptized.

"He turned his life around a couple of months ago so we've got the church background and everybody has been praying so we'll keep our fingers crossed," she said.

But the families of Wilis and his cousin, Jon Winterhawk, say there's no question the men should be charged with manslaughter, claiming they caused the death by running after the boys and threatening them.

But for now, no charges are being filed in this case.

"We need to have more investigation done," said Chief Criminal Deputy Prosecutor Jerry Costello. "The lead detective wants to talk with some additional witnesses and to clarify some information and when we have all of the facts as best that we can understand them then we'll apply them to the unique legal questions in this case."

So for now, the other suspect Tyrone Sherrod and Haley are free, while another family grieves a loss and sets a funeral.

Even though Haley has been set free on this case, he's still in jail, being held for parole violation on another unrelated case.

The prosecutor says that fact will have no bearing on the decision whether to file manslaughter charges in this case. That decision could come any day.

http://www.komotv.com/news/story_m.asp?ID=38041

seqiro

07-20-2005, 09:11 PM

zero2dash

07-20-2005, 09:24 PM

Forget about the stupid kids and the stupid adults who chased them, I feel sorry for that 17 year old girl who was just minding her own damn business and ended up hitting and killing a child. Regardless of the fact that it was completely not her fault, she must feel like total crap and has to live with it.

Agreed, now she's got that tragic moment forever embedded into her memory and will have to deal with that for the rest of her life. :(

One thing about that news report seriously bothers me.

So for now, the other suspect Tyrone Sherrod and Haley are free, while another family grieves a loss and sets a funeral.

The reporter acts like this was a callous, planned act by the two men and the only victims in this case are the dead kids' family. Sure, don't pity the girl or the men (who also have to face the fact that they saw a kid die right before their eyes). Death isn't something people just conveniently forget no matter what side of the fence you're on...(relative, guilty party, witness etc)

cruelpupet

07-22-2005, 05:11 AM

nickel

07-22-2005, 06:41 AM

Agreed. Is there a defense fund for the two men yet?
there probably is, or you could just cut them a check anyway.

i think i found their addresses for you on zabasearch:

MARIO HALEY 7215 WAPATO ST TACOMA WA
(253) 476-3581

TYRONE SHERROD 214 145TH STREET CT E TACOMA WA

Grimm

07-22-2005, 12:03 PM

LISTEN, AND GO BACK AND READ THE THREAD OVER IF YOU MUST.
Yelling is not neccisary. I have been carefully reading everything you said. It's very rude and not conductive to civil debate.

Yoss made the initial mention comapring the boys to the ones who threw rocks. I engaged him and said there was no comparison. That was it. That was my point. Your point was that a rocket is not dangerous. I am arguing that it is. I don't care about what Yoss (no offense meant Yoss) said as it does not relate to what we are discussing.

I don't see how something can be both not right and yet worthy, without questioning the ethics of the person who would believe such a thing to be true. Its one or the other. You can say its not right, but you have a hard time sympathizing with the 12 year olds, but to say something is both wrong and worthy to me doesn't describe gray area. It describes confusion.
Right:
2 : being in accordance with what is just, good, or proper <right conduct>

Worthy:
1 a : having worth or value : ESTIMABLE <a worthy cause> b : HONORABLE, MERITORIOUS <worthy candidates>
2 : having sufficient worth or importance <worthy to be remembered>

Right and worthy are not synonyms. They are neither mutualy inclusive nor exclusive. They are frequently used together because they are somewhat similar, but not so similar that it would require them to be used together.

Let's see how such an argument stands up in court. Oh, the cops aren't around, I guess its up to me to administer justice myself. Sorry, not how the law works here, thank God.
It's a good thing that there is no real "Court of Zenbooty" then. In the absence of law enforcement the citizenry is allowed to act, even in some cases required to act. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the act of chasing the kids. (And you are welcome. ;))

Fine, if you shoot a rubber band at me (a real threat, it could put out my eye!) and I kill you for it, should that be taken into any real consideration?I don't think your scale is entirely appropriate here. One, a rocket shot at a driver is dangerous, a rubber band is not. Two, neither adult killed anyone, there was an assault, a chase, a beating, and a stupid kid running into traffic.
A better comparison would be you firing a handgun into the air and me kicking your butt for it. The bullets have to come down and they can land on someone's head, you can't be allowed to endanger people's safety at a whim.

I think you're backtracking now:
...
There's nothing wrong with changing you're opinion. Just admit you've changed it instead of claiming complexity.
My opinion hasn't changed. I'm sorry if I am not effectivly able to communicate it to you, but everyone else seems to have got it. I am not going to admit to something that is not true.

Yossarian

07-22-2005, 12:16 PM

I don't care about what Yoss (no offense meant Yoss)

don't worry, none taken, and besides, i'm used to having the opnions i put forth ignored. :neartears

bbrian

07-22-2005, 12:37 PM

A 'bottle rocket' is not a rocket at all. It is a thin bamboo stick with a propellant on the end. It weighs an ounce, so their impact even at high speeds is neglible. A small rock would do a lot more damage even if the bottle rocket were to explode at the same time as the impact to the vehicle (which would be incredible timing). I have been shot with a bottle rocket before and I have had one blow up in my hand. No harm done..

I'm not saying that a bottle rocket can't be dangerous.. they are illegal in my state. But to think a bottle rocket could somehow break a windshield is crazy. Comparing a bottle rocket to a gun is insane as well.

If given the opp to chose whether to be shot with a bottle rocket or a rubber band, I'd pick the bottle rocket. The chances of hitting me are slim and the chances of timing the explosion to be when it hits me are really slim. It's pretty easy to jack an eye up with a rubber band.

This mess is terrible all the way around.. over some stupid firecrackers.

nickel

07-22-2005, 12:47 PM

here are what bottle rockets look like for anyone who hasn't seen them.

http://www.fireworksbydonnora.com/Bottle-Rockets/Individual/images/whistlingmoontravelwreport.jpg

another update:

As for the incident that started it all, it's possible that the surviving cousin could be charged as a juvenile for the dangerous use of fireworks.
http://www.komotv.com/stories/37987.htm

Maarchk

07-22-2005, 05:15 PM

but cripes. it's just an effing bottle rocket. are you saying you've never had a bottle rocket fight? :cool:

A bottle rocket shooting at cars that possibly are leaking oil or could cause an accident when one car swerves from a flam ball coming at them?

I think you are trivializing this a bit. Its like saying that kids that throw rocks off interpasses... Didn't you ever throw rocks?

SnowSurfer

07-23-2005, 03:30 AM

how do we know the bottle rockets they were using weren't these??

http://www.hamcofireworks.com/catalog/images/Texas_Pop_Rocket.jpg

because thats what i consider a bottle rocket..

revil

07-23-2005, 10:35 AM

A-FRICKIN'-MEN!
That's a huge issue here...where were the parents and why was this acceptable behavior??? I'm so sick and tired of lazy ass parents who don't do anything with their kids and don't discipline their kids and don't spend time with their kids and then something like this happens and the parent is on tv "boo hoo my poor child waaaaah you killed my son" leaving blame on everyone but themselves. :rolleyes:

It's sad the kid died but the responsibility falls into the hands of the parents who were not supervising their children. :disa:
Oh man. I know what you mean. I teach a class of japanese kindergardners. This one lazy parent lets her kid do whatever she wants. So the kid punches one of the other students in the class. I of course stop him and take him out of the class to his mother which is waiting for him. I explained what he did and her response was that "he is excited".