# Dad hits "intruder" with a pipe, Dad is charged with assault



## LittleBlondePunk (Sep 14, 2008)

> DELTONA -
> 
> An angry Deltona father whacked his teenage daughter's boyfriend with a metal pipe after finding the boy naked in his daughter's room.
> 
> ...





Ok, one i can understand that he hit a teenager, but WTF! Its not like th dad knew who this guy was! He was naked in his house, he had never seen him before, so he was only protecting his self and his family. I think its BS he got charged and has a slut-ass daughter. Comeon now. Be a little more sneaky next time...

EDIT!


> Dad who hit daughter's boyfriend won't be prosecuted
> By KARI COBHAM
> Staff Writer
> 
> ...



JUSTICE PREVAILED!


----------



## Biolink (Sep 14, 2008)

Wow, what a slutty ass daughter.

I would have done the same thing if I was the guy. Tells you how fucked our judicial system is since he is getting charged. That's just fucked up


----------



## Gunners (Sep 14, 2008)

No he should get charged more I don't think ''Omg rape'' would come to mind as I would expect a lot more noise.

He could have killed the youth.

Also the kid wasn't an intruder as he was let in the house by someone who lived there.


----------



## Biolink (Sep 14, 2008)

Jio said:


> No he should get charged more I don't think ''Omg rape'' would come to mind as I would expect a lot more noise.
> 
> He could have killed the youth.



Rape doesn't have to be loud.

The rapist could tell the girl to be quiet, or she and her family gets murdered.


----------



## Bender (Sep 14, 2008)

It's the boys damn fault for sneaking in


----------



## iLurk (Sep 14, 2008)

What the hell is this?

The boy should be in jail and be charged with breaking and entry.

Probably assaulting and indecent exposure to a minor.

What kind of law system is this?

It's like a thief breaking into a house, you grabbed his gun and shot him, and then you get charged with murder.

It just doesn't make any sense.

I wouldn't have used a metal pipe, I wouldn't used a butcher knife or a chainsaw.


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

When you walk into your daughter's room an see a fucking naked guy on the bed while your daughter is not present and it is in the middle of the night damn straight you wack him in the head with a pipe.


----------



## sliv3r (Sep 14, 2008)

I can't even count how many times my ex gf's dad caught us doin the dirty. Hell, he was the one who provided all the condoms, and he was a cop... and i guess the age difference wasn't really legal too... i guess i'm just lucky


----------



## Biolink (Sep 14, 2008)

It didn't happen at night. It said Thursday morning. I'd assume logically that would be early morning around 2 AM- 6 AM. Lot of factors there with lighting.

Nonetheless it's all the same.

The Father didn't know who the hell he was. I think it was within his right to assume rape.


----------



## iLurk (Sep 14, 2008)

sliv3r said:


> I can't even count how many times my ex gf's dad caught us doin the dirty. Hell, he was the one who provided all the condoms, and he was a cop... and i guess the age difference wasn't really legal too... i guess i'm just lucky



How old are you and how old is the girl?

If the age difference is as wide as the grand canyon, you're damn right you're lucky.


----------



## impersonal (Sep 14, 2008)

littleblondepunk said:
			
		

> Ok, one i can understand that he hit a teenager, but WTF! Its not like th dad knew who this guy was! He was naked in his house, he had never seen him before, so he was only protecting his self and his family.


Are you calling him retarded ? Because, what kind of absolute idiot wouldn't _immediately_ understand what is going on ?


			
				Biolink said:
			
		

> Rape doesn't have to be loud.
> 
> The rapist could tell the girl to be quiet, or she and her family gets murdered.



No rapist would be stupid enough to rape a girl in the home she lives in with all her family. That just doesn't make any sense.



			
				iLurk said:
			
		

> What the hell is this?
> 
> The boy should be in jail and be charged with breaking and entry.
> 
> ...


Is this thread the official opening of a new fan club, "redneck vigilante justice" ?



			
				Hunter x One Piece said:
			
		

> When you walk into your daughter's room an see a fucking naked guy on the bed while your daughter is not present and it is in the middle of the night damn straight you wack him in the head with a pipe.


If you've got some basic common sense, you try to figure out what he is doing here. Instead of trying to kill him on the spot.


----------



## Biolink (Sep 14, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> Are you calling him retarded ? Because, what kind of absolute idiot wouldn't understand what is going on ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Have you ever read some of these internet articles?

Srsly 

Don't discount what people will or will not do


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

So Hugo, you're telling me that if you walked into your daughters room and saw some kid you've never seen before lying naked while your daughter was not present you wouldn't hit him?


----------



## Kameil (Sep 14, 2008)

Classic.


----------



## The Fireball Kid (Sep 14, 2008)

> I think its BS he got charged and has a slut-ass daughter.



so, sense she's a girl that has sex, she's automatically a slut? take your misogynistic ideologies and shove them up your ass, you jerk.


----------



## iLurk (Sep 14, 2008)

Hunter x One Piece said:


> So Hugo, you're telling me that if you walked into your daughters room and saw some kid you've never seen before lying naked while your daughter was not present you wouldn't hit him?



Damn it, I was going to say the exact same thing to him.

How the hell are you suppose to react to a naked teenag boy in your DAUGHTER'S bedroom?

Be all calm and say, "Would you like a cup of tea?"

Screw the formal shit, I'm going to RAAAAAGE!


----------



## impersonal (Sep 14, 2008)

Hunter x One Piece said:


> So Hugo, you're telling me that if you walked into your daughters room and saw some kid you've never seen before lying naked while your daughter was not present you wouldn't hit him?


Anybody who's got two neurons would understand that it's the daughter's lover. Anybody who's got only one would still be intelligent enough to ask first. 

So either the boy was the victim of a murderous, brainless zombie, or the father thought it would be a good idea to beat up his daughter's lover. With a goddamn pipe. And you guys wonder why he's getting sued.


----------



## Raiden (Sep 14, 2008)

Lol wut? Why was the boyfriend standing naked on her bed?

Seriously, justice better be served in this case, there's no way that the father could have known this was his daughter's boyfriend. 



Cell said:


> so, sense she's a girl that has sex, she's automatically a slut? take your misogynistic ideologies and shove them up your ass, you jerk.



Not sure where that poster is from, but guys over here in New York often call girls sluts for doing things that like.


----------



## Gunners (Sep 14, 2008)

> What the hell is this?
> 
> The boy should be in jail and be charged with breaking and entry.



He wasn't breaking an entry he had permission to be inside the house by someone who lives there. He was let in the house.



> Probably assaulting and indecent exposure to a minor.


An assumption on your point, he could be younger than the woman.


> It's like a thief breaking into a house, you grabbed his gun and shot him, and then you get charged with murder.



Actually you probably would get charged with murder if you took someone's weapon and shot them. Though the two aren't exactly comparable for one the youth wasn't trying to attack the man with a weapon.



> I wouldn't have used a metal pipe, I wouldn't used a butcher knife or a chainsaw.


Then you are a moron.

________

Seriously, the first thought that would come in my mind in a situation like that is my daughter trying to do something in stealth. Rape isn't the likely thing in this scenario.


----------



## Biolink (Sep 14, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> If you've got some basic common sense, you try to figure out what he is doing here. Instead of trying to kill him.



That's what we call a knee-jerk reaction.

Still I don't think it's feasible to think everybody would react the same, and assess the situation and see that it was just some guy trying to get some pussy from the slutty daughter.

The article said he heard noises and shit. I personally would have thought sex, but I can also understand if somehow he thought dude may have been trying to rape his daughter or something like that. Even if he didn't think rape, he had never seen this dude before, so he was still a stranger.


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> Anybody who's got two neurons would understand that it's the daughter's lover. Anybody who's got only one would still be intelligent enough to ask first.
> 
> So either the boy was the victim of a murderous, brainless zombie, or the father thought it would be a good idea to beat up his daughter's lover. With a pipe.


His daughter was not present, some fucking naked guy who he has never seen is standing on his damn daughter's bed.

What the fuck are you gonna do?

Invite him to stay for dinner?


----------



## iLurk (Sep 14, 2008)

You heard weird noises in your daughter's bed room and you see a guy naked in her bed room.

If assuming that that naked teenager was having sex with your daughter is retarded, what other assumption can you make without being a "retard"?

Assuming they're playing strip poker? That's way retarded.


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

naked guy.

never seen him.

daughter not present.

standing on daughter bed.


----------



## Purgatory (Sep 14, 2008)

Maybe the pipe wasn't actually a pipe..

If I was the dad, I would've fucking killed him on spot, or at least threaten him by saying:

_"I'm not afraid of going to prison again, they treat me like a god, and I have eyes all around the house."_


----------



## The Fireball Kid (Sep 14, 2008)

While I don't think the boy did anything wrong with being with his girlfriend after she let him into her house, I don't think the man should be charged with assault. A fine, at the most, it seems that the entire situation was just a big misunderstanding.


----------



## iLurk (Sep 14, 2008)

Hunter x One Piece said:


> His daughter was not present, some fucking naked guy who he has never seen is standing on his damn daughter's bed.
> 
> What the fuck are you gonna do?
> 
> Invite him to stay for dinner?



No.



iLurk said:


> Be all calm and say, "Would you like a cup of tea?"



You invite him for tea.


----------



## Biolink (Sep 14, 2008)

Hunter x One Piece said:


> naked guy.
> 
> never seen him.
> 
> ...



Basically.

I mean wtf was dude standing up on the bed butt naked anyways?


----------



## Gunners (Sep 14, 2008)

> His daughter was not present, some fucking naked guy who he has never seen is standing on his damn daughter's bed.
> 
> What the fuck are you gonna do?
> 
> Invite him to stay for dinner?


Me personally. I would ask what the fuck is going on, I would then tell him to get out the house.


> You heard weird noises in your daughter's bed room and you see a guy naked in her bed room.
> 
> If assuming that that naked teenager was having sex with your daughter is retarded, what other assumption can you make without being a "retard"?
> 
> Assuming they're playing strip poker? That's way retarded.


So because they are having sex, that's enough reason to hit someone in the head with a pipe that can easily cause death?


----------



## Miss Pumpkin (Sep 14, 2008)

They shouldn't have charged him for THAT. 

It wasn't even his fault. :/


----------



## DannyG (Sep 14, 2008)

I think that is BS how was the father sopposed to know how it was and what was going on. My assumption, the boy's parents were rich and had good lawyers. It's amazing what you can do with a good lawyer.


----------



## impersonal (Sep 14, 2008)

Hunter x One Piece said:


> His daughter was not present, some fucking naked guy who he has never seen is standing on his damn daughter's bed.
> 
> What the fuck are you gonna do?
> 
> Invite him to stay for dinner?



The article doesn't mention the absence of the girl. So we can assume that she was either in the bed, next to the bed, or a few meters away (in another room, shower or whatever). 

Any normal father would've said, in a very angry manner: _"what the fuck are you doing here ?"_. Then the boy would have explained. Then the father would've said something along the lines of _"If I ever see your face again I'll beat you up"_ or if he's more open concerning sexuality issues _"Out of my sight right now"_. Then he would have told her daughter _"don't ever see that guy again"_ OR _"don't let in guys without telling me. Not in this house._". And later on : _"And you better be using goddamn condoms."_

I see that instead of doing the normal thing, that I've just described, you'd rather beat people with a pipe. I suppose you plan on becoming a policeman (one of those we call "pigs") or a gangmember. Am I right ?


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

You got it the wrong way Hugo, because the article doesn't mention the presence of the girl it can be assumed that she was not there.


----------



## hammer (Sep 14, 2008)

Jio said:


> Me personally. I would ask what the fuck is going on, I would then tell him to get out the house.
> 
> So because they are having sex, that's enough reason to hit someone in the head with a pipe that can easily cause death?



damn strait if she is 17 then she has no right to invite some one in the 1st place without my permisison let alone age of consent ill bash his fucking face in and take man slaughter


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> The article doesn't mention the absence of the girl. So we can assume that she was either in the bed, next to the bed, or a few meters away (in another room, shower or whatever).
> 
> Any normal father would've said, in a very angry manner: _"what the fuck are you doing here ?"_. Then the boy would have explained. Then the father would've said something along the lines of _"If I ever see your face again I'll beat you up"_ or if he's more open concerning sexuality issues _"Out of my sight right now"_. Then he would have told her daughter _"don't ever see that guy again"_ OR _"don't let in guys without telling me. Not in this house. And you better be using goddamn condoms."_
> 
> I see that instead of doing the normal thing, you'd rather beat people with a pipe. I suppose you plan on becoming a policeman or a gangmember. Am I right ?


The man had the pipe before he entered the room. He heard noises and thought something was up, so he grabbed the pipe, seen a man naked in his daughter bed standing up and his daughter was not there, he then chased the man out the house with the pipe he picked up.


----------



## impersonal (Sep 14, 2008)

Hunter x One Piece said:


> The man had the pipe before he entered the room. He heard noises and thought something was up, so he grabbed the pipe, seen a man naked in his daughter bed standing up and his daughter was not there, he then chased the man out the house with the pipe he picked up.



Uh, he hit him on the head and _then_ chased him. That's how the article puts it. And frankly, I find it hard to believe that he thought anything but "this must be my daughter's boyfriend". And the court will find it hard to believe, too. 

That said, I'm not saying he should go to prison over this ; his reaction is somewhat understandable, even though he definitely has some issues. Normal people ask questions, before hitting people with metal pipes. I mean, how dangerous can a naked boy look ? Can you imagine the scene ? The boy must have been terrified, and instead of yelling obscenities at him, the dad hit him on the head with a metal pipe.


----------



## Al-Yasa (Sep 14, 2008)

i would beat the bf up...i mean come on if it was my daughter i wouldnt want some creep touching her regardless of who he was


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> Uh, he hit him on the head then chased him. That's how the article puts it.


He obviously didn't hit him hard as if he did the boy would've been out cold or atleast on the floor after taking such a hit.


----------



## Xion (Sep 14, 2008)

He should have asked him to leave. If he didn't and the kid rushed him he could have just shot him. 

Can't say I wouldn't hit my daughter's gf either though.


----------



## typhoon72 (Sep 14, 2008)

i woulda threw that bastard out the window


----------



## Biolink (Sep 14, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> He should have asked him to leave. If he didn't and the kid rushed him he could have just shot him.
> 
> Can't say I wouldn't hit my daughter's gf either though.



Your daughters GF or your daughters BF?


----------



## Son Goku (Sep 14, 2008)

kindly tell him to leave then help him through a window


----------



## cacophony (Sep 14, 2008)

lol standing naked on the bed


----------



## enigma6 (Sep 14, 2008)

so, the guy tries to go into forbidden territory and got whacked,  sounds about right, though the daughter shouldn't get off easy either.


----------



## Xion (Sep 14, 2008)

cacophony said:


> lol standing naked on the bed



In that case, the father was probably jealous.


----------



## Son Goku (Sep 14, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> In that case, the father was probably jealous.



well played


----------



## Xion (Sep 14, 2008)

Tex said:


> well played



Jealous of what though I know not. Maybe he wanted to have that big a penis...or maybe he wanted to fuck his daughter.


----------



## LittleBlondePunk (Sep 14, 2008)

Cell said:


> so, sense she's a girl that has sex, she's automatically a slut? take your misogynistic ideologies and shove them up your ass, you jerk.



? Yeah i would assume your slutty ass daughter having her boyfriend in her room in the middle of the night and sneaking around so no one found out was pretty "terrific". Seriously? Way to go and get your boyfriend hit in the head with a pipe cause you cant keep your legs closed. Now i was a teenager once before, but like HELL i would have ever had anyone stay the night over with a dad like mine. Its her fault for being an idiot.


----------



## Son Goku (Sep 14, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> Jealous of what though I know not. Maybe he wanted to have that big a penis...or maybe he wanted to fuck his daughter.



i think thats what he wanted


----------



## iLurk (Sep 14, 2008)

If there's anybody who's going to pop my daughter's cherry and shatter her hymen, it's gonna be me!


----------



## The Fireball Kid (Sep 14, 2008)

littleblondepunk said:


> ? Yeah i would assume your slutty ass daughter having her boyfriend in her room in the middle of the night and sneaking around so no one found out was pretty "terrific". Seriously? Way to go and get your boyfriend hit in the head with a pipe cause you cant keep your legs closed. Now i was a teenager once before, but like HELL i would have ever had anyone stay the night over with a dad like mine. Its her fault for being an idiot.



Sex isn't a bad thing! How does enjoying a healthy sexual relationship with your boyfriend make you a slut? I'm sure if it was a guy you'd have no problem cheering him on for getting "laid", but sense it's a girl she must a "slut".

You're a class A douche.


----------



## Son Goku (Sep 14, 2008)

iLurk said:


> If there's anybody who's going to pop my daughter's cherry and shatter her hymen, it's gonna be me!



redneck speak i suppose


----------



## guro (Sep 14, 2008)

I'm actually on the fathers side in this case.


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Sep 14, 2008)

He shoulda just played dumb, and caught the dude sneaking in some other night.  Then he could have legally shot him--dead!  Under Florida's Make My Day Provision he would have been immune from prosecution.


----------



## iLurk (Sep 14, 2008)

Tex said:


> redneck speak i suppose



Bingo.

If I were a redneck, I wouldn't have a computer or the leisure to go online.

I'll be too busy having wincest with my daughter and my dog.


----------



## Son Goku (Sep 14, 2008)

iLurk said:


> Bingo.
> 
> If I were a redneck, I wouldn't have a computer or the leisure to go online.
> 
> I'll be too busy having wincest with my daughter and my dog.



can rednecks even use a computer
and with the dog is bestiality


----------



## dreams lie (Sep 14, 2008)

...

The girl has the right to allow strangers into the house?  If not, it should have been trespassing.


----------



## Son Goku (Sep 14, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> ...
> 
> The girl has the right to allow strangers into the house?  If not, it should have been trespassing.



well the girl doesnt it isnt here house
and indeed


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 14, 2008)

I think a lot of people who support this guy are speaking from exprerience...both males and females.

Damnit, I'm a woman and I would've done the same thing if I saw a naked guy in my daughter's bedroom. He had no business being there regardless if the daughter let him in the house. There's a reason why she *snuck* him in...so her parents wouldn't know about it.

With that being said, the father didn't know the guy was in *his* home, hell he didn't even know his daughter had a lover for more than a year! What was he supposed to think?

He hears noises coming from his daughter's room early in the morning and checks it out and sees a teenage boy standing naked in his daughter's room. He did the right thing by knocking the shit out of him.

Hell if it was my mother who caught me, not only would the boy have gotten knocked out, but I would've been in the hopsital as well for doing that shit under her roof!

Sorry, but unless that girl is paying bills, rent, or whatever, she has absolutely *no say so* about who's allowed in the house and at what time. 

Maybe I'm being biased because I've never done no shit like that as a teen...I had too much respect for my mother to bring some guy in her home and fuck him.


----------



## Deamiel (Sep 14, 2008)

I'm agreeing with the dad.  First off, the guy was trespassing.  The daughter doesn't own the property, so she has no say in who can be on it.

Next, the guy was breaking in.  When you illegally enter someone's house without their permission, it's considered breaking in.  *Once again, this isn't the daughters house.*

So, if I hear noises in my house like that, I'm going to assume it's a thief or worse.  I'm going to grab  a weapon.  And then if I find some naked guy I don't know in my daughters room, I'm definitely going to assume the worst.  You can't just ask the guy to leave.  You can reasonably assume the daughter wasn't there because the article doesn't state that the daughter was pleading with her father.

So, Stranger + Breaking and Entering + Sexual Activity with Daughter = rapist.   If this guy was a criminal, what would you do now if he has a knife?

Too late, you already asked him to join you for tea and crumpets.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 14, 2008)

This is kind of fucked up actually, but I would probably beat the shit out of my daughter's boyfriend too.


----------



## Sen (Sep 14, 2008)

That's just disturbing that you can get charged when someone breaks into or seemingly breaks into your home.  :S


----------



## Cirus (Sep 14, 2008)

That guy has a slut for a daughter, and he shouldn't be charged for hitting that guy because he did what any red blooded american man/father would do if he found a naked guy in his daughters room.


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

Nesha said:


> I think a lot of people who support this guy are speaking from exprerience...both males and females.
> 
> Damnit, I'm a woman and I would've done the same thing if I saw a naked guy in my daughter's bedroom. He had no business being there regardless if the daughter let him in the house. There's a reason why she *snuck* him in...so her parents wouldn't know about it.
> 
> ...


Fixed, girls don't fuck guys, unless you like to dominate in bed.


----------



## Xion (Sep 14, 2008)

Well I can see why they charged him. Even if we identify with the father, if the kid is not hurting anyone you still don't have a right to hurt him.

Legally the worst he could probably do is demand him to live and/or call the cops. Unless of course the kid was killing her or something like that.


----------



## Gary (Sep 14, 2008)

Be nice with a pipe.


----------



## Rei (Sep 14, 2008)

^ 



Vegeta. said:


> That guy has a slut for a daughter, and he shouldn't be charged for hitting that guy because he did what any red blooded american man/father would do if he found a naked guy in his daughters room.



agreeing with you on that right there. :S


----------



## ♠Mr.Nibbles♠ (Sep 14, 2008)

A whole year and the dad didn't know some other dude was laying down the pipe. He was right to get charged


----------



## Man in Black (Sep 14, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> Well I can see why they charged him. Even if we identify with the father, if the kid is not hurting anyone you still don't have a right to hurt him.
> 
> Legally the worst he could probably do is demand him to live and/or call the cops. Unless of course the kid was killing her or something like that.


If someone is in your house and you don't know who they are you have the right to hurt them.


----------



## Biolink (Sep 14, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> Well I can see why they charged him. Even if we identify with the father, if the kid is not hurting anyone you still don't have a right to hurt him.
> 
> Legally the worst he could probably do is demand him to live and/or call the cops. Unless of course the kid was killing her or something like that.



We need some Texas justice. Where you can get killed for walking on somebody's lawn

That said. Dude had every right to fuck him up. He didn't know the dude. This is a stranger in his house.

Imagine the shock to wake up in the morning and some dude you don't even know got his dick all hanging out. I'd be pretty mad.


----------



## Xion (Sep 14, 2008)

Hunter x One Piece said:


> If someone is in your house and you don't know who they are you have the right to hurt them.



You really don't depending on the circumstances of course. 

I am sure he knew who it was when he saw his daughter masturbating in front of the guy.


----------



## Para (Sep 14, 2008)

I would've fucking hit him. Maybe not with a pipe, but still  someone you don't know is in your house in your kid's room? Fucking NAKED? Damn right you're gonna act irrationally.


----------



## Xion (Sep 14, 2008)

Para said:


> I would've fucking hit him. Maybe not with a pipe, but still  someone you don't know is in your house in your kid's room? Fucking NAKED? Damn right you're gonna act irrationally.



My question is, where the fuck did he get the pipe from? 

Who has a pipe lying around their house?


----------



## Gunners (Sep 15, 2008)

> If someone is in your house and you don't know who they are you have the right to hurt them.


No you don't have a right to hurt them. If you live in a house with multiple people you are going to come across multiple people you don't know at some points doesn't give you the right to bust their head right open.

I seriously don't get this whole, he slept with his daughter he deserves to get the shit smacked out of him. A lot of the blame falls on the daughter too so he isn't really stealing her innocence, she allowed him in the actual house.

I wouldn't potentially murder someone for doing shit that has probably been going on for generations.


----------



## Altron (Sep 15, 2008)

the guy should be thankful he was not caught doing that shit in texas or he would have had his brains blown out.


----------



## impersonal (Sep 15, 2008)

Nesha said:


> I think a lot of people who support this guy are speaking from exprerience...both males and females.
> (...)





Nesha said:


> With that being said, the father didn't know the guy was in *his* home, hell he didn't even know his daughter had a lover for more than a year! *What was he supposed to think?*


What, how thick are the people posting in this thread? I keep checking their ages, and I find they're 21, 22 or even 24 when I was sure they were 12 or 13 !



Nesha said:


> Hell if it was my mother who caught me, not only would the boy have gotten knocked out, but* I would've been in the hopsital as well for doing that shit under her roof!*


You sure have one severely fucked up family. Honor killings, in the USA ? What the h*** ?



			
				Vegeta said:
			
		

> That guy has a slut for a daughter, and he shouldn't be charged for hitting that guy because *he did what any red blooded american man/father* would do if he found a naked guy in his daughters room.


Oh, I bet saudi arabian men would've done the same thing. It's amazing, I thought the USA had gone through a sex revolution, I thought that consensual sex had become acceptable. Obviously it has not. This is what it's all about.


----------



## ez (Sep 15, 2008)

Obviously both are in the wrong here, but the fault lies with the father for not exercising self control, given that he's the adult in the situation. He clearly went overboard.


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 15, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> What, how thick are the people posting in this thread? I keep checking their ages, and I find they're 21, 22 or even 24 when I was sure they were 12 or 13 !



Well it's safe to say you thought wrong! _Goo goo, gaa gaa..._ 

But of course you wouldn't agree with me...after all you *do* support the _"Let's serve the intruder with tea and cookies"_ option.


----------



## Psysalis (Sep 15, 2008)

Senbonzakura Kageyoshi said:


> That's just disturbing that you can get charged when someone breaks into or seemingly breaks into your home.  :S



Agreed


----------



## Biolink (Sep 15, 2008)

Jio said:


> No you don't have a right to hurt them. If you live in a house with multiple people you are going to come across multiple people you don't know at some points doesn't give you the right to bust their head right open.
> 
> I seriously don't get this whole, he slept with his daughter he deserves to get the shit smacked out of him. A lot of the blame falls on the daughter too so he isn't really stealing her innocence, she allowed him in the actual house.
> 
> I wouldn't potentially murder someone for doing shit that has probably been going on for generations.



There's a difference IMO between your child bringing over a friend without telling any grown person, you walk in, say "Who are you", and then continue on as opposed to waking up in the middle of the morning and finding somebody butt naked in your house and you've never seen before.

Never seen before.

If he would have known the daughter had a BF in the first place, dude wouldn't have had to get his head cracked open. I'm sure he would have got yelled at by the Dad, and told to never come back or see his daughter again, but that's about it.

If your kid was going to bring somebody over the house, usually they aren't secretive unless they aren't supposed to have company period, as opposed to the daughter sneaking this guy in early in the morning.

I don't about the rest of you, but male or female, I didn't sneak people in my parents house in the morning, and I especially wouldn't have did it if they didn't know them. That's something you don't do. I did bring people into my house without telling anybody in the day time, but usually since we aren't doing shit, but playing videogames or lifting weights the parents just ask who the are, and go about there merry way. I'm sure most people would be understanding to a person they didn't know if it was in the day time, unless they are just complete hardasses for parents.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

The laws like the one here in Texas only apply if there is reason to believe that someone will do harm, has entered your home illegally or the like. So all of you saying he had a right to hit the guy, that's stupid. 

You could just have people send someone to your house because you don't like them and then beat the shit out of them in that case.


----------



## Pretty Good Satan (Sep 15, 2008)

Raiden said:


> Lol wut? Why was the boyfriend standing naked on her bed?



He was probably getting a blow job. 

Anyway, according to  the girl and boy are both fifteen.



> Raul Colon, 45, didn't even know his daughter had a boyfriend -- or that the youngster had been sneaking into the home for more than a year. So when he heard noises coming from his daughter's room this morning and saw a stranger naked, standing on the girl's bed, he swung a metal pipe he had taken from the garage, *hitting the 15-year-old,* a sheriff's report said.



and



> Colon's daughter later told deputies that she had been seeing Contreres for 18 months but did not tell her father about the relationship. Contreres had sneaked in thorough a bedroom window at 3 a.m. this morning to have sex with her, *the 15-year-old girl* told deputies.


----------



## anticute (Sep 15, 2008)

How old is she?

I can understand that father hitting and chasing the boy because he didn't know who it was, and I would do that same if I saw that happening.However, wtf is wrong with him? How the hell you don't know your daughter has a boyfriend for over a year? And the daughter was sneaking him into the house to have sex? The hell man...? Seriously how old is she? I bet she feels stupid now that the father's charged and that she got caught.

What an idiot.


----------



## Pretty Good Satan (Sep 15, 2008)

Honey Bunny said:


> How old is she?



The daughter and the boyfriend are both fifteen.


----------



## Biolink (Sep 15, 2008)

Honey Bunny said:


> How old is she?
> 
> I can understand that father hitting and chasing the boy because he didn't know who it was, and I would do that same if I saw that happening.However, wtf is wrong with him? How the hell you don't know your daughter has a boyfriend for over a year? And the daughter was sneaking him into the house to have sex? The hell man...? Seriously how old is she? I bet she feels stupid now that the father's charged and that she got caught.
> 
> What an idiot.



Secrets much?

It's totally unreasonable to think parents can keep tabs on their kids 24/7. I know for a fact my parents didn't keep tabs on all of my Girlfriens. Hell my parents still think I'm a virgin 

If she acts like a perfect little Virgin Mary around her parents, why should they expect a curveball all of a sudden? They'd probably assume(Unless they are hardasses that won't let her have a Boyfriend) that when the time came she would tell them about a Boy she liked or a Boy she was seeing.

I personally don't like telling anybody in my family about my relationships, because family members are nosy motherfuckers with nothing to do, and I don't feel like explaining how "Such and such" is doing everytime I talk to said family member/members.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Sep 15, 2008)

Too bad the old guy didn't shoot the fucker.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 15, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> Anybody who's got two neurons would understand that it's the daughter's lover. Anybody who's got only one would still be intelligent enough to ask first.
> 
> So either the boy was the victim of a murderous, brainless zombie, or the father thought it would be a good idea to beat up his daughter's lover. With a goddamn pipe. And you guys wonder why he's getting sued.



But before that, he heard noises.  Would hitting the guy with a pipe not be self defense first and foremost?  You can't take risks here, cause he may have a gun.  

Intelligence has nothing to do with whether the guy was the daughter's lover when someone breaks in the house.  I would rather incapacitate the intruder then ask questions for my and my own family's safety.


----------



## Fruits Basket Fan (Sep 15, 2008)

Wow....even though that father thought it was a intruder at first, I am shocked he went full force at a 15 year old :amazed!

But wow....a whole year until he figured out that his daughter has a boyfriend .....


----------



## Xion (Sep 15, 2008)

CrazyMoronX said:


> Too bad the old guy didn't shoot the fucker.



The he'd be charged with murder.


----------



## galliam (Sep 15, 2008)

He has a pretty good case for self defense actually, considering he lacked knowledge of who the boy was. From the general consensus on this board, It would seem that a jury would agree with me, though I don't recall from my law classes EXACTLY what the precedent on this sort of thing is. 

As for the dumbass who automatically "knew" that it was his daughter's lover or whatever... I'm not gonna bet my families lives on such a guess. WAAAAY too many sick fucks out there.


----------



## Xion (Sep 15, 2008)

galliam said:


> He has a pretty good case for self defense actually, considering he lacked knowledge of who the boy was. From the general consensus on this board, It would seem that a jury would agree with me, though I don't recall from my law classes EXACTLY what the precedent on this sort of thing is.



Self-defense? 

Dad: "I was just defending myself by chasing the kid around the house with a metal pipe with his back to me." 

Kid:


----------



## galliam (Sep 15, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> Self-defense?
> 
> Dad: "I was just defending myself by chasing the kid around the house with a metal pipe with his back to me."
> 
> Kid:



Yes, because defending your family inside your home falls under that category.


----------



## Xion (Sep 15, 2008)

galliam said:


> Yes, because defending your family inside your home falls under that category.



Defense is a relative term. This wasn't really defense.


----------



## impersonal (Sep 15, 2008)

zornedge said:
			
		

> Would hitting the guy with a pipe not be self defense first and foremost? You can't take risks here, cause he may have a gun.


Oh yeah, I bet he could have a gun hidden inside his asshole. That's why the father hit the 15 years old naked boy in the head with a metal pipe. Makes perfect sense. At least Nesha is honest about her opinion (namely : kill teenagers who make love). You just keep making retarded excuses.



			
				Nesha said:
			
		

> But of course you wouldn't agree with me...after all you do support the "Let's serve the intruder with tea and cookies" option.


And you said clearly that you support beating both kids to death with a pipe. So yeah, I bet we can "agree to disagree".


----------



## galliam (Sep 15, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> Defense is a relative term. This wasn't really defense.



In the eyes of the law its not. Which is the standpoint I was speaking from.


----------



## Xion (Sep 15, 2008)

galliam said:


> In the eyes of the law its not. Which is the standpoint I was speaking from.



Then why were you were arguing with me? 

That was my point all along.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Honey Bunny said:


> How old is she?
> 
> I can understand that father hitting and chasing the boy because he didn't know who it was, and I would do that same if I saw that happening.However, wtf is wrong with him? How the hell you don't know your daughter has a boyfriend for over a year? And the daughter was sneaking him into the house to have sex? The hell man...? Seriously how old is she? I bet she feels stupid now that the father's charged and that she got caught.
> 
> What an idiot.



Doesn't matter how old she is, I am not saying what the guy did was legal, but I catch my little girl in bed with some fucker and we're going squab...



Fruits Basket Fan said:


> Wow....even though that father thought it was a intruder at first, I am shocked he went full force at a 15 year old :amazed!
> 
> But wow....a whole year until he figured out that his daughter has a boyfriend .....



Shit, fifteen year olds can scrap, don't let age food you.


----------



## Saufsoldat (Sep 15, 2008)

galliam said:


> In the eyes of the law its not. Which is the standpoint I was speaking from.



I don't know about US law, but in Germany self-defens is relative. That's why you're not allowed to kill a 6 year old who tries to hit you.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 15, 2008)

I don't understand the people in this thread supporting charging the father.

If you catch someone in your house that you do not know, especially if there is something to give reason to question their mental state, like them being naked for instance.

An intruder in your home is a potential threat.  If I caught someone in my house that I did not know who seemed to be wandering about naked I would attack him too.  Especially if I had kids in the house that I may need to protect.

Suppose for a second that this boy were a rapist and he had drugged or knocked out the daughter.  What would people say of the father if he merely came in, assumed this was his daughters boyfriend then left only to have her be raped?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> I don't understand the people in this thread supporting charging the father.
> 
> If you catch someone in your house that you do not know, especially if there is something to give reason to question their mental state, like them being naked for instance.
> 
> ...



A man in IL shot a crack head who was raping his daughter...went to jail for it. It was in his house, middle of the night.


----------



## Saufsoldat (Sep 15, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> I don't understand the people in this thread supporting charging the father.
> 
> If you catch someone in your house that you do not know, especially if there is something to give reason to question their mental state, like them being naked for instance.
> 
> An intruder in your home is a potential threat.  If I caught someone in my house that I did not know who seemed to be wandering about naked I would attack him too.  Especially if I had kids in the house that I may need to protect.



You seem to be forgetting that he's *15 years old*. You do not hit a naked, defenseless child with a pipe even if you find him under your bed or in your closet...



> Suppose for a second that this boy were a rapist and he had drugged or knocked out the daughter.  What would people say of the father if he merely came in, assumed this was his daughters boyfriend then left only to have her be raped?



 Yes, a realistic scenario. A rapist caught red-handed will of course act totally casual.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 15, 2008)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> A man in IL shot a crack head who was raping his daughter...went to jail for it. It was in his house, middle of the night.



That is a terrible injustice, it doesn't change that this man is in the right.



Saufsoldat said:


> You seem to be forgetting that he's *15 years old*. You do not hit a naked, defenseless child with a pipe even if you find him under your bed or in your closet...



I've seen 15 year olds that look like people in their mid twenties.



Saufsoldat said:


> Yes, a realistic scenario. A rapist caught red-handed will of course act totally casual.



When Jeffrey Dahmers victim was found naked, drugged, bleeding from the ass and panicked by police he confronted them perfectly calmly, stated simply it was his boyfriend and the cops handed his victim back to him.


----------



## Altron (Sep 15, 2008)

stupid kid should have been smart and get a hotel room.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Saufsoldat said:


> Yes, a realistic scenario. A rapist caught red-handed will of course act totally casual.



You've apparently never met crack heads...


----------



## Stroev (Sep 15, 2008)

Jio said:


> No you don't have a right to hurt them.
> I seriously don't get this whole, he slept with his daughter he deserves to get the shit smacked out of him. A lot of the blame falls on the daughter too so he isn't really stealing her innocence, she allowed him in the actual house.
> I wouldn't potentially murder someone for doing shit that has probably been going on for generations.


This. And at first look at the threa title, I faecpalemed, but now I'm not.


----------



## impersonal (Sep 15, 2008)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You've apparently never met crack heads...





This thread is getting more ridiculous with every attempt to justify the father's action.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> This thread is getting more ridiculous with every attempt to justify the father's action.



Didn't try to justify shit, I just said that there is a scenario where someone could be calm if caught raping someone. That was all I answered. The thing is that you pretty can justify it if your in his shoes and catch someone fucking your daughter. Maybe not hitting with a pipe, but hitting him.


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 15, 2008)

Because all the people in this thread who support the 15-year-olds know that teenagers never commit crimes.

So next time people when you find a teen in your home whom you've never met/seen before in the middle of the night (doesn't matter if they're naked), offer them tea and cookies and be on your way. Teens don't commit crimes and they're not a threat to anybody.


----------



## Gunners (Sep 15, 2008)

> There's a difference IMO between your child bringing over a friend without telling any grown person, you walk in, say "Who are you", and then continue on as opposed to waking up in the middle of the morning and finding somebody butt naked in your house and you've never seen before.



The same principle applies, the fact that a resident of that house invited the person in the house means he wasn't breaking an entry. It is essentially the same as your room mate bringing someone back and fucking them.

Your kids actually have a right to bring allow people in the house because of that said person would not be breaking an entry.



> If he would have known the daughter had a BF in the first place, dude wouldn't have had to get his head cracked open. I'm sure he would have got yelled at by the Dad, and told to never come back or see his daughter again, but that's about it.


The father should have asked before sparking him out. He clearly didn't think he was a rapist otherwise he would have tried to detain him rather than chase him out the house where he could escape.



> If your kid was going to bring somebody over the house, usually they aren't secretive unless they aren't supposed to have company period, as opposed to the daughter sneaking this guy in early in the morning.


Doesn't matter, they still invited someone in the house which means said person wasn't breaking an entry.



> I don't about the rest of you, but male or female, I didn't sneak people in my parents house in the morning, and I especially wouldn't have did it if they didn't know them. That's something you don't do. I did bring people into my house without telling anybody in the day time, but usually since we aren't doing shit, but playing videogames or lifting weights the parents just ask who the are, and go about there merry way. I'm sure most people would be understanding to a person they didn't know if it was in the day time, unless they are just complete hardasses for parents.



I wouldn't let someone drown in a pool of water because saving them would be the decent thing to do, if I let the person drown I wouldn't get tried for their death however.

What you would do and what the tactful thing to do isn't relevant. The fact of the matter is he wasn't breaking an entry and the father wasn't acting in self defence.



			
				Nesha said:
			
		

> So next time people when you find a teen in your home whom you've never met/seen before in the middle of the night (doesn't matter if they're naked), offer them tea and cookies and be on your way. Teens don't commit crimes and they're not a threat to anybody.



Or you could accept the fact that your daughter played a role in what happened and tell the kid to get out the house.

*Clears throat* Violence isn't the only solution to this problem.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Nesha said:


> Because all the people in this thread who support the 15-year-olds know that teenagers never commit crimes.
> 
> So next time people when you find a teen in your home whom you've never met/seen before in the middle of the night (doesn't matter if they're naked), offer them tea and cookies and be on your way. Teens don't commit crimes and they're not a threat to anybody.



Well not the white teens! They never commit crimes


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 15, 2008)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Well not the white teens! They never commit crimes



Well I dunno...that White teen who raped this 80-something grandma...

Oh hell, he could've been Albino!


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Nesha said:


> Well I dunno...that White teen who raped this 80-something grandma...
> 
> Oh hell, he could've been Albino!



*Believe It* would say he was part black or yes...an elusive Albino who was adopted by white people at an early age.


----------



## orochimarusama21 (Sep 15, 2008)

the father had a right to bash him in his head. a man he doesn't know on his daughters bed naked. any right minded father would beat the shit out of the guy. this guy should not be charged. and no i'm not saying the daughter is a slut. the guy shouldn't have been sneaking into her house in the first place.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Sep 15, 2008)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> *Diamed* would say he was part black or yes...an elusive Albino who was adopted by white people at an early age.



**fixed**


----------



## orochimarusama21 (Sep 15, 2008)

and I know that all the men in here that are saying they would ask or not act irrational are bullshitting. if you see a guy in your house naked in your daughters room you would act irrational. and also if the parents say you can't have people over then you can't have people over they can kick you out of the house. and also it's only if the parents or one of the parents allow them over that it's ok.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Diceman said:


> **fixed**



Ah you're right, Believe it would say it was divine mandate that the guy got beat...


----------



## illusion (Sep 15, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> This thread is getting more ridiculous with every attempt to justify the father's action.



What the fuck are you talking about? I find a naked 15 year old in my house and I don't know who he is, he's geting his head busted, plain and simple.


----------



## ~Flippy (Sep 15, 2008)

That should teach the daughter not to sneak dudes in during the buttfuck morning hours.


----------



## Tleilaxu (Sep 15, 2008)

If I found ANYONE I did not know in my house its shoot first ask later.


----------



## Weak (Sep 15, 2008)

For those of you against the father, I ask you:

Take a moment to turn in your chair, or wherever you're sitting, and look behind you. Imagine for a moment that the room you're in is dark, and no less than 10 feet away, there's a male figure standing nearby, who may or may not notice you. This person hasn't knocked on a wall, or introduced themselves in any way. They are essentially a stranger to you, and what's more, they're naked.

Do you:
      A. Pick up the nearest object and strike them with it.
      B. Cower in fear and/or scream.
      C. A and B.
      D."Hello, my name is 'such-and-such', what's yours?"

If you honestly answer 'D', then I want to know what planet you're from.

The father, in this case, heard a strange commotion from his _daughter's bedroom_, early in the morning. He grabbed a pipe that he probably kept for dealing with intruders, entered the room, and attacked this boy until he fled the scene. Human beings can't act rationally in every situation that greets them. This father felt both he and his family were threatened, this stranger had entered the home unannounced, and he reacted.

I don't care what kind of man the father is, how innocent his daughter may be, or how genuine this boyfriend's relationship with her may have been. That's all irrelevant.

The fact that he's facing charges is completely ridiculous.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 15, 2008)

Just from the answers trying to vilify the father, human kind needs to be wiped out for straight stupidity and started over from scratch. It's the only way.


----------



## illusion (Sep 15, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> Just from the answers trying to vilify the father, human kind needs to be wiped out for straight stupidity and started over from scratch. It's the only way.



I'm curious to hear how you'd react, if you found a stranger in your home (naked).


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> Just from the answers trying to vilify the father, human kind needs to be wiped out for straight stupidity and started over from scratch. It's the only way.



Looks like we have the beginnings of another irresponsible person who thinks that their kids fucking and getting seen by him is perfectly alright. I don't think even the sanest man would act rationally if he caught his daughter in bed with a guy at that age. 

Its not like they were 18 and fucking in their own apartment, its not like they were married and staying over and had sex at their parents...its not a matter of the breaking and entering, its a matter of whats reasonable reaction. 


If he hadn't used the pipe, I think he would be way more accepted as being reasonable...at the same time if he thought he heard and intruder he more than likely had the pipe for that. 

And to the argument about who has a right to invite someone over, only the house owners do in my eyes. Now if the dad had caught them talking on the couch and done this shit, then yeah, he didn't invite the guy, but he could have just told them to leave. 

He reacted like he did because of what he saw, its like when someone catches their wife cheating and hurts the guy, or when someone catches someone robbing their house and shoots them. If the person went and hunted the robber down after the fact and shot them, its different.

But the law allows for temporary lapse in judgment often, especially in moments like this. I think the guy should have to pay for the kids hospital bills at most.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 15, 2008)

illusion said:


> I'm curious to hear how you'd react, if you found a stranger in your home (naked).



The intruder is going to die.


----------



## galliam (Sep 15, 2008)

The father was within his rights to detain and restrain, not to beat the kid about the head with a metal pipe. If he had a weapon, he would have been justified, this case could go 50/50 imo. This whole issue ending in a shit storm is not necessary, both sides are kind of right.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 15, 2008)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Looks like we have the beginnings of another irresponsible person who thinks that their kids fucking and getting seen by him is perfectly alright. I don't think even the sanest man would act rationally if he caught his daughter in bed with a guy at that age.
> 
> Its not like they were 18 and fucking in their own apartment, its not like they were married and staying over and had sex at their parents...its not a matter of the breaking and entering, its a matter of whats reasonable reaction.
> 
> ...


Are we aware of what _vilify_ means?


----------



## illusion (Sep 15, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> The intruder is going to die.



LOL, I was thinking the same thing. 

Fact is the father didn't know what was going on. I just don't see how anyone can blame him, he thought his family was in danger, he did what most of us would do (except for pussies of course).


----------



## Prince Leon (Sep 15, 2008)

If I were the father he would've gotten more than just a pipe to the head. He would've gotten swift foot up the ass. With steel-toe boots on. Then proceed to give a marvelous ass-kicking followed by a rough depositing outside the door/window. 

Who in their right mind is going to stand there and ask a *butt-ass-naked guy* who they don't know why they are in their house? Surely not anyone with _common sense_. Unless, of course, seeing that type of thing is normal for them which in and of itself is another serious problem.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 15, 2008)

illusion said:


> LOL, I was thinking the same thing.
> 
> Fact is the father didn't know what was going on. I just don't see how anyone can blame him, he thought his family was in danger, he did what most of us would do (except for pussies of course).


I am a little bit older and have a little more life experience than most of the people on the board.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> Are we aware of what _vilify_ means?



I actually read another word there, so sorry about that, but that post applies to the people who don't think they would do what this father did. I know what vilify means but I read it as venerate...which is totally off, but sorry for that. Hell I read that one line and got all pissed off, when I saw how you said this is whats wrong with America. I owe you reps.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 15, 2008)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> I actually read another word there, so sorry about that, but that post applies to the people who don't think they would do what this father did. I know what vilify means but I read it as venerate...which is totally off, but sorry for that. Hell I read that one line and got all pissed off, when I saw how you said this is whats wrong with America. I owe you reps.



Don't worry about it.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 15, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> Oh yeah, I bet he could have a gun hidden inside his asshole. That's why the father hit the 15 years old naked boy in the head with a metal pipe. Makes perfect sense. At least Nesha is honest about her opinion (namely : kill teenagers who make love). You just keep making retarded excuses.



Eh, it's my first post in this thread, what other excuses are you talking about?  

Anyway... you enter my house.  You fuck my daughter.  I don't know you, nor do I know my daughter has a boyfriend.  You bet your ass I'm gonna think you're a rapist, and I'll fuck you up.  

That's exactly what his father did.  This is clear break in, and rape scenario here.  There's no other way of looking at the situation, even if the boy was a 15 year old.


----------



## Pretty Good Satan (Sep 15, 2008)

zornedge said:


> There's no other way of looking at the situation,



  Are you retarded?

Seriously?  You can't think of any other way of looking at the situation?  How about looking at the reality of the situation, which was that the kid was the girl's boyfriend?


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 15, 2008)

Pretty Good Satan said:


> Are you retarded?
> 
> Seriously?  You can't think of any other way of looking at the situation?  How about looking at the reality of the situation, which was that the kid was the girl's boyfriend?



Hindsight is 20/20.  The father acted appropriately for the situation, he heard a noise and investigated it only to find an uninvited nude stranger wandering his home in his daughters room.  A very common initial reaction to such a discovery would be to try to drive that person out of your childs room and out of your home.

As I said above, for all he knew this was a rapist attacking his daughter at that exact moment and he only had a moment or two to stop him.  Again, suppose that this boy _were_ a rapist and he had drugged or knocked out the daughter. What would people say of the father if he merely came in, assumed this was his daughters boyfriend then left only to have her be raped?

While I agree one should be open upon further examination to try to view the situation from various points, but for an in the heat of the moment reaction I fail to see how we can fault the father at all.


----------



## deidara_wannabe (Sep 15, 2008)

I don't blame the dad at all, the boy's lucky he only got hit with a pipe...


----------



## zornedge (Sep 15, 2008)

Pretty Good Satan said:


> Are you retarded?



Nope, I'm realistic.



> Seriously?  You can't think of any other way of looking at the situation?  How about looking at the reality of the situation, which was that the kid was the girl's boyfriend?



Sure, there're a couple of variables here - daughter's look when you find out, whether the boy is screaming, girl is fighting, etc - but when it comes right down to it, you have to consider the worst case scenario here (which is, a rapist breaking in your house in this situation).  Not doing so may cost you or your daughter's life if you don't take action.

At the very least, incapacitate or render the person harmless before asking questions.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 15, 2008)

Jio said:


> The same principle applies, the fact that a resident of that house invited the person in the house means he wasn't breaking an entry. It is essentially the same as your room mate bringing someone back and fucking them.
> 
> *LOLZ what? I am sure the father and mother own the house, technically if he goes into the house without the owner's permission its grounds for trespassing according to United States law . The daughter doesn't own the house nor the land, if she gives permission but the owner ( in this case the dad) does not give this person permission to be there, then he is trespassing according to the law, no offense but your "opinion" would be pretty much pointless in trying to argue against the U.S. law.*
> 
> ...



responses in bold, and I must say, if this is how you think, you are a huge mess .


----------



## zornedge (Sep 15, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> responses in bold, and I must say, if this is how you think, you are a huge mess .



I agree with you on your points about legal ownership on the property.  

In addition to your post, the father was acting as a guardian.  It is his responsibility to protect his daughter, because she is not yet of age to leave the house.  Failing to act upon the situation would have equally serious consequences if the situation turned out for the worse.  It's the father's duty to act in her daughter's best interest.  Problem in this story is that it seems the daughter has trust issues with her father, but that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 15, 2008)

zornedge said:


> I agree with you on your points about legal ownership on the property.
> 
> In addition to your post, the father was acting as a guardian.  It is his responsibility to protect his daughter, because she is not yet of age to leave the house.  Failing to act upon the situation would have equally serious consequences if the situation turned out for the worse.  It's the father's duty to act in her daughter's best interest.  Problem in this story is that it seems the daughter has trust issues with her father, but that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.



perhaps she thinks the law will be sympathetic LOL. talking things out with her father before such an incident is lots better than what she and her boyfriend will face in the court system. Also if it makes you feel even better about our points, I'm only 15 . I can only assume the people arguing in favor of the 15 year old are like either really young ( as young as 8) or about as old as 22, not really old enough to understand having a daughter.


----------



## Twizted (Sep 15, 2008)

I honestly can't say I'd blame the dad. I mean, random naked guy in my daughter's room in the middle of the night, whom I've never seen before? I'd probably assume something sketchy. Obviously it was a mistake, but when it comes to protecting your family, you can't assume this guy is harmless.


----------



## Tasmanian Tiger (Sep 15, 2008)

Biolink said:


> Wow, what a slutty ass daughter.
> 
> I would have done the same thing if I was the guy. Tells you how fucked our judicial system is since he is getting charged. That's just fucked up



fucking bitches in this country


----------



## Gary (Sep 15, 2008)

Twizted3584 said:


> I honestly can't say I'd blame the dad. I mean, random naked guy in my daughter's room in the middle of the night, whom I've never seen before? I'd probably assume something sketchy. Obviously it was a mistake, but when it comes to protecting your family, you can't assume this guy is harmless.



well don't mess with his family?


----------



## -Dargor- (Sep 16, 2008)

Had that teen been a rapist the dad would be crowned a hero right now...

So the lesson here is, if you're daughter is getting jumped in the dark you have to ask who it is first, and if you don't get shot in the head by a rapist, you can then call the cops freely.

Gotta love america...


----------



## Saufsoldat (Sep 16, 2008)

-Dargor- said:


> So the lesson here is, if you're daughter is getting jumped in the dark you have to ask who it is first, and if you don't get shot in the head by a rapist, you can then call the cops freely.



You could say or ask anything before striking a child over the head with a pipe... Considering that the boy started running away, it's not a reasonable reaction.



> Gotta love america...



Nah, it's a shithole.


----------



## -Dargor- (Sep 16, 2008)

Saufsoldat said:


> You could say or ask anything before striking a child over the head with a pipe... Considering that the boy started running away, it's not a reasonable reaction.


Lol, when you find a stranger in your home, fucking your flesh and blood, not knowing if he's armed or not, also not knowing about his age, you don't start chitchatting, you use the only advantage you may have wich is surprise.

That teen didn't belong there anyway period

I'd love watching you warn a burglar in the dark "hey hey, I got a steel pipe now, you better not shoot me you baddie baddie"

I wouldn't expect a 17 years old with no kids to understand tho, when you have a family of your own you'll think otherwise.


----------



## Saufsoldat (Sep 16, 2008)

-Dargor- said:


> Lol, when you find a stranger in your home, fucking your flesh and blood, not knowing if he's armed or not, also not knowing about his age, you don't start chitchatting, you use the only advantage you may have wich is surprise.



He was naked, standing on the bed. As hugo_pratt said, was he supposed to pull a gun out of his ass? Also, you can see how old someone is.



> That teen didn't belong there anyway period



Daughter invited him period



> I'd love watching you warn a burglar in the dark "hey hey, I got a steel pipe now, you better not shoot me you baddie baddie"



It was not in the dark.



> I wouldn't expect a 17 years old with no kids to understand tho, when you have a family of your own you'll think otherwise.



You could at least shout "what the fuck" and see whether or not the guy gets running.


----------



## -Dargor- (Sep 16, 2008)

Saufsoldat said:


> He was naked, standing on the bed. As hugo_pratt said, was he supposed to pull a gun out of his ass? Also, you can see how old someone is.


It wasn't stated if his hands could be seen, you never know.



> Daughter invited him period


Its not her house, and how should he know anyway



> It was not in the dark.


While true, it still doesn't take away the trauma of seing an intruder humping your daughter tho, not knowing if its rape



> You could at least shout "what the fuck" and see whether or not the guy gets running.


Again, when a whole family is depending on you for substainance and to a certain extent protection, you shouldn't hesitate to go for it first. There was no way he could have known if that guy had a gun either in his hands or hidden in the blankets, there could also have been more than one guy in the room at the time, too many unknowns.

In this kind of situation, instincts take over, he saw someone he didn't know naked over his child inside his own home, in my opinion he had all the rights to see him as threat to his family's safety.

The only one to blame in all this is the daughter for screwing around in secrecy, being honest in the first place would have probably avoided all this mess.

Then again, had the guy been a rapist/burglar, the dad would be crowned a hero right now. Trespassing into somebody's home isn't something that should be taken lightly, now even tho the daughter invited him, she's not legally the owner of the house, so it was trespassing to a certain extent.

I would probably do the same, maybe even worse put in the same situation. Being polite isn't worth risking your life or that of your family when dealing with trespassers.


----------



## Saufsoldat (Sep 16, 2008)

-Dargor- said:


> It wasn't stated if his hands could be seen, you never know.



Yeah, yeah, rapists tend to take off all their clothes but keep a gun hidden instead of pointed at the victim, I got it.



> Its not her house, and how should he know anyway



How should the boy know that he wasn't allowed there? 



> While true, it still doesn't take away the trauma of seing an intruder humping your daughter tho, not knowing if its rape



It doesn't say anything about sex when the dad got in the room, just that the boy was standing on the bed. So either she was just giving him a blowjob or they weren't having sex.



> Again, when a whole family is depending on you for substainance and to a certain extent protection, you shouldn't hesitate to go for it first. There was no way he could have known if that guy had a gun either in his hands or hidden in the blankets, there could also have been more than one guy in the room at the time, too many unknowns.



Still no reason to possibly kill the person and chase after him all the way out on the street.



> In this kind of situation, instincts take over, he saw someone he didn't know naked over his child inside his own home, in my opinion he had all the rights to see him as threat to his family's safety.



Again, not over his child.



> The only one to blame in all this is the daughter for screwing around in secrecy, being honest in the first place would have probably avoided all this mess.



Not fucking when she knows her dad gets up at 4am would've done the trick, too.



> Then again, had the guy been a rapist/burglar, the dad would be crowned a hero right now. Trespassing into somebody's home isn't something that should be taken lightly, now even tho the daughter invited him, she's not legally the owner of the house, so it was trespassing to a certain extent.



Attacking someone and trying to kill him when he runs away is nothing to be crowned for.



> I would probably do the same, maybe even worse put in the same situation. Being polite isn't worth risking your life or that of your family when dealing with trespassers.



There are several stages between being polite and hitting a kid on the head with a pipe. No need to go for either extremes.


----------



## -Dargor- (Sep 16, 2008)

While we have no idea what the guy looked like, I know 15 years old guys who look like they're much older, also if he's old enough to be boning a girl, I wouldn't qualify him as a "kid" at all.

Now having to come in trough the daughter's window is enough to guess you're not welcomed to the house in my book.

As for the chase/kill, I'll say it again, adrenalyne rush can make you do many things depending on your way of thinking/instincts/situation. In this case he just chased him out, if you wanna kill someone you use something much more lethal than a pipe.

Now any actual parent would agree that in the exact same situation, they would have done the same, wich is chase that naked stranger out of their home.

You hear noises
You think there's a burglar or worse in your home
You come across this naked guy standing on your daughter's bed
You have never seen him before and have no idea how old he is or know anything about him

You're first logical assumption is he's a rapist, or at best a mentally ill person/drug addict, wich can all be a threat to your children/wife's safety. 

Self-Defense mode
Chase out of the house

The boy wasn't killed nor was any killing intent mentionned and I'm damn sure the father didn't know it was his daughter's boyfriend until later on. 

I don't see how any retard could condemn a father protecting his family in his own home from a trespasser whom he knew nothing about.

Now its all about personnal opinions, but I think its fair that people who don't own a house or have kids should just keep theirs to themselves, because they have no idea of how it can feels like or of what responsiblities a parent holds towards his kids/family.

Keep rebeling against the world and enjoy your innocense while it lasts


----------



## strongarm85 (Sep 16, 2008)

You know, I don't really buy the story that the dad in this situation didn't know who the guy was. If he really has been in sneaking into the guy's house for more than a year than than either the Dad is never at home, a damn idiot for never realizing that his daughter keeps letting this guy in, or most likely, knew who the boy was and that he was coming over. We're obviously not being told the full story here.


----------



## Gunners (Sep 16, 2008)

> LOLZ what? I am sure the father and mother own the house, technically if he goes into the house without the owner's permission its grounds for trespassing according to United States law . The daughter doesn't own the house nor the land, if she gives permission but the owner ( in this case the dad) does not give this person permission to be there, then he is trespassing according to the law, no offense but your "opinion" would be pretty much pointless in trying to argue against the U.S. law.



Doesn't matter whether they pay the bills, the child dwells in the house so if they invite someone in the house the person is not trespassing. 



> The fact is, the owner of the house did not allow him in, so he is trespassing and technically can be charged with breaking and entering merely because he was not given permission to enter the home. If a 5 year old tells a p*d*p**** he can sneak into his house, I am sure according to your logic, that it would be wrong for the father to defend his family against this intruder .



If a 5 year old invited a paedophile in the house they would say the 5 year old was manipulated in some way. The kid was given permission to enter the home by a resident of that home therefore he was not tresspassing. 


> Human instinct is self defense, this 15 year old could have had a gun on the bed and endangered his family, he merely did the best option which was to make sure this person would not escape and his trespassing would not go unpunished.


But the kid ran out the house so he did escape. He could have called the boys parents and told them what he was up to, you don't punish a youth by smacking them upside the head with a pipe, you don't punish people in general with a pipe upside the head for that sort of shit.

Also when you say punish, the aim when people are ''trespassing'' in your home isn't to punish them, you might what to leave that line out in the future. So many people have this weird conception that if someone is in their home they automatically have the rights to do whatever they want to them. Wrong.



> Again, a 15 year old who is NOT the owner, nor even considered a full fledged adult, invited someone not known to the family, to SNEAK INTO THE HOUSE, THAT IS CALLED BREAKING AND ENTERING!!!!!!!!!!


No it isn't, she is a resident of that house and invited the person inside. Did he break into the home? No he was allowed in. 

There are actually cases, in the UK anyway, that set precidense for things like this, daughter inviting lover in the home and because he was invited in it is not considered breaking an entry.



> Yes he was, are you an insane fool? He was let into the house without consent of the home/land owners and SNEAKED into the house, the father saw a naked man standing in his daughter's room and disabled him, making sure that he would drive the boy away. The moment it happens is taken into consideration in the court of law, its not a whole "well this is what it really was so father= guilty", its the perception, NOT the intention. If you percieve someone for example, on myspace as a p*d*p**** with some of their comments and you call the cops on them, they legally have the right to arrest this person forsexual harassment, even if it wasn't in the intention.


Will edit this part later college.


----------



## orochimarusama21 (Sep 16, 2008)

omg to the people who are saying that the father is wrong there is something wrong with you.

how can you say that cause she invited him over it's not breaking and entering. no matter if she lives in the house or not she does not decide who can come over or not. THE OWNERS which are the parents do.

you say how the kid should know he's not invited? maybe because he had to sneak into the house to do this? or how about that the father never seen him before?

oh and another thing if you see a guy standing naked on your daughters bed in her room. (it doesn't matter if she was in the room or not) your not gonna yell what the fuck and see if the guy goes running or not. plus if the guy does go running he is obviously running because he knows he was doing something wrong. you wouldn't yell what the fuck you would just attack the guy. no right minded father would just yell what the fuck and not do anything. especially for his daughter. a father protects his daughter more than his sons.

i'm not even a father and I understand this. how come a lot of you do not get it?

i don't mean any flaming by this but cmon you can't say he is wrong in what he did. he protected his daughter and family and that's what any father would do.


----------



## |)/-\\/\/|\| (Sep 16, 2008)

Well the boy was not breaking and entering, the daughter let him in. The dad didn't know about it. I think the daughter should pay the 10,000 $


----------



## Biolink (Sep 16, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> You know, I don't really buy the story that the dad in this situation didn't know who the guy was. If he really has been in sneaking into the guy's house for more than a year than than either the Dad is never at home, a damn idiot for never realizing that his daughter keeps letting this guy in, or most likely, knew who the boy was and that he was coming over. We're obviously not being told the full story here.



You are underestimating the Teenagers ability to keep a secret.

Like I said, there have been 3 girlfriends my parents never knew about. I got "The Talk" two years after I had already done it. If the daughter acts like a perfect little princess around the Dad, why should he assume that his daughter was sneaking boys into the house in the early mornings?

A year is very broad. I'm sure he didn't get let in every week, maybe not even every two weeks


----------



## armorknight (Sep 16, 2008)

It's obvious that the people arguing against the dad are suffering from hindsight bias and/or don't understand what it means to be a parent.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 16, 2008)

armorknight said:


> It's obvious that the people arguing against the dad are suffering from hindsight bias and/or don't understand what it means to be a parent.



It's just the rebel in teenagers that is speaking, that's all there is to it.  People who are yet not of age, and are inexperienced with the ways of the world.

---

It's perfectly normal for teenagers to be the rebels they are, thinking they are part of the movement of the world, a world shaker.  Problem is, they fail to wake up and smell reality.  Older people are clearly just as human as they are, and far more evolved in terms of rational thinking only gained from experience.  

That being said, it's a really selfish way of thinking that his father did something wrong.  His dad was looking out for his daughter, nothing less, nothing more.  His rationality was based on years of experience reading the newspaper, hearing stories from people, hell, maybe he had a personal experience himself.  He acted upon what he knew, using the element of surprise to subdue the intruder.  The daughter is underage anyway, she shouldn't be fucked, at least not under his roof.  When people are old enough, they're smart enough to stay the fuck away from their parent's house when it comes to sex, unless there is mutual agreement between the partners and the parents.  

Also, his daughter was placed in the wrong by keeping secrets from his father, else this situation would have not happened.  His daughter probably thought she was the sweet shit, and kept secrets to benefit herself, bragging to the whole motherfucking school about her exploits.  Look what happened, brag about that.  Maybe it'll teach her a thing or two about family trust.


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 16, 2008)

Those who support the intruder obviously have snuck into a few homes, or have allowed their partners to sneak into their parents.


----------



## Fojos (Sep 16, 2008)

Cell said:


> so, sense she's a girl that has sex, she's automatically a slut? take your misogynistic ideologies and shove them up your ass, you jerk.



No, but the fact that she's been doing it for over a year and hiding it all the time makes her one. (Not the part where she hides sex, but the family had never even met the guy)


----------



## kulgan18 (Sep 16, 2008)

lol thats a bunch of BS.
I bet he just has a daughter complex and doesnt want anybody having sex with her.

Where was his daughter in all this? his dad didnt care to ask her if he was his guest?. 

Who gives a shit if he never saw the guy before, So like it never crossed his mind that his daughter was having sex?. This is a quite retarded.


----------



## Aokiji (Sep 16, 2008)

Saufsoldat said:


> *You could say or ask anything before striking a *child over the head with a pipe... Considering that the boy started running away, it's not a reasonable reaction.
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, it's a shithole.



This.

But the evil bastard in me is happy that the kid got what he had coming. Sneaking into someone's house and fucking his daughter. Should've beaten the shit outta him by hand.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 16, 2008)

People keep saying "the boy was invited" or "how was he suppose to know he wasn't supposed to be there".  If that were really the case then why would he have to sneak into the house?  If he was rightfully there why sneak in?  He knew he was not supposed to be there and he knew the father had no idea who he was so he should have been ready to face the consequences if he were caught.

Here is a scenario.  Suppose you own a store and you sleep in a room in the back.  During the night one of your employees unlocks the door and sneaks someone in to have sex with.  You hear a noise from the back and wander out to find a nude man wandering your store.  You're well within your right to attack him, he's on your property without your knowledge despite the fact that he was invited in by someone who doesn't have the right to extend such an invitation without your knowledge.


----------



## kulgan18 (Sep 16, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> People keep saying "the boy was invited" or "how was he suppose to know he wasn't supposed to be there".  If that were really the case then why would he have to sneak into the house?  If he was rightfully there why sneak in?  He knew he was not supposed to be there and he knew the father had no idea who he was so he should have been ready to face the consequences if he were caught.
> 
> Here is a scenario.  Suppose you own a store and you sleep in a room in the back.  During the night one of your employees unlocks the door and sneaks someone in to have sex with.  You hear a noise from the back and wander out to find a nude man wandering your store.  You're well within your right to attack him, he's on your property without your knowledge despite the fact that he was invited in by someone who doesn't have the right to extend such an invitation without your knowledge.



Thats not an unlawful entrance, that is the difference. He was invited, makes no difference where did he enter.

And in more general terms, this is cultural problem. Why is it that people insist on shoot first, ask question later?.
Just imagine if the dad had a gun, ever thought about that?. Then we would have triple tragedy that could easily be avoided if people stop and THINK, Just for a moment.

Also imagining that your teenage daughter could be having sex would also help. .

Thats why i say this is bunch of BS this defence he is using. He probably had a fit of rage at the thought of a guy screwing his daughter on her bedroom.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 16, 2008)

kulgan18 said:


> He probably had a fit of rage at the thought of a guy screwing his daughter on her bedroom.





I wouldn't be surprised, considering his daughter never told him about her "boyfriend".  Of course, you'll have a fit of rage seeing your beloved daughter being raped.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 16, 2008)

kulgan18 said:


> Thats not an unlawful entrance, that is the difference. He was invited, makes no difference where did he enter.
> 
> And in more general terms, this is cultural problem. Why is it that people insist on shoot first, ask question later?.
> Just imagine if the dad had a gun, ever thought about that?. Then we would have triple tragedy that could easily be avoided if people stop and THINK, Just for a moment.
> ...



He was invited by someone he knew perfectly well did not have the authority to invite him.  You child does not have the right to invite people into the home without your knowledge.  He knew that, hence why he had to sneak into the house and hide his presence from her parents.


----------



## Crimson Lord (Sep 16, 2008)

That's so @!$#ed up.

Poor father >.<


----------



## kulgan18 (Sep 16, 2008)

zornedge said:


> I wouldn't be surprised, considering his daughter never told him about her "boyfriend".  Of course, you'll have a fit of rage seeing your beloved daughter being raped.



"raped", wow thats quite strong considering it was his daughter the one being slutty.

Was she even in the room or what?. If she was id imagine she would try to explain whats going on.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 16, 2008)

kulgan18 said:


> "raped", wow thats quite strong considering it was his daughter the one being slutty.



I take it we agree, then, on the father's perspective.  Her daughter failed to tell her father what was going on, earning her that status you gave her.  



> Was she even in the room or what?. If she was id imagine she would try to explain whats going on.



Well, it's on her, not her father.  Since she failed to explain about her life to her father - which I would imagine to be the case as per the article, this historical piece of their lives would build even more family trust between them now.  

Her father is a guardian and he is in trouble acting out his role while the daughter gets away free, hopefully with a lifetime of guilt considering her father protected her.  She essentially sent him to prison for her own greedy impulses, worse case scenario.

If you follow the same practice, I don't recommend doing it in anyone's parents house unless you walked in the front door.


----------



## kulgan18 (Sep 16, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> He was invited by someone he knew perfectly well did not have the authority to invite him.  You child does not have the right to invite people into the home without your knowledge.  He knew that, hence why he had to sneak into the house and hide his presence from her parents.



Where do you get she has no authority to invite him?.

Makes no difference if she is minor or not, only that she is an occupant of the house.
And him being an owner of the house makes no difference also.

Like his wife could have invited a complete stranger to have sex with her also and it would also be a lawful entrance.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 16, 2008)

kulgan18 said:


> Makes no difference if she is minor or not, only that she is an occupant of the house.
> 
> And him being an owner of the house makes no difference also.



It makes a HUGE difference.  I won't even bother arguing this difference, you should know better.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 16, 2008)

kulgan18 said:


> Where do you get she has no authority to invite him?.
> 
> Makes no difference if she is minor or not, only that she is an occupant of the house.
> And him being an owner of the house makes no difference also.
> ...



The fact that she is an occupant means dick.  If your parents tell you someone can't enter the house, you cannot defy them and let that person in.  Its not your house.  She snuck someone past her parents, which means she obviously didn't have their ok.

His wife is also an OWNER of the house, so that is a completely different scenario.  This girl is a resident but it is not her house, she cannot dictate who comes and goes without her parents ok.  Much like you can't throw a party without your parents consent, its not your call.


----------



## Akira (Sep 16, 2008)

I'm not surprised he was charged as even though it's foreseeable that he would swing the pipe if he felt as though his daughter was under threat, he still hit the guy in the _back of the head_, so proving justified self defence is out of the question. 

Also the kid was a tresspasser seeing as he wasn't invited by the parents (owners of the property), and the daughter herself doesn't have a sufficient degree of control over the premises to be considered an occupier.

I don't support the idea of him getting fined since he was acting to protect his daughter, but that's the justice system for you.


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 16, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> The fact that she is an occupant means dick.  If your parents tell you someone can't enter the house, you cannot defy them and let that person in.  Its not your house.  She snuck someone past her parents, which means she obviously didn't have their ok.
> 
> His wife is also an OWNER of the house, so that is a completely different scenario.  This girl is a resident but it is not her house, she cannot dictate who comes and goes without her parents ok.  Much like you can't throw a party without your parents consent, its not your call.



Don't even bother debating with the people who support then teens. It's obvious they don't have a place of their own, and no children. It's also obvious they sympathize with the "victim" because they either been in the "victim's" shoes or the daughters.

This is a perfect example of what could happen when you defy your parents.


----------



## Xion (Sep 16, 2008)

Nesha said:


> Don't even bother debating with the people who support then teens. It's obvious they don't have a place of their own, and no children. It's also obvious they sympathize with the "victim" because they either been in the "victim's" shoes or the daughters.
> 
> This is a perfect example of what could happen when you defy your parents.



Those that "support" the teens don't really support them so much as they know the justice system is clear in a case like this. 

You can't go attacking someone violently who is in your house to screw your daughter. I am sure he didn't look like a fucking burglar with the daughter eyeing him.

The fact that he ran and the daughter/kid tried to explain it doesn't help his case. 

You cannot attack someone with a metal pipe unless that person is an immediate harm to life and property.

That is why you can't just shoot people on your property...except in Texas.


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 16, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> Those that "support" the teens don't really support them so much as they know the justice system is clear in a case like this.
> 
> You can't go attacking someone violently who is in your house to screw your daughter. I am sure he didn't look like a fucking burglar with the daughter eyeing him.
> 
> ...



That's funny because in the original article I don't remember reading that the girl was in the room, let alone giving her father an explaination.

But the second time someone posted the article, the girl admitted to the *authorities* that she's been fucking the guy for over a year behind her father's back.

Try again.


----------



## Goom (Sep 16, 2008)

honestly if I saw something like that I would guess it was my daughters boyfriend or something.  But I still would punch him the fuck out.  Just wouldn't knock him with a pipe.


----------



## Xion (Sep 16, 2008)

Nesha said:


> That's funny because in the original article I don't remember reading that the girl was in the room, let alone giving her father an explaination.
> 
> But the second time someone posted the article, the girl admitted to the *authorities* that she's been fucking the guy for over a year behind her father's back.
> 
> Try again.



So the guy was naked there for himself?


----------



## auto-matic (Sep 16, 2008)

> didn't even know his daughter had a boyfriend or that the youngster had been sneaking into the home for more than a year.



*sigh* how do u not know


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 16, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> So the guy was naked there for himself?



I would say "Picture yourself in the father's shoes", but that would be irrelevant.

But I'm not going to argue this either. I hate debating. The father was in his right. The daughter and her boyfriend were wrong.


----------



## impersonal (Sep 16, 2008)

Nesha said:
			
		

> But I'm not going to argue this either. I hate debating.


Indeed, you mostly use ad hominems or lies instead of proper arguments. Do us all a favor and quit posting.

For the record, here is an example of such worthless and completely false [at least in my case with the exception that I don't have kids] posts :


> Don't even bother debating with the people who support then teens. It's obvious they don't have a place of their own, and no children. It's also obvious they sympathize with the "victim" because they either been in the "victim's" shoes or the daughters.


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 16, 2008)

The father was well within his right to do what he did considering that he never knew the boy, never seen him, never knew about his relationship with his daughter.

If the daughter wanted to practice adult...activities...then she should've been *adult* and told her father that she had a boyfriend. She should've been *adult* and actually allowed her father to *meet* her boyfriend instead of doing sneak, unacceptable acts behind his back...under *his* roof no less. 

*EDIT: *I'll say it again: A prime example of what happens when you defy your parents.


----------



## wiggely (Sep 16, 2008)

I love how everyone says "he thought it was rape". bull shit.

he walked in the room. found his daughter having sex.  and clubed the guy she was having sex with.  the father should be charged.

i don't know if the people who are saying "rape!" have ever had sex before, but you can tell if its rape if you walk in on two people having sex pretty easily.

what i'm sure happened:
-father hears noise, goes to investigate
-walks in on his daughter having sex (cause thats what happened)
-he looks in horror as the daughter he thought was a virgin is getting plowed
-wacks guy

yeah thats illegal.  it doesn't matter why the father did what he did.  you can kill someone and have be a total accident and still go to jail.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 16, 2008)

Jio said:


> Doesn't matter whether they pay the bills, the child dwells in the house so if they invite someone in the house the person is not trespassing.
> 
> *Yes it does matter who pays the bills and who owns the property and such. Maybe thats not the way it is un the UK, but here in the United States, if  a person SNEAKS into a house without the owner's permission, that is trespassing, so thats really too bad because your view is 100% wrong in the eyes of the law, regardless of what kind of evidence you use against it.*
> 
> ...




Responses in bold.


----------



## Tasmanian Tiger (Sep 16, 2008)

I would beat the shit outta that bitch first


----------



## Blizzard chain (Sep 16, 2008)

Honestly, that's pretty stupid on the judicial system's part. 
The little bastard that got knocked upside the head pretty much deserved it though.
But I probably wouldn't have hit him in the head with a pipe (that isn't to say that I wouldn't tell him to get the fuck out or used a wooden object  )


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 16, 2008)

I have to say I love all the responses in this thread saying "he should have known it was her boyfriend".

Yeah that makes a lot of sense.

*naked stranger in my home*

"Oh, you must be my daughters boyfriend despite the fact that I have absolutely no knowledge of her even having a boyfriend".


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 16, 2008)

allow me to continue your conversation tsukitomi  :

"would you like some tea and crumpets naked stranger"?

"I guess you must be my daughter's boyfriend, I mean you cannot possibly be a rapist, drunk, heroine addict, or robber right ?"


----------



## Dionysus (Sep 16, 2008)

Justice should be meted out based on knowledge of the father's motives as well as the circumstances.  It's fairly simple to see he shouldn't be charged with a felony like aggravated battery.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 16, 2008)

EXACTLY. the people in this thread fighting against the father think of it like "father should have known it was his daughter's boyfriend, how could you assault a 15 year old boy". They are taking information that was known AFTER the moment into account which is wrong. You have to think of the actual moment.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 16, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> EXACTLY. the people in this thread fighting against the father think of it like "father should have known it was his daughter's boyfriend, how could you assault a 15 year old boy". They are taking information that was known AFTER the moment into account which is wrong. You have to think of the actual moment.



As I said earlier, hindsight is 20/20.


----------



## Dionysus (Sep 16, 2008)

Ah, I'll add a clause to my earlier statement.  I only assume what is told in the story and take it at face value, not inferring anything else.


----------



## -Dargor- (Sep 16, 2008)

Don't bother, most of the people arguing that the dad was wrong are for the most part teens anyway, could have been them getting hit with the pipe so hey, let's charge the father for defending his home


----------



## Mintaka (Sep 16, 2008)

iLurk said:


> You heard weird noises in your daughter's bed room and you see a guy naked in her bed room.
> 
> If assuming that that naked teenager was having sex with your daughter is retarded, what other assumption can you make without being a "retard"?


ZOMG MY GENDER BENDIN MACHINE WORKED!


I'd bring the pipe just in case but ask him first.  If he was an intruder then I'd fall back to the "lets beat his brains out with a pipe while chasing him throughout my house" strategy.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 16, 2008)

Tokoyami said:


> ZOMG MY GENDER BENDIN MACHINE WORKED!
> 
> 
> I'd bring the pipe just in case but ask him first.  If he was an intruder then I'd fall back to the "lets beat his brains out with a pipe while chasing him throughout my house" strategy.



Again I feel the need to repeat my point that hindsight is 20/20.  Its very different to say "this is what I would do" and then actually _being_ in that situation and finding a potential rapist/murderer in your daughters room (or at the very least an intruder in your home).

His reaction was very very understandable and justifiable.  I don't think your average person would stop and say "excuse me nude man I've never seen before, may I ask who you are and what your intentions are in my single daughters room?".


----------



## Aina (Sep 16, 2008)

I'm 50/50 with the situation. He shouldn't of been so rash, could of asked what the hell is this.

But on the other hand, I would do the same if I saw some random naked teen in my house/apartement/condem.


----------



## Gunners (Sep 17, 2008)

> Yes it does matter who pays the bills and who owns the property and such. Maybe thats not the way it is un the UK, but here in the United States, if a person SNEAKS into a house without the owner's permission, that is trespassing, so thats really too bad because your view is 100% wrong in the eyes of the law, regardless of what kind of evidence you use against it.



Actually, I did some research on this in America it is not trespassing if you have an invitee. An inviter does not have to be a home owner, also said something along the lines of if there is a tresspasser you tell them to leave first then call first before striking them.

He had permission by someone in the house. Also I was originally arguing that he didn't break an entry which is different to trespassing.



> This "kid" is 15 years old, and not only that, he had been having sex since he was at least 14, I would hardly call him a kid, young adult on the cusp of adult-hood is what I'd call him, and if he is to truly become an adult, he must learn to be a man and admit that he was sneaking in when he shouldn't have been, he is old enough to know not to trespass.


The kid wasn't given time to admit to his actions before the fahter hit him upside the head with a pipe. He probably knew that the father wouldn't be happy with him sleeping with his daughter in their home it doesn't actually give the father the right to attack him like that which is why he was fined.



> How could he have called the boy's parents? he didn't know who the boy was remember ? And you think his daughter would have told him right away that it was her boyfriend? and that she would actually give her dad the boy's parents' number? Obviously you have learned very little in your years of education, and I can only assume your not very social ( or no offense, but perhaps a social outcast?), otherwise you would know how secretive teens can be, ESPECIALLY in the United States.


Maybe if he didn't batter the kid he could have questioned him, or even called the police both options would have been better than brutalising the kid.



> Legally, they DO. Not murder of course, but for example, if a sign says no trespassing and then an attack dog sign, do we blame the dog for attacking the 15 year old when it was clear he was trespassing, or do we blame the 15 year old for his ignorance? You have the right to deal with a trespasser as you see fit as long as its justified. This 15 year old could have threatened the family with a gun possibly.


If someone invited the person on to the property and the dog attacked them, regardless of signs you would be liable for their damages. 

You don't have the right to deal with a trespasser as you see fit, you have the right to use reasonable force to detain them, though as I said, this doesn't really apply here as the kid wasn't a trespasser he was invited in the home.



> This isn't the bloody United Kingom . Laws are different ehre and such, if a 15 year old, virtually an adult, sneaks into teh house and is found naked above a man's daughter's bed, its his fault if he gets hit with a pipe. The man had no way of knowing, so too bad. That's the law here in the United States.


Actually the laws aren't that different, for one the guy was actually fined. Two the laws on that area are similar to the UK I guess it could vary from state to state. The fact of the matter is what happened to the man is the same as what would happen in the UK.


----------



## Aokiji (Sep 17, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> People keep saying "the boy was invited" or "how was he suppose to know he wasn't supposed to be there".  If that were really the case then why would he have to sneak into the house?  If he was rightfully there why sneak in?  He knew he was not supposed to be there and he knew the father had no idea who he was so he should have been ready to face the consequences if he were caught.
> 
> Here is a scenario.  Suppose you own a store and you sleep in a room in the back.  During the night one of your employees unlocks the door and sneaks someone in to have sex with.  You hear a noise from the back and wander out to find a nude man wandering your store.  *You're well within your right to attack him*, he's on your property without your knowledge despite the fact that he was invited in by someone who doesn't have the right to extend such an invitation without your knowledge.



Why actually? You can't defend yourself if your not getting attacked.


----------



## Vandal Savage (Sep 17, 2008)

Oh wow, looks like this guy let his emotions rule him in this situation. 

Still, I sure as hell would have been pissed with my Daughter if I found this shit out like the way this guy did.


----------



## Munak (Sep 17, 2008)

I am so going to move in the US.


----------



## Grrblt (Sep 17, 2008)

Hunter x One Piece said:


> His daughter was not present, some fucking naked guy who he has never seen is standing on his damn daughter's bed.
> 
> What the fuck are you gonna do?
> 
> Invite him to stay for dinner?



How about he asks him "who the fuck are you?" before he swings a weapon at him. It's not like his daughter was in any immediate danger since, as you pointed out, the daughter wasn't there.


----------



## Dionysus (Sep 17, 2008)

So, a lot of people here are OK with the *felony* charge?


----------



## mystictrunks (Sep 17, 2008)

I just learned that it's okay to beat someones brains in if they're having consensual sex with a relative.


----------



## callinginsane (Sep 17, 2008)

MY GAWD
He didn't know his daughter had a boyfriend,and to see him nude in her bedroom,I would have done the same if I were him


----------



## Aokiji (Sep 17, 2008)

mystictrunks said:


> I just learned that it's okay to beat someones brains in if they're having consensual sex with a relative.



The moar you know. 

**


----------



## Teleq (Sep 17, 2008)

Grabbing a pipe when hearing suspicious sounds is fine, seeing a teenager naked and beating him with it is not. I'm pretty shocked at how many in this thread support the "shoot first, ask questions later" mindset. Nobody was in immediate danger and he should have at least yelled "what the fuck". Of course you're going to be mighty pissed off as a father, but there is something called "self restraint". Oh wait, who needs that in America, eh?


----------



## Smoke (Sep 17, 2008)

HE has the right to _"bare arms"_ not to _"hit people with a pipe"_


Ha!!! Serves him right for not using a gun.




You have rights, people. USE THEM!!!!!


----------



## Felt (Sep 17, 2008)

Did he think he was trying to steal clothes?


----------



## orochimarusama21 (Sep 17, 2008)

kulgan18 said:


> Thats not an unlawful entrance, that is the difference. He was invited, makes no difference where did he enter.
> 
> And in more general terms, this is cultural problem. Why is it that people insist on shoot first, ask question later?.
> Just imagine if the dad had a gun, ever thought about that?. Then we would have triple tragedy that could easily be avoided if people stop and THINK, Just for a moment.
> ...



are you an idiot? he obviously didn't know his daughter was having sex. you obviously have no clue how it feels to be a parent. I don't even have children and I know how a parent thinks. you obviously would not think your 15 year old daughter was having sex. and can you people stop saying he was invited in. the daughter doesn't own the goddamn house which means he was not legally invited into the house. the law would say that he was not invited into the house. they have to be invited into the house by the people who own it. just because she lives there does not give her any right to invite anyone into the house whatsoever.


----------



## Teleq (Sep 17, 2008)

orochimarusama21 said:


> you obviously have no clue how it feels to be a parent.





orochimarusama21 said:


> I don't even have children and I know how a parent thinks.


... Right. 





orochimarusama21 said:


> you obviously would not think your 15 year old daughter was having sex.


 Really. It's not that hard to imagine, seeing a guy naked in my daughter's room and all. Although, granted, you don't really seem to be the type to think much.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 17, 2008)

Teleq said:


> ... Right.  Really. It's not that hard to imagine, seeing a guy naked in my daughter's room and all. Although, granted, you don't really seem to be the type to think much.



I'll love to hear from you what happens when someone breaks in your daughter's room, and has a gun pointed blank at you when you question what happens, wishing you took the insight of this thread to at least use the element of surprise to subdue first before asking questions... assuming you're still alive.

Hypothetical situation, of course.


----------



## Teleq (Sep 17, 2008)

zornedge said:


> I'll love to hear from you what happens when someone breaks in your daughter's room, and has a gun pointed blank at you when you question what happens, wishing you took the insight of this thread to at least use the element of surprise to subdue first before asking questions... assuming you're still alive.
> 
> Hypothetical situation, of course.


Irrelevant and paranoid reasoning. The guy in the article was naked and unarmed, which is easily discernible before shouting out. If he had been fully clothed and not freaking standing on the bed, it would be different.

And if I took the "insight" of this thread, I'd be knocking out everyone I met in case they happened to be armed and after my family, fo'sho.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 17, 2008)

Teleq said:


> Irrelevant and paranoid reasoning. The guy in the article was naked and unarmed, which is easily discernible before shouting out. If he had been fully clothed and not freaking standing on the bed, it would be different.
> 
> And if I took the "insight" of this thread, I'd be knocking out everyone I met in case they happened to be armed and after my family, fo'sho.



I guess you're the type that'll ask "Do you want some coffee?" to some random, naked stranger who may, or may not be a rapist.  

While hitting one with the pipe might be too much, personally, I won't even hesitate to tackle someone down and make sure he can't do anything.  That's a good time to analyze the situation.  I sure as hell would not expose myself or my family to danger like you will.


----------



## Prince Leon (Sep 17, 2008)

mystictrunks said:


> I just learned that it's okay to beat someones brains in if they're having consensual sex with a relative.



Well, you can either do that or just stay and watch as some snot-nosed little shit, _that you didn't give permission to enter your house_, have sex with your (possibly underaged) daughter.


----------



## Aokiji (Sep 17, 2008)

Teleq said:


> ... Right.  Really. It's not that hard to imagine, seeing a guy naked in my daughter's room and all. Although, granted, you don't really seem to be the type to think much.



hahaha shitty attempt at ad hominem.


----------



## anticute (Sep 17, 2008)

Biolink said:


> Secrets much?
> 
> It's totally unreasonable to think parents can keep tabs on their kids 24/7. I know for a fact my parents didn't keep tabs on all of my Girlfriens. Hell my parents still think I'm a virgin
> 
> ...



I know that but still... A YEAR TO FIND OUT THIS B.S.?


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 17, 2008)

Aokiji said:


> Why actually? You can't defend yourself if your not getting attacked.



You're dealing with a potential threat _in your home_.  Suppose for the sake of argument the guy had a gun, does he actually have to start shooting before its defending yourself?  Because pointing a gun isn't an actual attack.

An unarmed person can be a legitimate threat.  You don't need a weapon to bite someones windpipe.

He responded to an unknown person in his home wandering in the nude.  If I found a nude man wandering my home my initial thought would be either he's on drugs or mentally unstable.


----------



## Nodonn (Sep 17, 2008)

> He responded to an unknown person in his home wandering in the nude. If I found a nude man wandering my home my initial thought would be either he's on drugs or mentally unstable.



If I had a daughter and a guy was standing naked above her, I'd probably go batshit insane for this reason.


----------



## -Dargor- (Sep 17, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> You're dealing with a potential threat _in your home_.  Suppose for the sake of argument the guy had a gun, does he actually have to start shooting before its defending yourself?  Because pointing a gun isn't an actual attack.
> 
> An unarmed person can be a legitimate threat.  You don't need a weapon to bite someones windpipe.
> 
> He responded to an unknown person in his home wandering in the nude.  If I found a nude man wandering my home my initial thought would be either he's on drugs or mentally unstable.



Of course not, its much better to bend over and offer some tea :lord

Don't bother arguing with the retards, let Darwin's law take care of it.

Idealistic idiots condemning a father for protecting his home and familly in the name of... of what again? Of unknown-naked-maybe-not-so-aggressive-trespassers' rights?

No wonder the world's goin' crazy

The dad should sue the boy for illegaly entering his property period .


----------



## vagnard (Sep 18, 2008)

Lol... The rednecks excuses are amazing. The father never saw a gun, the father never saw the boy attacking his daughter, the father never even gave the boy time to react or explain himself. 

The fact the guy is just a pissed off shitty father who knew shit about his daughter and uneslashed his wrath against a idiot boyfriend instead his slutty daughter. 

Hell... even if the guy is a thief you don't have the right to shoot him unless you have direct evidence you are in danger... that's why only in Arnold's state you can shoot and ask questions later. 

Why you all just admit you are fans of Dirty Harry instead making shitty excuses?. There is no credible way the boy or the girl didn't even have time to say a single thing before the father started his brutal assault like "father! stop!"

Just by the reaction of your daughter or the guy you can realize the guy wasn't a rapist. The father is just a crazy guy who shouldn't be allowed to walk in street. 

The boy was just an irresponsable prick.

The father was a potential murderer.


----------



## Aokiji (Sep 18, 2008)

-Dargor- said:


> Of course not, its much better to bend over and offer some tea :lord
> 
> Don't bother arguing with the retards, let Darwin's law take care of it.
> 
> ...



He wasn't protecting shit. Me being an idealist?  I'm a defender of the death penalty. So much for me being a leftard.


----------



## Grrblt (Sep 18, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> You're dealing with a potential threat _in your home_.  Suppose for the sake of argument the guy had a gun, does he actually have to start shooting before its defending yourself?  Because pointing a gun isn't an actual attack.


He *didn't* have a gun. If you see a stranger sneaking around in your house with a gun, you have my blessing to act first. If you see a stranger standing still in your house, with no weapon, not even trying to be invisible, then he's probably not a sex murderer and you will have time to ask him what the fuck he's doing there.



> An unarmed person can be a legitimate threat.  You don't need a weapon to bite someones windpipe.


An unarmed person generally isn't a threat to an armed person. In this case it's pretty obvious the armed person had a much higher threat level.



> He responded to an unknown person in his home wandering in the nude.  If I found a nude man wandering my home my initial thought would be either he's on drugs or mentally unstable.


Let's beat the crap out of people who are on drugs or mentally unstable.


----------



## MS81 (Sep 18, 2008)

Grrblt said:


> He *didn't* have a gun. If you see a stranger sneaking around in your house with a gun, you have my blessing to act first. If you see a stranger standing still in your house, with no weapon, not even trying to be invisible, then he's probably not a sex murderer and you will have time to ask him what the fuck he's doing there.
> 
> 
> An unarmed person generally isn't a threat to an armed person. In this case it's pretty obvious the armed person had a much higher threat level.
> ...



yeah I would've beat the crap out of boy with my bare knuckles, but to think he actually used a weapon against him.


----------



## Kira Yamato (Sep 18, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> No rapist would be stupid enough to rape a girl in the home she lives in with all her family. That just doesn't make any sense.
> .



It must be nice never to watch the evening news then, because it has happen...maybe not in your area but I can recall in recent memory a serial rapist who was doing the very same thing you claim no one in their right mind would do...in my area. 

Then again, if your a serial rapist I doubt common sense would come into play.


----------



## Jin-E (Sep 18, 2008)

Was the daughter in the room as well?

I think the father overeacted. He could have just asked "Who the fuck are you?" or something like that.

Vigilante justice leads to tragedy.


----------



## PL0X (Sep 18, 2008)

What a stupid daughter. She should've snuck out, they both seem pretty retarded to me and I can't really blame the dad too much for freaking out if he thought he lovely daughter was still a virgin.


----------



## vagnard (Sep 18, 2008)

Kira Yamato said:


> It must be nice never to watch the evening news then, because it has happen...maybe not in your area but I can recall in recent memory a serial rapist who was doing the very same thing you claim no one in their right mind would do...in my area.
> 
> Then again, if your a serial rapist I doubt common sense would come into play.



And in case of rape you think a rapist would react the way this boy reacted?. What about the daughter?. She was there relaxed because she loved to be raped?.

The boy was chased until the front door... therefore probably he had plenty of time to explain or shouting at last for mercy... but clearly that crazy father didn't gave a shit. 

Hell... people talk like the father ambushed the guy in 0.1 seconds and had no time to do anything.


----------



## Aokiji (Sep 18, 2008)

MS81 said:


> yeah I would've beat the crap out of boy with my bare knuckles, but to think he actually used a weapon against him.



My stance     .


----------



## Kira Yamato (Sep 18, 2008)

vagnard said:


> And in case of rape you think a rapist would react the way this boy reacted?. What about the daughter?. She was there relaxed because she loved to be raped?.



I read the article, so please quote me the boyfriends reaction, because it wasn't there. The father swung a pipe at a guy standing on her daughter's bed.


----------



## vagnard (Sep 18, 2008)

Kira Yamato said:


> I read the article, so please quote me the boyfriends reaction, because it wasn't there. The father swung a pipe at a guy standing on her daughter's bed.



I don't need to read about the boy's reaction to know it wasn't a rapist reaction. Probably it was the reaction of an scared boy trying to explain himself persued by a maniac along the whole house... self defense?... lol

You have no right to even shoot a real thief inside your house unless he directly menaces your life. The boy never showed any sign to put the life of the father or the daughter in danger. 

The guy just concluded that. That's why he was charged. Because he adopted a Dirty Harry politic... hell... I bet he is just pissed off because some guy was having sex with his daughter.

These are the conditions needed so the castle doctrine can be invoked:

_* An intruder must be making (or have made) an attempt to unlawfully and/or forcibly enter an occupied home, business or car.
    * The intruder must be acting illegally -- e.g. the Castle Doctrine does not give the right to shoot officers of the law acting in the course of their legal duties
    * The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death upon an occupant of the home
    * The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to commit some other felony, such as arson or burglary
    * The occupant(s) of the home must not have provoked or instigated an intrusion, or provoked or instigated an intruder to threaten or use deadly force
    * The occupant(s) of the home may be required to attempt to exit the house or otherwise retreat (this is called the "Duty to Retreat" and most self-defense statutes referred to as examples of "Castle Doctrine" expressly state that the homeowner has no such duty)
_

This case doesn't fit in any of them... therefore the father must be charged.

Notice the word "occupant". In no case the law says only the owner can invite people to his home. Therefore it wasn't an intrusion given the daughter is one of the "occupants"


----------



## Koi (Sep 18, 2008)

What the fuck.  Why the hell are they charging this guy?

The kid was on HIS PROPERTY, without permission of the property owner.  Maybe he shouldn't have used a pipe, but fuck, I would have laid into the kid too.



vagnard said:


> *I don't need to read about the boy's reaction to know it wasn't a rapist reaction. *Probably it was the reaction of an scared boy trying to explain himself persued by a maniac along the whole house... self defense?... lol


Because you know so many? 

A lot of rapists are apparently smooth-talkers, dude. Not all of them fit the maniacal, dirty, breaking-and-entering stereotype that TV cop dramas and movies want to push.


----------



## Yosha (Sep 18, 2008)

Haha deltona is not too far from me, like 15 minutes tops. Anyways, I would of done the same shit.


----------



## ?Grimmjow? (Sep 18, 2008)

What do the police say the the kid, if i was that father i wouldnt only hit him with a pipe, i would chop off his dick, btw where did he get the metal pipe from?


----------



## Dionysus (Sep 18, 2008)

vagnard said:


> ** The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to commit some other felony, such as arson or burglary*
> 
> This case doesn't fit in any of them... therefore the father must be charged.


I don't see how this doesn't apply here.  A naked guy in your daughter's bedroom.  Though I'm no fucking lawyer, especially not where this happened, so I have no clue what the guy is able to do (guess it's not Texas).

My opinion, based on the article--not my preternatural ability to know exactly what happened, reactions included--is that the father should not be charged with a *felony* offense.


----------



## Gunners (Sep 18, 2008)

What I find funniest is some of you would condemn the behaviour of Arab men. ''I would chop his dick off'' ''I would beat him to a pulp'' etc. If your son was in the bedroom with another girl how would you behave exactly?


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 18, 2008)

Grrblt said:


> He *didn't* have a gun. If you see a stranger sneaking around in your house with a gun, you have my blessing to act first. If you see a stranger standing still in your house, with no weapon, not even trying to be invisible, then he's probably not a sex murderer and you will have time to ask him what the fuck he's doing there.



I didn't say he had a gun.  If you actually READ my post you would see I said "for the sake of argument".  He was saying that you had to actually be actively attacked for it to be self defense, I was saying that that is not really the case.



Grrblt said:


> An unarmed person generally isn't a threat to an armed person. In this case it's pretty obvious the armed person had a much higher threat level.



Depends entirely on the people in question.  A person can be very very dangerous when unarmed.  When its a stranger in your home or a stranger on the street confronting you and posing a potential threat you have to assume the worst or you could end up losing your life.  Thats a basic principle in any self defense class, always assume the other person is better than you and has the edge.



Grrblt said:


> Let's beat the crap out of people who are on drugs or mentally unstable.



I'm sorry you're right.  Lets let the drug addicts and psychopaths just roam free in my house, I won't try to stop them at all or try to protect myself and my home, I'll just let them roam free.

If someone is on drugs or mentally unstable then you can't reason with them because they aren't in a reasonable state of mind.


----------



## vagnard (Sep 18, 2008)

Koi said:


> Because you know so many?
> 
> A lot of rapists are apparently smooth-talkers, dude. Not all of them fit the maniacal, dirty, breaking-and-entering stereotype that TV cop dramas and movies want to push.



Oh yeah... and the boy covering himself.. not attacking at all and escaping to the front door is the very sign of inmediate danger!. lol

You law doesn't even let you use lethal force against even a real intruder unless you perceive inmediate real danger (weapon, the intruder attacking someone, etc). The boy didn't anything to suggest that according to the article. He never pointed a gun against the father or the daughter neither tried to attack him. The father had no proof... he just was pissed off because some guy was fucking his daughter... why we aren't honest here?.  

Do you really believe neither the boyfriend or the daughter had no time to explain themselves if the guy chased the boy until the frontal door making such fuss?.  

But I'm sure you don't understand given you share the mentality of "shoot first.. ask later" of the crazy father. 



Dyonisus said:


> I don't see how this doesn't apply here. A naked guy in your daughter's bedroom. Though I'm no fucking lawyer, especially not where this happened, so I have no clue what the guy is able to do (guess it's not Texas).
> 
> 
> 
> My opinion, based on the article--not my preternatural ability to know exactly what happened, reactions included--is that the father should not be charged with a felony offense.



It doesn't apply here. The father never saw a weapon or a direct intent of attack from the boyfriend. He just assumed the guy was rapist. 

How about assuming the real thing?... How about assuming you have a slutty daughter and an idiot boyfriend?. A horny daughter is way more common than a rapist according to my book. 

No... shoot first... ask later.


----------



## Raikiri? (Sep 18, 2008)

iLurk said:


> What the hell is this?
> 
> I wouldn't have used a metal pipe, I wouldv'e used a butcher knife or a chainsaw.




 rofl, my thoughts exactly


----------



## Talon. (Sep 18, 2008)

i think people are just stupid. a lead pipe is a bad choice. I would have trapped the motherfuckier with my kids blanket then asked him what the hell he was doin in mah house. if his story checks out, i give him a condom so he dont get my kid pregnant


----------



## LittleBlondePunk (Sep 19, 2008)

iLurk said:


> What the hell is this?
> 
> The boy should be in jail and be charged with breaking and entry.
> 
> ...




Its comments like this that keep this thread HILariOUS


----------



## Canute87 (Sep 19, 2008)

Boy was lucky the father didn't kill him.


----------



## Altron (Sep 19, 2008)

boy was still stupid, deciding to do it in the girl's house instead of a hotel room. Maybe that hit to the head will teach him to use a hotel room next time.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 20, 2008)

Altron said:


> boy was still stupid, deciding to do it in the girl's house instead of a hotel room. Maybe that hit to the head will teach him to use a hotel room next time.



I agree. Hotel room FTW.


----------



## Skylark (Sep 20, 2008)

Personally, if I found a naked man in my house that I didn't know. I would have done the same thing. Easy. Especially when the naked person in question is in my(theoretical) daughters bedroom, standing on her bed. Naked.

I think it'll be dismissed, in court, the daughter is not the owner of the home so her invitation to the boy isn't valid and the boys presence can be considered trespassing. Minor or not the father was doing what a father should do and that is protect his child.
Imagine how alarming that would have been...seriously, you see a naked dude hovering over your daughter you are not going to stop and ask "hey, are you having consensual sex with my daughter and how old are you?"


----------



## Red (Sep 20, 2008)

Lots of people are talking through hindsight. If I enter my daughter's room and see a naked man standing over her I wouldn't think "Oh it's just her boy friend" I'd think "Oh shit there is a naked man Ive never seen before in my daughter's room" and get the base ball bat I have but never use.

Legally an assault charge is okay seeing as the boy didn't do anything wrong. the main fault is the daughter for not letting her dad know that she had a boy friend. If the dad knew he probably wouldn't have taken a pipe.


----------



## Creator (Sep 20, 2008)

You call it assualt, i call it the US constitution.


----------



## Xion (Sep 20, 2008)

Reload said:


> Lots of people are talking through hindsight. If I enter my daughter's room and see a naked man standing over her I wouldn't think "Oh it's just her boy friend" I'd think "Oh shit there is a naked man Ive never seen before in my daughter's room" and get the base ball bat I have but never use.
> 
> Legally an assault charge is okay seeing as the boy didn't do anything wrong. the main fault is the daughter for not letting her dad know that she had a boy friend. If the dad knew he probably wouldn't have taken a pipe.



Exactly. Legally he is still liable.

P.S. How are you making out down in Texas? Did you get power back or are you somewhere else?


----------



## Gary (Sep 20, 2008)

Altair_X said:


> i think people are just stupid. a lead pipe is a bad choice. I would have trapped the motherfuckier with my kids blanket then asked him what the hell he was doin in mah house. if his story checks out, i give him a condom so he dont get my kid pregnant



oh I just fucking love the way you think pek


----------



## Sasori-puppet#66 (Sep 20, 2008)

Well, I can't blame him.


----------



## Sexta Espada (Sep 20, 2008)

Kid snuck into the house, and got caught. Epic fail and deserved this, the guy will probably get off though, so no worries about wrongful punishments. Still shouldn't have been charged though....


----------



## Grrblt (Sep 20, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> I didn't say he had a gun.  If you actually READ my post you would see I said "for the sake of argument".  He was saying that you had to actually be actively attacked for it to be self defense, I was saying that that is not really the case.


For it to be self defense, there has to be a threat. An uninvited guy with a gun would be a threat. An uninvited guy on its own is not. 



> Depends entirely on the people in question.  A person can be very very dangerous when unarmed.  When its a stranger in your home or a stranger on the street confronting you and posing a potential threat you have to assume the worst or you could end up losing your life.  Thats a basic principle in any self defense class, always assume the other person is better than you and has the edge.


Another basic principle in any self defense class is: don't attack people who don't pose any threat.



> I'm sorry you're right.  Lets let the drug addicts and psychopaths just roam free in my house, I won't try to stop them at all or try to protect myself and my home, I'll just let them roam free.


Did I say you couldn't kick them out of your house?



> If someone is on drugs or mentally unstable then you can't reason with them because they aren't in a reasonable state of mind.


That is no reason to hit them with a pipe.

And they will usually be able to tell you what they're doing there. Especially since most strangers in your house are either regular burglars or guests of someone else who lives in your house.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 20, 2008)

Grrblt said:


> For it to be self defense, there has to be a threat. An uninvited guy with a gun would be a threat. An uninvited guy on its own is not.
> 
> *thats not the fact you nimrod . The fact is, he COULD have a had a gun on the bad, and in the eyes of the law, reasonable perception such as that alone is enough to clear the charges. I am speaking in how the law would put it, so no matter waht you say, the law thinks differently and the people that throw the law onto the wicked will also think differently than you, therefore if you were this boy's lawyer, you would have lost the case without even arguing for 2 minutes.*
> 
> ...



responses in bold, and damn grrblt, I really didn't think you could spout a post as silly as this .


----------



## Red (Sep 20, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> Exactly. Legally he is still liable.
> 
> P.S. How are you making out down in Texas? Did you get power back or are you somewhere else?


I bunkered down for the storm and nothing happened, some trees fell but there was no damage to my house and it was really really terrifying, at one point I was sure the house would fall so I got dressed so if I die, they won't find me in boxers. 

I met up with my folks in Dallas since there was no electricity in my place for a solid week.


----------



## Gecka (Sep 20, 2008)

Hugo_Pratt said:


> No rapist would be stupid enough to rape a girl in the home she lives in with all her family. That just doesn't make any sense.



Since when were psychopathic rapists sensible?


----------



## -Dargor- (Sep 20, 2008)

Because oferring cookies and tea is the obvious choice when you find a naked trespasser in your daughter's bed.

/facepalm @retards


----------



## Goongasnootch (Sep 20, 2008)

Raiden said:


> Lol wut? Why was the boyfriend standing naked on her bed?
> 
> Seriously, justice better be served in this case, there's no way that the father could have known this was his daughter's boyfriend.
> 
> ...


Well, where I'm from, a girl having sex with her boyfriend doesn't make her a slut.  Generally, she has to be a bit more loose about who she's fucking before that term comes up.


----------



## Sasori-puppet#270 (Sep 20, 2008)

wowow.

my first reaction would have been "RAPIST!!" too, so i don't blame the father. especially since he was never introduced to him, so the last thing i would think is "it's all good cos that must be her secret boyfriend lying naked over there"


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 20, 2008)

Grrblt said:


> For it to be self defense, there has to be a threat. An uninvited guy with a gun would be a threat. An uninvited guy on its own is not.
> 
> Another basic principle in any self defense class is: don't attack people who don't pose any threat.



A stranger wandering your home is a threat.  If to your knowledge they aren't supposed to be there they are a threat.  They are an unwelcomed presence in your HOME.



Grrblt said:


> Did I say you couldn't kick them out of your house?



You do realize that depending what drugs their on they could have enhanced strength and be almost immune to pain right?  What are you going to do?  Yell at them and ask them to leave?

That not even to mention that some drugs will cause your body temperature to rise and many will strip completely naked in an attempt to cool down.

So if I saw a strange nude man in my home I'd assume he was either on drugs or mentally unstable and thus a threat.



Grrblt said:


> That is no reason to hit them with a pipe.
> 
> And they will usually be able to tell you what they're doing there. Especially since most strangers in your house are either regular burglars or guests of someone else who lives in your house.



When your child is in the same room as this person yes it is a reason to hit them with a pipe or a golf club or a baseball bat or whatever else you have lying around.



vagnard said:


> Notice the word "occupant". In no case the law says only the owner can invite people to his home. Therefore it wasn't an intrusion given the daughter is one of the "occupants"



So if a 5 year old girl unlocks the door and invites a burglar in because he's dressed as santa claus thats not an unlawful entry?


----------



## Z.:M:.Z (Sep 21, 2008)

Wow. Either he has no security system, or he is just not "Sith" enough.


----------



## Grrblt (Sep 21, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> responses in bold, and damn grrblt, I really didn't think you could spout a post as silly as this .
> 
> *I don't bother responding to schmucks who can't reply properly. Stop writing inside my quote tags.*


Response in bold.


----------



## Grrblt (Sep 21, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> A stranger wandering your home is a threat.  If to your knowledge they aren't supposed to be there they are a threat.  They are an unwelcomed presence in your HOME.


Unwelcomed presence != threat.



> You do realize that depending what drugs their on they could have enhanced strength and be almost immune to pain right?  What are you going to do?  Yell at them and ask them to leave?


Uh, yeah. If they don't leave and instead try to attack you, _then_ you can hit them with a pipe.



> That not even to mention that some drugs will cause your body temperature to rise and many will strip completely naked in an attempt to cool down.


You know what else causes rises in body temperatures? Nice looking daughters. Commonly found in their rooms.



> So if I saw a strange nude man in my home I'd assume he was either on drugs or mentally unstable and thus a threat.


He isn't "thus a threat". People on drugs aren't threats any more than sober people are. Mentally unstable people aren't threats any more than stable people are.



> When your child is in the same room as this person yes it is a reason to hit them with a pipe or a golf club or a baseball bat or whatever else you have lying around.


You would make the worst dad ever. No exaggeration. If you see a stranger together with your child in your house, your first assumption would be: that's a friend of my child. And that is a reason _not to_ hit them with a bat.



-Dargor- said:


> Because oferring cookies and tea is the obvious choice when you find a naked trespasser in your daughter's bed.
> 
> /facepalm @retards



Has anyone suggested that? No? Retard.


----------



## Lucien Lachance (Sep 21, 2008)

Yeah, I think that's bullshit; I would have done the same.

If I were in the teenager's situation, I'd probably explain what I'm doing here, as long as my life was in danger.


----------



## Vanity (Sep 21, 2008)

Well since the dad didn't know about the boyfriend, I'm not surprised that he thought it was an intruder and hit him....although he really should have asked questions first before hitting.

However, I think it's a bit over the top for him to be charged when he really didn't know and probably thought his daughter was in danger.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Sep 21, 2008)

Grrblt said:


> Unwelcomed presence != threat.



A presence alone is not a threat.  But when no one is supposed to be there and you open the door and find a wandering nude stranger thats reason to believe him a threat.



Grrblt said:


> Uh, yeah. If they don't leave and instead try to attack you, _then_ you can hit them with a pipe.
> 
> You know what else causes rises in body temperatures? Nice looking daughters. Commonly found in their rooms.



"Oh nude man in my daughters room who i've never seen before, and to my knowledge my daughter has no boyfriend, you must be her boyfriend.  Excuse me good sir, are you my daughters boyfriend?"  "Why yes I am" "Oh my mistake, be sure to use a condom".  Yeah that sounds like a realistic reaction to discovering a random nude man in your daughters room when no one is supposed to be there.

What if he had discovered him in the process of climbing through the window.  Is your first assumption "oh this must be the boyfriend I don't know exists" or "oh fuck a burglar"?



Grrblt said:


> He isn't "thus a threat". People on drugs aren't threats any more than sober people are. Mentally unstable people aren't threats any more than stable people are.



Are you serious?  People on drugs and mentally unstable people are any more of a threat then stable people?  Jeffrey Dahmer, Ed Gein, Charles Manson all MENTALLY UNSTABLE people, I would say they all pose much more of a threat then any stable person.

Thats the whole point behind listing someone mentally unstable.

I've done work with the homeless before and some of the people on drugs are most definitely a threat.  Some of them are quite violent too.



Grrblt said:


> You would make the worst dad ever. No exaggeration. If you see a stranger together with your child in your house, your first assumption would be: that's a friend of my child. And that is a reason _not to_ hit them with a bat.



You know I grew up with 5 siblings, and none of the friends my siblings or myself ever had over were discovered for the FIRST TIME nude in the house.  Usually when someone is a friend of a child in the house they are introduced to the family at least ONCE prior to stripping down naked in the home.


----------



## dummy plug (Sep 22, 2008)

isnt that self defense?


----------



## Casyle (Sep 22, 2008)

Doesn't surprise me that the father's the one that got in trouble.  We live in a day and age where homeowners get successfully sued by thieves who broke into their homes and got hurt.  *shrugs*

He probably should have taken a moment to figure out what was going on exactly, though.  Of course, people do that every year and get killed/nearly killed for not reacting first and asking questions later.


----------



## Sanity Check (Sep 22, 2008)

I hate this new age interpretation of law advocating an imaginary standard of living people must adhere to upon finding naked people running around in their house.

But, I guess the dad will be charged with assault.  Then he'll retaliation sue the kid and the kid's family for statutory rape.  The lawyers and court systems will make money.

That's the important thing isn't it?  Money...


----------



## Nodonn (Sep 22, 2008)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> I hate this new age interpretation of law advocating an imaginary standard of living people must adhere to upon finding naked people running around in their house.
> 
> But, I guess the dad will be charged with assault.  Then he'll retaliation sue the kid and the kid's family for statutory rape.  The lawyers and court systems will make money.
> 
> That's the important thing isn't it?  Money...




There isn't any money left, your government took it all to buy banks


----------



## hammer (Sep 22, 2008)

lets put it this waythe daughter wasnt in theroom for all thefather knew he chould be the type to do the nasty with dead bodies

and ifthe fatehr MUSTbe charged a msiterminr at most


----------



## Altron (Sep 22, 2008)

guy was still a dumbass not getting a hotel or doing it somewhere else without their parents. Maybe that bash on the head will give him some brains not to fail so hard again.


----------



## maximilyan (Sep 22, 2008)

Well since he felt the need to lay pipe to his daughter, its only right that the dad lay pipe to the dudes head.


----------



## Gary (Sep 22, 2008)

Why is this thread still going on?


----------



## Han Solo (Sep 22, 2008)

The Dad deserves to be charged. I mean it may have just been a heat of the moment thing, but come on. He could have easily killed that kid.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 22, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> The Dad deserves to be charged. I mean it may have just been a heat of the moment thing, but come on. He could have easily killed that kid.



. and the kid could have easily killed the whole family had he had a gun .


----------



## Xion (Sep 22, 2008)

dummy plug said:


> isnt that self defense?



Yes.

He was defending himself with a metal pipe from a naked, running, scared-shitless kid.


----------



## drache (Sep 22, 2008)

huh, well while i smpthize you can't go around hitting people with a pipe


----------



## hammer (Sep 22, 2008)

ok people are asuming thegirl WAS in the room when in fact she was NOT thereforthe bochould have done ANYTHING to her heatr of the moment is the best defnce and it honestly should ne for himc ausethe daughjter pays no bills and shes udner aged

edit:is it relly neccsary to de rep me because i disagree with you guys i mean relly its not like im flaming here


----------



## kulgan18 (Sep 22, 2008)

vagnard said:


> I don't need to read about the boy's reaction to know it wasn't a rapist reaction. Probably it was the reaction of an scared boy trying to explain himself persued by a maniac along the whole house... self defense?... lol
> 
> You have no right to even shoot a real thief inside your house unless he directly menaces your life. The boy never showed any sign to put the life of the father or the daughter in danger.
> 
> ...



Thank you that was exactly what i was saying before they started with their personal attacks.

And I fail to see how jealousy is any defence at all. 

Oh so the guy cant deal with his daughter being slutty, tough break. You either try better communication with her or just accept it.


----------



## Tasmanian Tiger (Sep 22, 2008)

Kick her out. Cut her out.


Just let the bitch live with that jerk who snuck into dad's house


----------



## Garfield (Sep 22, 2008)

No one touches my daughter!!!

lol, daughter and her boyfriend were really stupid both ways,
1> Apparently they weren't discreet enough
2> They could have let it known they were a couple and avoided this.

THey got no excuse.


----------



## ZigZag (Sep 22, 2008)

Well I guess the boy never should have came in with out the father's knowledge.


----------



## Kenpachi_Uchiha (Sep 22, 2008)

If your in my crib and not supposed to be, hence an intruder, then you best be prepared for a beatdown.


----------



## Altron (Sep 23, 2008)




----------



## Casyle (Sep 23, 2008)

> People on drugs aren't threats any more than sober people are. Mentally unstable people aren't threats any more than stable people are.



I'm still trying to figure out if you're kidding or if you're serious...


Ice can make people incredibly violent.  Oh, oh!  Thank heaven for mom loving Cops!  

Cops HATE seeing suspects on PCP.  Why?  It makes them unpredictable, VIOLENT, and immune to pain.  Someone that'd usually only take a cop to deal with suddenly takes 5 cops to deal with.


Again, though, I'm torn on this.  I can understand his reaction, honestly.  It's not hard for me to see when I try to imagine the situation.  However, ideally, he should have tried to take a moment to figure out what was going on.  Really stupid of that girl not to tell her father she was letting this guy in, or even that she had a boyfriend.


----------



## iiTohsakaxx (Sep 23, 2008)

what the heck?
he shouldn't have been charged because I know I would've done the same thing if I see a stranger _naked_ in my daughter's room (assuming I've got myself a daughter  )

that's just retarded, that he has been charged for doing what most people would have done too, given the same situation.


----------



## Han Solo (Sep 23, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> . and the kid could have easily killed the whole family had he had a gun .



Oh my God. Are you serious? The "intruder" was naked, so it'd be pretty obvious that he was not armed.


----------



## Suigetsu (Sep 23, 2008)

Biolink said:


> Wow, what a slutty ass daughter.
> 
> I would have done the same thing if I was the guy. Tells you how fucked our judicial system is since he is getting charged. That's just fucked up




Thats Not justice thats BS!

I think that it would had been better if the stranger had died than lived.


----------



## Nodonn (Sep 23, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> Oh my God. Are you serious? The "intruder" was naked, so it'd be pretty obvious that he was not armed.



Most people on earth don't have Byakugans, so we can't see the entire body of a naked person to check if he's armed.
We also can't scan the area around the naked guy for weapons.


----------



## Suigetsu (Sep 23, 2008)

I agree, besides he could have been a raper aswell.


----------



## Han Solo (Sep 23, 2008)

"Could have".

But he wasn't. My next door neighbor could be a potential murder. Should I attack him too?

You ask him who the fuck he is first. If he then acts aggressive, then by all means hit the bastard.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 23, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> "Could have".
> 
> But he wasn't. My next door neighbor could be a potential murder. Should I attack him too?


If he is standing in your house naked and you didn't invite him then, yes.



> You ask him who the fuck he is first. If he then acts aggressive, then by all means hit the bastard.


He doesn't have to ask. Entering without the *owner's* consent is an act of aggression.


----------



## Han Solo (Sep 23, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> If he is standing in your house naked and you didn't invite him then, yes.



I really disagree. If he's just, well, there, why would I attack him? I'd tell him to get the fuck out of my house.

He doesn't have to ask. Entering without the *owner's* consent is an act of aggression.[/QUOTE]

It may or may not just be a British thing, but I'm pretty sure over here that if anyone living in the house, owner or no, let's someone in, it's not trespassing. And he was let in. By the daughter.

This whole "act first, ask questions later" can do alot of damage. The boyfriend could have easily died.


----------



## hammer (Sep 23, 2008)

> It may or may not just be a British thing, but I'm pretty sure over here that if anyone living in the house, owner or no, let's someone in, it's not trespassing. And he was let in. By the daughter.
> 
> This whole "act first, ask questions later" can do alot of damage. The boyfriend could have easily died.



its his own damn fault for sneaking in you dont sneak in the girlshouse the girl sneaks in YOR HOUSE we live in dubble stnderd amrica if the fatehr(of theboy saw the girl hed be like haha good job but noooo if its the guy you bash his head and im siding with the dad.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 23, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> I really disagree. If he's just, well, there, why would I attack him? I'd tell him to get the fuck out of my house.


You can disgree all you want, but you have to defend yourself and your  family against people that weren't invited and don't have any business there, especially if you don't have a clue they were in the house without your knowledge or permission, barring they are police and have a warrant.




> It may or may not just be a British thing, but I'm pretty sure over here that if anyone living in the house, owner or no, let's someone in, it's not trespassing. And he was let in. By the daughter.


If she had the right she would have brought him in the front door and not snuck him in the window.



> This whole "act first, ask questions later" can do alot of damage. The boyfriend could have easily died.


It is supposed to do a lot of damage, that is the reasoning behind it. Act like a criminal, get treated like one. Had I been the father he would have died. If you walk in to a running buzzsaw it is your own fault, he did. In the real world and life if you do something stupid, there is always the possibility of death.


----------



## Han Solo (Sep 23, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> You can disgree all you want, but you have to defend yourself and your  family against people that weren't invited and don't have any business there, especially if you don't have a clue they were in the house without your knowledge or permission, barring they are police and have a warrant.



His family? It's not as if his daughter was in the room. Look, if the guy was like carrying a gun or acting aggressive, then yes I'd hit the bastard with a metal pipe. But if I walked into my house and there was guy standing there, naked, and he obviously did not have a weapon on him, and most of all, if there were other people living in my house, then I'd ask him who the fuck he was first. Or just tell him to fuck off. If he doesn't and does an aggressive act, then yes I'd beat the fucker.



Adrianhamm said:


> If she had the right she would have brought him in the front door and not snuck him in the window.



Or perhaps she just did not want her dad to know what she was doing? I mean the dad has the right to kick him out if he doesen't want him there sure, but I'm sure that anyone living in a house can legally let anyone they want in, regardless of whether they are the owner or not.



Adrianhamm said:


> It is supposed to do a lot of damage, that is the reasoning behind it. Act like a criminal, get treated like one. *Had I been the father he would have died.* If you walk in to a running buzzsaw it is your own fault, he did. In the real world and life if you do something stupid, there is always the possibility of death.



Have a fun time getting done for murder then.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 23, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> "Could have".
> 
> But he wasn't. My next door neighbor could be a potential murder. Should I attack him too?
> 
> You ask him who the fuck he is first. If he then acts aggressive, then by all means hit the bastard.



that's where your wrong. "could have" is much much much more important than "but he wasn't", had he had a gun on the bed, they could have all died. In the court of law, if someone is thought to have a gun and appear dangerous, it is within your rights to detain them, especially if they are naked in your own house and property, in your daughter's room, naked.


----------



## Han Solo (Sep 23, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> that's where your wrong. "could have" is much much much more important than "but he wasn't", had he had a gun on the bed, they could have all died. In the court of law, if someone is thought to have a gun and appear dangerous, it is within your rights to detain them, especially if they are naked in your own house and property, in your daughter's room, naked.



But once again, it must have been pretty obvious that the guy did not have a gun. I mean, he ran after him. Ran him out of the house. I'm pretty sure that I could see if a naked guy has a gun or not.

And like I already said, if he _did_ have a weapon, then I'd support the father hitting him with a metal pole.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 23, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> But once again, it must have been pretty obvious that the guy did not have a gun. I mean, he ran after him. Ran him out of the house. I'm pretty sure that I could see if a naked guy has a gun or not.
> 
> And like I already said, if he _did_ have a weapon, then I'd support the father hitting him with a metal pole.



When someone is in your house, naked, in your daughter's room, first reaction of a responsible parent is to beat the shit out of this guy, who could be a burglar, rapist, p*d*p****, or even all 3. Better to incapacitate this person than risk getting shot. We live in a world where for example, the two young adults from Columbine were able to get guns and shoot up the place. Its not unlikely an intruder in your house has a gun, regardless if he is naked or not. And its still very possible that if the father didn't chase him out of the house, the person could have grabbed some kind of blunt object and struck back the father and such. I am assuming you are not even an adult yet Han Solo, so you do not know what its like.


----------



## Han Solo (Sep 23, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> When someone is in your house, naked, in your daughter's room, first reaction of a responsible parent is to beat the shit out of this guy, who could be a burglar, rapist, p*d*p****, or even all 3. Better to incapacitate this person than risk getting shot. We live in a world where for example, the two young adults from Columbine were able to get guns and shoot up the place. Its not unlikely an intruder in your house has a gun, regardless if he is naked or not. And its still very possible that if the father didn't chase him out of the house, the person could have grabbed some kind of blunt object and struck back the father and such. *I am assuming you are not even an adult yet Han Solo, so you do not know what its like.*



I'm 19 and I live in an apartment with friends, if you want to know.

And I'll just agree to disagree with you here.

Maybe it's just a difference in culture. (I assume your not British)

And as for not knowing what it's like, I've been burgled by people trying to steal drugs (i.e. fucking nutters) twice when I lived at home. My brother used to be a dealer. I had a knife stuck to my throat.


----------



## hammer (Sep 23, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> I'm 19 and I live in an apartment with friends, if you want to know.
> 
> And I'll just agree to disagree with you here.
> 
> ...



honestly honsolothe reason why id o the same thing is because if hes danerus youd be dead before you fnish your sentense so i would jsut beat his brains out and like you said it probly is cutlerl diffrnce between us.


----------



## Esponer (Sep 23, 2008)

Damn right he was charged with assault; he just brutally attacked someone. I don't see what the big deal here is.


----------



## Narush (Sep 23, 2008)

all 3 are to blame.the daughter cause she didn't say anything, the guy too for not telling he was there(could have said he was a friend or something just to say he was someone familiar) and the dad into hitting the guy,even though it was to protect.


----------



## hammer (Sep 23, 2008)

Esponer said:


> Damn right he was charged with assault; he just brutally attacked someone. I don't see what the big deal here is.



the big deal is  this 15 year old boy was in this mans house


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 23, 2008)

Esponer said:


> Damn right he was charged with assault; he just brutally attacked someone. I don't see what the big deal here is.



it looks like someone forgot to read the article .


----------



## Esponer (Sep 23, 2008)

hammer said:


> the big deal is  this 15 year old boy was in this mans house


And then the man assaulted him. No, not seeing the issue here.


----------



## hammer (Sep 23, 2008)

Esponer said:


> And then the man assaulted him. No, not seeing the issue here.



well whouldnt you it a person in yuor house if you never EVER met them and he had NO explenation to as why he was there and his daughter was not present


----------



## Esponer (Sep 23, 2008)

hammer said:


> well whouldnt you it a person in yuor house if you never EVER met them and he had NO explenation to as why he was there and his daughter was not present


Actually, that happened.

I told him to get the fuck out of my house and he got the fuck out of my house.


----------



## hammer (Sep 23, 2008)

Esponer said:


> Actually, that happened.
> 
> I told him to get the fuck out of my house and he got the fuck out of my house.



well you were lucky not evryone is so lucky like when they mentioned earlyer about the rape instense of the father who saved his daughter of bein raped and got charged in some cases action must be taken.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 23, 2008)

Esponer said:


> Actually, that happened.
> 
> I told him to get the fuck out of my house and he got the fuck out of my house.




A. Esponer, is that actually you? Cause seriously dude, does NOT sound like you.

B. This is AMERICA! you know, the place where kids can get guns and shoot up schools ( columbine) ? 

C. Its reasonable to defend your home from a naked person in your daughter's bedroom, so unless your a parent, anyone supporting the charge has no true valid opinion .


----------



## Esponer (Sep 23, 2008)

hammer said:


> well you were lucky not evryone is so lucky like when they mentioned earlyer about the rape instense of the father who saved his daughter of bein raped and got charged in some cases action must be taken.


Yeah, you know what else? I walked right past this man going into the supermarket earlier today. I was lucky I wasn't attacked and raped by him ? if I'd had some common, American sense I would've hit him with a metal pipe until he had to go to hospital.

The 45-year old walked into the room, and saw the teenager standing naked. He was not in the process of raping anyone. Without the metal pipe, the father would've been completely in control. The teenager was naked and I don't think anyone would imagine he was carrying a pistol up his anus.

Attacking the child was nothing other than assault. It certainly wasn't self-defence.



Shoddragon said:


> A. Esponer, is that actually you? Cause seriously dude, does NOT sound like you.


Well, I wasn't very happy with some random guy being in my house at half four in the morning.



Shoddragon said:


> B. This is AMERICA! you know, the place where kids can get guns and shoot up schools ( columbine) ?


The boy was "standing naked on the girl's bed". It takes less than a second to judge whether someone's a threat, and the boy will not have been acting aggressively ? especially not after seeing that the man had a metal pipe in his hand.

There's no excuse, none at all, for attacking someone who was not behaving aggressively at all. Even more so when it's a naked child. 



Shoddragon said:


> C. Its reasonable to defend your home from a naked person in your daughter's bedroom, so unless your a parent, anyone supporting the charge has no true valid opinion .


I'd like to respond to this very well justified reasoning with an equally well justified response:
_No, it's not reasonable at all._​


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 23, 2008)

no offense esponer, but if more people thought the way you do, most of the people in jail would be innocent , and the guilty would be running free.


----------



## Esponer (Sep 23, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> no offense esponer, but if more people thought the way you do, most of the people in jail would be innocent , and the guilty would be running free.


Yeah, that's _exactly_ what the difference between the UK and the US is. It's _totally_ not? practically the other way around.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 23, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> His family? It's not as if his daughter was in the room. Look, if the guy was like carrying a gun or acting aggressive, then yes I'd hit the bastard with a metal pipe. But if I walked into my house and there was guy standing there, naked, and he obviously did not have a weapon on him, and most of all, if there were other people living in my house, then I'd ask him who the fuck he was first. Or just tell him to fuck off. If he doesn't and does an aggressive act, then yes I'd beat the fucker.


His daughter would technically be his family. It's is the room he provided for her in his home. It doesn't matter if he was carrying a gun or acting overtly aggressive, he was in the man's home. It's not like there aren't cases of people being raped in one room while others were in an abode and others in the same abode didn't hear it. In fact it happens more than you would think, hell it can happen in the street. 





> Or perhaps she just did not want her dad to know what she was doing? I mean the dad has the right to kick him out if he doesen't want him there sure, but I'm sure that anyone living in a house can legally let anyone they want in, regardless of whether they are the owner or not.


Then the ass-kicking is his own fault. Not necessarily and not without the consent and knowledge of the owner.





> Have a fun time getting done for murder then.


I live in states, with the exception of DC, where I can get away with it and the cops wouldn't bat an eye. I might even get away with it in DC.


----------



## Nae'blis (Sep 23, 2008)

it's not an intruder but a guy trying to get some tail. Dad should understand.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 23, 2008)

Nae'blis said:


> it's not an intruder but a guy trying to get some tail. Dad should understand.



Then they should have rented a hotel room or went to neutral ground.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Sep 23, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> Then they should have rented a hotel room or went to neutral ground.



Neutral ground?Switzerland?


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 23, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> Then they should have rented a hotel room or went to *neutral ground.*


like a public restroom, the park, or the beach


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 23, 2008)

Esponer said:


> Yeah, that's _exactly_ what the difference between the UK and the US is. It's _totally_ not? practically the other way around.



what I'm trying to say is that if everyone trying to protect their family should be charged with assault as you believe, then we would have a lot of good people in jail and criminals free. Because that is what you just said .


----------



## Altron (Sep 23, 2008)

sex in public places? Bad idea 

Mother killed disabled daughter then drove around for 8 hours found guilty


----------



## Esponer (Sep 23, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> what I'm trying to say is that if everyone trying to protect their family should be charged with assault as you believe, then we would have a lot of good people in jail and criminals free. Because that is what you just said .


The guy wasn't protecting his family. He was taking out his aggression on some child.


----------



## Nae'blis (Sep 23, 2008)

Esponer said:


> The guy wasn't protecting his family. He was taking out his aggression on some child.



exactly.

Well maybe he was protecting her honour, but she probably lost that years before this incident.


----------



## callinginsane (Sep 24, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> like a public restroom, the park, or the beach



That'll be too public.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 24, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> like a public restroom, the park, or the beach


There is some excitement to that.


Diceman said:


> Neutral ground?Switzerland?


Sure


Altron said:


> sex in public places? Bad idea
> 
> CLITON 200


Don't knock it until you have tried it.



-Dream said:


> That'll be too public.



Only if they get caught, but it is better than a pipe to the head for being some place he shouldn't have at a time he shouldn't have been there.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Sep 24, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> Only if they get caught, but it is better than a pipe to the head for being some place he shouldn't have at a time he shouldn't have been there.


Yes,getting arrested for indecent exposure is better than getting a pipe to your head


----------



## GuyverFan (Sep 24, 2008)

> September 23, 2008
> 
> Dad who hit daughter's boyfriend won't be prosecuted
> By KARI COBHAM
> ...



read this

I wasn't sure if this was posted or not, I'll delete it if it was. But I'm glad he didn't get charged for defending his family.


----------



## LittleBlondePunk (Sep 24, 2008)

Saiji said:


> read this
> 
> I wasn't sure if this was posted or not, I'll delete it if it was. But I'm glad he didn't get charged for defending his family.



If you dont mind im gonna add it to the first post so people can read it further in depth.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 24, 2008)

The State's attorney made the right decision, they wouldn't have gotten a conviction anyway.



> Yes,getting arrested for indecent exposure is better than getting a pipe to your head


A nod and a wink is better a pipe to the dome any day.


----------



## Legend (Sep 24, 2008)

im glad i wasn't that kid


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 24, 2008)

THE LEGEND OF Q said:


> im glad i wasn't that kid



How much do you want to bet he won't sneak in that girl's window anytime soon?


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 24, 2008)

as I told people in favor of the child, the law wouldn't see it their way, and low and behold it didn't go their way .


----------



## Psycho (Sep 24, 2008)

seriously, i blame the daughter, she's dumb enough to hide her boyfriend from her dad for over an year and have him sneak in to her house constantly, seriously, he's lucky he got of with just a head wound, most people would've shot him down


----------



## orochimarusama21 (Sep 25, 2008)

Saiji said:


> I wasn't sure if this was posted or not, I'll delete it if it was. But I'm glad he didn't get charged for defending his family.



ahhhhh Justice is served just like I was saying and many other people. The father was not charged because he didn't know who the guy was and he was protecting his daughter.

plus if you sneak into your gf's house you better be ready to get attacked if she lives with her parents.


----------



## Jessica (Sep 25, 2008)

15 year old boy sneaking into your house for more than a year and, well, obviously having sex with your daughter..

If that was me, I'd smack him even if they both told me what was going on! And then I'd smack my daughter too!


----------



## Esponer (Sep 25, 2008)

Jessica said:


> 15 year old boy sneaking into your house for more than a year and, well, obviously having sex with your daughter..
> 
> If that was me, I'd smack him even if they both told me what was going on! And then I'd smack my daughter too!


Someone needs to lock you up.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 25, 2008)

most serious boys know that sneaking into a GF's hosue is dangerous bizness lolz. I know that, my cousin ( aka The Pimp) knows that, and again, I know that. Especially since my last girlfriend was dominican, and her father likes baseball . Guess what would happen if he found me sexin his daughter without him knowing  ?


----------



## hustler's ambition (Sep 26, 2008)

Well I know everyone who supported the "Let's serve the intruder tea and cookies" theory are shitting bricks right now! 

Hooray for intruder violence!


----------



## O-Ren (Sep 26, 2008)

Love how everyone blames the poor kid. It's the dad's fault for over-reacting. And a Pipe wth?


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 26, 2008)

O-Ren said:


> Love how everyone blames the poor kid. It's the dad's fault for over-reacting. And a Pipe wth?



yes, blame the 15 year old "kid" who was sneaking into the house for over a year and having sex with the man's daughter . gtfo, or at least READ the article.


----------



## Nae'blis (Sep 26, 2008)

I'd probably grab him by the shirt and stuff.


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 26, 2008)

Nae'blis said:


> I'd probably grab him by the shirt and stuff.



try that to someone about 6 meters away whilst you have the risk of him having a gun on the bed . Chances are, he would get to the gun and shoot you before you could grab him. Better to be safe than sorry.


----------



## hammer (Sep 26, 2008)

Nae'blis said:


> I'd probably grab him by the shirt and stuff.



to bad mr dumbass was but naked XD(honestly why the hell would he go to  have sex in his gfs house when her parents are home getting hits his own falt)

and if some one is fully dressed in my house randomly i dont know he chould have a gun and this is COMPLETLY diffrnt then my neiber senario sense my neibers on his own property.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 26, 2008)

Perhaps this thread should be moved to the debate section?


----------



## Adrianhamm (Sep 26, 2008)

Nae'blis said:


> I'd probably grab him by the shirt and stuff.


You are going to grab a naked man by his shirt?


----------



## Shoddragon (Sep 26, 2008)

Adrianhamm said:


> You are going to grab a naked man by his shirt?



obviously many people decided to NOT read the article.


----------



## zornedge (Sep 26, 2008)

Shoddragon said:


> obviously many people decided to NOT read the article.



Or it could be just really, really, really flabby skin.


----------



## hammer (Sep 26, 2008)

zornedge said:


> Or it could be just really, really, really flabby skin.




ha then that girl has BAAAAD taste in men then XD


----------



## Xion (Sep 26, 2008)

zornedge said:


> Perhaps this thread should be moved to the debate section?



Then every political and economic thread would have to be moved as well.


----------



## Banhammer (Sep 27, 2008)

People assault my swiss army knife with their abdomen all the time


----------



## -Dargor- (Sep 27, 2008)

Can't believe this thread hit 340+ posts


----------



## Juice (Sep 27, 2008)

Idiot kid. :face Was going to get caught sooner or later.


----------



## Alex Louis Armstrong (Sep 30, 2008)

Tex said:


> can rednecks even use a computer




yes i can use a computer fine 


you sneak you pay plain and simple.

the rape thing could be even broader maybe dad and mom were next 



based on the info the dad had he was well within his right but that being said even if he knew who he was i still see nothing wrong with how he acted its also funny the boy automatically started running probably made it worse lol.


----------



## Joe Cool (Sep 30, 2008)

Nesha said:


> I think a lot of people who support this guy are speaking from exprerience...both males and females.
> 
> Damnit, I'm a woman and I would've done the same thing if I saw a naked guy in my daughter's bedroom. He had no business being there regardless if the daughter let him in the house. There's a reason why she *snuck* him in...so her parents wouldn't know about it.
> 
> ...



Same. If i walked in on my daughter if i become a father and shes getting boned i'm railing them across the face with a baseball bat, or my fist and then do a few kicks to the balls for good measures to make sure he won't ever be able to get her preggers if her slut ass isn't already. Hoping if i have  daugther she has enough sense and respect not to be the slut of the school.

I just know these kids weren't using protection. Probably reason why the dad used hit the kid so hard with the pipe. *"NO CONDOMS?!? WAT DA FUCK IS DIS SHIT?!"* 

You guys saying you wouldn't level some stranger standing over your daughter naked are either into double teaming wincest or don't mind giving the world more sluts to fuck.


----------



## Esponer (Sep 30, 2008)

Joe Cool said:


> You guys saying you wouldn't level some stranger standing over your daughter naked are either into double teaming wincest or don't mind giving the world more sluts to fuck.


Or have a well developed sense of morality. Unlike an awful lot of people, including in this thread and in the US (and other) justice system(s).



			
				Nesha said:
			
		

> Sorry, but unless that girl is paying bills, rent, or whatever, she has absolutely *no say so* about who's allowed in the house and at what time.


I'm interested: could you source that statement? I'm fairly sure it's not true in the UK but I don't know if you live here, and if not I've obviously no idea of the laws in your country.


----------



## Carly (Sep 30, 2008)

Esponer said:


> Or have a well developed sense of morality. Unlike an awful lot of people, including in this thread and in the US (and other) justice system(s).
> 
> 
> I'm interested: could you source that statement? I'm fairly sure it's not true in the UK but I don't know if you live here, and if not I've obviously no idea of the laws in your country.



Well leveled sense of morality = not attacking a strange naked man standing over your teenage daughter in the night.


----------



## mister_manji (Oct 1, 2008)

Jio said:


> He wasn't breaking an entry he had permission to be inside the house by someone who lives there. He was let in the house.


but not by the owner of the house. By his daughter, without his knowledge.


----------



## Han Solo (Oct 1, 2008)

mister_manji said:


> but not by the owner of the house. By his daughter, without his knowledge.



Within UK laws at least, it's legal.

If you are invited in by an registered person living there, you can let who the fuck you want. True, the owner has the final say and can kick out anyone he wants, but a registered person living there can let who they want in.

But that's UK law, I don't know the American laws.



Carly said:


> Well leveled sense of morality = not attacking a strange naked man standing over your teenage daughter in the night.



Way to fail at reading comprehension.

The daughter _was not in the room._

And your twisting this article as you see fit. All we know is that the father found him standing the room. How the hell did you go from that to "looming over"


----------



## Esponer (Oct 1, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> Within UK laws at least, it's legal.
> 
> If you are invited in by an registered person living there, you can let who the fuck you want. True, the owner has the final say and can kick out anyone he wants, but a registered person living there can let who they want in.
> 
> But that's UK law, I don't know the American laws.


Yeah, I was going to say the same. I did some looking into those laws when my ex-girlfriend was not quite moving out when I wanted her to. I was looking into the laws of whether I could kick her out and I'm sure I also read what you're describing.


----------



## -Dargor- (Oct 1, 2008)

Unless you legally own the house you have no say.

Stupid kids these days think they can do anything, start by paying the bills and clean your room before you think we owe you anything.

Dad was right, period.


----------



## korican04 (Oct 1, 2008)

Han Solo said:


> Within UK laws at least, it's legal.
> 
> If you are invited in by an registered person living there, you can let who the fuck you want. True, the owner has the final say and can kick out anyone he wants, but a registered person living there can let who they want in.
> 
> But that's UK law, I don't know the American laws.


In the US, trespassing laws vary from state to state and even from city to city. In most laws though they state that you are trespassing if you don't have the consent of the owner, owner's agent or person in legal possesion (such as owning the lease of an apartment). 

In this case the boyfriend didn't have consent and probably knew he didn't have the consent of the house owner, so that would probably fall under trespassing. 

I don't know the laws for this particular state as to how to deal with trespassers. This is the part that varies from state to state, in texas the owner is allow to use any force on intruders.

The boy can probably be charged with trespassing and indescent exposure if he charged the father with assault. The father won the case regardless so it doesn't really matter.


----------



## Adrianhamm (Oct 1, 2008)

-Dargor- said:


> Unless you legally own the house you have no say.
> 
> Stupid kids these days think they can do anything, start by paying the bills and clean your room before you think we owe you anything.
> 
> Dad was right, period.



If I had the rep to give I would give it, because you hit the nail on the head.


----------



## hammer (Oct 1, 2008)

the problem here is the people from the uk arnt wrongper say there jsut seeing it threw there alws were as are laws are diffrent.


----------



## mister_manji (Oct 3, 2008)

hammer said:


> the problem here is the people from the uk arnt wrongper say there jsut seeing it threw there alws were as are laws are diffrent.


UK laws that state one must run away create only a nation of victims. You have tricked yourself into thinking that you are morally "balanced" as you suppress one of the few strong, natural urges that has kept this species alive: the urge to protect ones offspring. This is why you folks are controlled by the Police, and the knife-wielding chavs they fail to arrest every day.

also, before you typecast me as "typical american idiot, a cowboy who shoots from the hip" realize that i dont think violence is the answer to most of our problems, only that one must prepare for the worst in order to survive till the best of times. _Thats_ balanced morals

tl;drK:nation of victims, enjoy your police-state.


----------



## Esponer (Oct 3, 2008)

mister_manji said:


> UK laws that state one must run away create only a nation of victims. You have tricked yourself into thinking that you are morally "balanced" as you suppress one of the few strong, natural urges that has kept this species alive: the urge to protect ones offspring. This is why you folks are controlled by the Police, and the knife-wielding chavs they fail to arrest every day.
> 
> also, before you typecast me as "typical american idiot, a cowboy who shoots from the hip" realize that i dont think violence is the answer to most of our problems, only that one must prepare for the worst in order to survive till the best of times. _Thats_ balanced morals
> 
> tl;drK:nation of victims, enjoy your police-state.


No. That father was nor protecting himself, he was taking out his aggression on a child who was naked and probably quite obviously defenceless. The child will have been reacting inbetween being seen and hit with the pipe, and not aggressively. The father will have had plenty of opportunity _not_ to attack the child, but he decided otherwise.

It should be obvious from this story that the father hit the child because he was irate that this child had been having sex with his daughter. He wasn't protecting his house. He wasn't protecting himself, or his daughter, from being shot by a naked child on his daughter's bed who clearly didn't have a weapon and whose immediate reaction wouldn't have been aggressive.

Everyone, please stop lying to yourselves. You _know_ that the father did this because he was angry with the child for having sex with his daughter, so please stop pretending otherwise.

mister_manji, what you're rambling on about is pure nonsense. UK police state? Law that we must run away from any threat? Controlled by the police? And pardon me for suppressing my "strong, natural" urge to beat defenceless children with metal pipes because they sully the virginity of someone in my family.

Do you think that Britons are not allowed to defend their property? Please, don't try to go on a tirade about UK law if you don't know anything.

I'm not going to debate the finer points of carrying a defensive weapon, and won't be dragged into a debate about whether the UK or US gets that part right. But both the UK and US recognise the concept of 'reasonable force', and the difference where I think the UK clearly comes out on top is that the UK is less biased about evaluating this. So very often, US law is very biased towards accepting unreasonable force.


----------



## Banhammer (Oct 3, 2008)

You know, when I was a teenager, passing out naked after a night encounter with a club was a good thing


----------



## mister_manji (Oct 3, 2008)

Esponer said:


> No. That father was nor protecting himself, he was taking out his aggression on a child who was naked and probably quite obviously defenceless. The child will have been reacting inbetween being seen and hit with the pipe, and not aggressively. The father will have had plenty of opportunity _not_ to attack the child, but he decided otherwise.
> 
> It should be obvious from this story that the father hit the child because he was irate that this child had been having sex with his daughter. He wasn't protecting his house. He wasn't protecting himself, or his daughter, from being shot by a naked child on his daughter's bed who clearly didn't have a weapon and whose immediate reaction wouldn't have been aggressive.
> 
> ...



You think not being biased in the favor of the homeowner is a good thing? Then mister, we have such fundamental differences in our thought processess, that I don't even intend to answer your objections to my post, which, I might add, I made when drunk.


----------

