This story is generating much buzz here. There are many additional related stories through the link with updates and so forth. In summary, a few boys were ringing neighbors' doorbells at ten o'clock at night and running away. One neighbor wasn't amused and shot at the boys with a shotgun, spraying one twelve-year-old with dozens and dozens of pellets in the neck, face, arm, and back. He's recovering in the hospital. Thoughts?
I am not saying the kid deserved to be shot, but this article is making him out to be an inspiring hero, which I don't really think is right either.
I didn't know what gave you that impression so I had to read through the article again. Actually, I had only scanned it the first time because I've seen so much coverage on the television. Is it this line? "He is described as a kind, athletic boy with many friends, Jacob’s bravery gives strength to his family during this difficult time." Yeah, that seems a little...much. Totally agree.
From just that one article, I clearly think the man is in the wrong. But I wonder if there is more to it than what we read. LIke--have the kids caused him trouble before, had he talked with their parents, has he been robbed before, is he mentally stable, etc. None of those make it right to shoot a child, but I just wonder what details are missing.
I think that both the children playing ding-dong ditch and the man who shot them were wrong. Obviously, the man took it to an unnecessary level and I deem his action 'more' wrong (to simply say) based on the sole information provided. I agree with Silver that the article makes him seem inspirational which I think is a grossly inacurate portrayal. I agree with Go 4th that there really isn't enough information provided.
When stupid people do stupid things it doesn't have a happy ending. I have very little sympathy for anyone who feels that is it okay or fun to harass another person in their home. We are dealing with a neighbor now who is bent on making life miserable for us across the street and the people on the either side of his house. There are very few (if any) laws that can be applied in the county where we live for what they are actually doing. Sometimes the laws can't help the good guys, so I understand how he could have been just fed up.
I agree w/ LUCHopefulTeach. It reminds me of a story on the news a few yrs ago. I think it happened in my state where a man shot & actually killed a teen boy for stealing his Halloween decorations on his property. Just sad all around. These teen punks need a good lesson, but of course shooting's going way too far.
I don't think there is a whole lot to the story. It has been said the boys had done this once before.
Hmm. . .12 yr old boys ringing someone's doorbell & running away at 10p.m. at night? Where were the parents? Why were these kids allowed to be out & about at that time of night? Neither party is in the right here.
My mother was shot in the tush by a pellet gun last week. The little "darlings" that did it were aiming at my daughter's dog. Before they shot my mother (leaving a two inch bruise and going through her jeans), they shot out my mother's french door and shot the dog. Their prank hurt an innocent animal and a grandmother. If my teenage son had been there, I am not sure that he wouldn't have shot back. I don't agree with him, but he was very upset. The police took the "crime" very serious and are pressing charges. They wouldn't allow my mother to handle it on her own--all she wanted was the kids' parents (two boys) to pay for the window.
That was my question too-I mean that's a middle schooler-late to be running around unchaperoned. Here in Texas I'm not even sure he would have been arrested for shooting the kid. We have cases all the time of people shooting at people breaking in to their houses. If it was dark, he may not have even known it was a kid. It's really stupid to be playing pranks like that on people in this day and age.
These young boys made the choice to go around bugging their neighbors and now they are paying the (albeit steep) consequences. My guess is they won't be playing ding dong ditch anymore.
1. Kids play doorbell ditch. It's what kids do. I played it when I was a kid - maybe not at 10:00, I don't really remember. We weren't delinquents, punks, or destined for prison. We just had 11 year old senses of humor. 2. Anyone who fires shotgun at a child running away from them needs to do hard time.
Sarge, I agree with you. I wouldn't want my child doing this, but...it seems relatively mild to me. I don't mean to say it's okay or appropriate, but the consequence is for certain extreme. And by relatively mild, oh the things my brothers did. By comparison, this twelve-year-old forgot a step involving dog poo and a lighter. I have no reason to believe, based on all the footage I've seen, that the man thought the boy was an intruder, or was confused, or anything along those lines. He was annoyed at a kid for ringing his door bell, and rightfully so, and he chose to respond by shooting him.
I do not condone the shooting of children! But today kids think they are bullet proof (pellet proof) "I can do this, I am a kid, they can't do anything" well kids do not take in account some people have a lower tolerance of behavior. You never know where a person's mind is. I do think attempted murder is the highest charge that they could charge him with, it will be bargained down I bet, depending on the distance of the shot and the choke, a shot gun is not lethal after a certain distance. My grandfather was shot with rock salt onetime when he was "borrowing" some watermelons as a kid, it gave him a lasting impression. I do wonder what ramifications the parent(s) will have? If the kids are charged with trespassing, the parents with child neglect, and the shooter with assault with a deadly weapon I think justice will be served. Just because you get shot while doing something stupid does not mean you get a free pass.
Letting your 12 year old be out at 10pm might be stupid this day and age, but it's not neglectful. In my neighborhood I see lots of kids coming and going from their friends houses at that hour. Trespassing for ringing a doorbell? Attempted murder maybe not. For that you need to prove he actually wanted to kill them. Had one of the boys died, he probably would have gotten manslaughter. Assault with a deadly weapon with intent to do bodily harm is the most likely conviction. But I do think the guy needs to do some real time for what he did.
At 10:00 PM it is Trespassing... if not it is malicious mischief or disturbing the peace... We can agree that the kids were at least disturbing the peace right?
The man is an idiot. You don't load a weapon without intending to shoot it, and he did. Whether he meant to shoot a kid or not doesn't matter. Any gun owner will tell you that basic piece of information about owning and operating a gun. BUT, just goes to show you how an innocent prank can get out of hand, really fast. BTW, when I was in high school, I was shot at along with a group of my friends. It was Halloween, we were guilty as sin, running around town like hoodlums. A lady got in her van, chased us down the street, and fired 4 shots from a .357. Yes, that's what I said. One hit my friend in the hand, midstride as he was running. It entered his hand between 2 fingers, and exited out the base of his palm. How it didn't continue into his kidney is beyond me. We shouldn't have been there. She shouldn't have shot at us. Who is more guilty? Oh, and another btw, she was charged with assault, and got 7 months in prison (I think-it's been 15 years, I can't really remember). When she got out, she hung a sign in her yard that said "I don't call 9-1-1, I call .357" I am not kidding. It was still there a few years ago when she finally moved.
I looked up LOUISVILLE, KY. curfew law and curfew does not start till 11:00 pm weekdays I still think it is neglect... All I know My kids were not out at 10:00 any night without adult supervision. I think it is a lack of respect to the community for the parents to allow their kids to roam the streets at night. http://agendas.louisvilleky.gov/SIREPub/cache/2/m3whkynum4koui55szxdx2uz/2650006172011015116562.PDF
Let us use a hypothetical If when the kids were "playing" ding-dong ditch, they ring a little old lady's doorbell. 10:00 can be a serious time for someone to knock on your door. While coming to the door she falls down the stairs and breaks her hip. Complications ensue and the little old lady dies. What are the kids' responsibilities? Back in my home town some kids removed the front steps as an 'innocent' prank and the little old lady who lived there fell trying to get down from her front porch she was hospitalized for 3 weeks but the kids were never found (there were rumors as to who it was)
Ding Dong Ditch is relatively harmless. The only problem is that, if they get away with that, it will soon become boring and the group will have to find a prank that is a little more "exciting"...increasing the chance for property damage or injury to the victim. The longer they get away with pranks, the bolder they will become and the more their pranks will escalate. I don't agree with shooting the kids with buckshot, but a backside full of rock salt would probably convince the entire group it is better to just stay home at 10pm instead of dreaming up ways to irritate their neighbors. I'm sorry the boy was injured and put in the hospital, but in today's society, you never know how someone else is going to react. I think all parties are in the wrong here and I agree with the charges IrishDave listed, including child neglect on the parents.
It would depend on the towns curfew. When I grew up, the curfew for peoples under 18 was 10pm. If a child was out past 10pm they would receive a fine. I could see the court pursuing neglect if this occurred multiple times.
Once again, the kids and their parents are guilty of nothing more than being foolish. The man is guilty of a serious, violent crime.
That's entirely not true. A more likely scenario is they get bored with the prank and go home and play video games.
I'm really amazed some of you want to charge the parents when you have no idea what their involvement was. There is nothing at all in the story to indicate what they did or didn't do. Just because something bad happens does not mean there is automatically a case for neglect.* I don't know how much damage rock salt does, but frankly that still sounds like assault to me. Aggravated assault in most jurisdictions. The shooting that did occur is pretty clearly indefensible unless they were doing more than just ringing the doorbell and running. Attempted murder does seem like the best charge, though manslaughter is another possibility if he meant to just wave the gun around. I'm guessing if the child dies, one of these charges sticks. If the child lives, it probably gets plead down to something lesser, but he still gets jail time. Unless he's either really popular/rich or detested/poor, in which case things might be stretched either way. Charging for trespass is a possibility, even for just ringing a doorbell and running. I don't think it's typically done with 12-year olds, though. * in fact, where the law states a standard curfew, if that is obeyed it will likely be even more difficult to pursue a case for neglect. Yup.
Is the UPS man guilty of the same crime if he rings the wrong doorbell while she's napping? The kids were wrong. They should have been supervised. They should not have been out annoying the neighbors. But none of those are capital offenses. They didn't intend to do anyone harm. They didn't intend to do harm to his property, or to threaten him or anything or anyone he holds near. And they did no harm. He could have called the police. They would have gotten the kids off the streets and taken care of the issue. He chose to shoot children instead. Yeah, he's my hero.
To me, it looks like the kids are guilty of trespassing (definitely) and disturbing the peace. Like I said earlier, I think all parties are wrong and I think the man who shot the kids should receive a consequence by local law enforcement. The kids are trespassing and should receive some (much smaller) consequence. Now, am argument could be made that the parents were neglectful. The children were out late, unsupervised. The parents probably didn't know where they were. The child would not have gotten shot if the parents didn't allow their child out this late and its even worse if they didn't know their child was out. I know that's not a real strong argument however, its still somewhat of an argument on neglect.
I think attempted murder is too steep. I do think the kids should be up for something to. What a sad thing. I mean we never played ding dong ditch...but I don't think I would choose all my neighbors... may be the ones I knew that would be "safe" and people that I knew. More people are willing to protect what is theirs & if they feel threatened in any way they will protect it. C'mon 10pm is the time to be playing this game?!?! I would be really ticked as a person who had to go to work or had lil ones sleeping!!!
What makes you think the kids were "allowed" to be out that late. I did all kinds of stuff I wasn't allowed to do when I was a 12. For all we know, had the they arrived home unhurt, they would have faced serious groundation for getting home late. Also keep in mind that it's the first week or two of summer vacation. If there was a time that a middle school boy would shed what little common sense he had developed by the age of 12, this would be it. The bottom line is that kids do stupid things - that's why we call them kids and not "junior people."
Couple thoughts... It wasn't rock salt, it was birdshot. Dozens and dozens. In his jaw, neck, arm, back. The boy is still in intensive care after having surgery to remove some near his colon and has chest tubes in both lungs according to the latest story. The shooter is now saying the gun accidently fired. Yeah, not buying it. Possible, but still not buying it. I don't think 9:45 or 10:00 is too late to be outing playing when you're twelve. It appears to be a very nice neighborhood, and maybe because I lived in the country, but that's just when the night begins in the summer. To say the parents were neglectful is not a fair assessment of the situation in my opinion. It's possible they were, but I don't think I'd use that term. I still don't condone the ringing of doorbells, but I just think it's harsh to have the attitude of "Well, gotta deal with the consquences you little twirp!" Oh, adding another thought. I don't believe that when this little prank gets boring they move on to bigger things. Often, it's getting boring because they are maturing from children into adolescents.
Exactly. In my family, if my parents had gotten a call or visit from a cop with regard to my behavior in the neighborhood, I would have been wishing I'd been shot by the homeowner instead.
Yeah, that's pretty much the way we grew up, and the way my kids are growing up too. That said, I'm probably the only one of the 5 of us growing up who was too scared for "ring and run" as we called it then. It wasn't seen as the start of a life of crime.
Alice & Sarge... I was thinking the same thing... it wouldn't be the neighbor or police I would fear!!! LOL!!! We played something like this with our neighbor... but we did it at like 8pm & we were leaving little things on the doorstep. I remember one time setting up those little "poppers" in the doors. But we always did it during the day. Just Me... that's not late... if your minding your own business, but if you're involving others or disturbing others than it is late. People still have to work & get lil ones up for sitters and what not. I know even in HS we were not allowed to get phone calls after 9:30pm, especially during the week. I think a big problem is that this did seem to happen during the week as well. You still have to be respectful of others all year round.
I was never actually scared, I just never found this amusing. I remember the first time someone came to me and suggested it I was baffled why they would think it was a fun thing to do. Of course he is; he doesn't want to go to jail. I'm betting without some evidence, the jury doesn't buy it either.
Diznee, oh yes, I agree with you in that it's too late to bother others. I just meant in general as far as neglect is concerned.
First a capital offenses involves the Death Penalty so I don't think, only By the Grace of God, he killed someone so the Death Penalty is off the table. LOL Yes, he should have called the police. But would you take the chance of coming up against this kind of idiot. With the cases of road rage and ones like this does anyone want to chance it? That is why the statement in the news report really irks me "Jacob’s bravery gives strength to his family during this difficult time." this is just BS. The two cases should be bifurcated from each other, the kid and his friends should be adjudicated without input from the idiots actions, His actions should not influence the outcome of their case, where as the kids actions should be counted in the idiots case as to show what set his unreasonable response in action.
May be people are seeing the neglect because the parents didn't seem to know what they are up to at 10pm. I guess to me may be this neighbor was the "Old Coot," but really if he was known as that I don't think you should be messing with him. To me I think if my mom & dad didn't let me trick or treat there...may be we should avoid this one (not saying that it said that any where, but if your in a small neighborhood you know which ones you can & can't "mess" with so to speak.)