Posted on 05/10/2007 10:37:46 AM PDT by ConservativeStatement
DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. -- A 10-year-old boy was found guilty Thursday in the beating of a homeless Army veteran that left the man so severely injured he had to undergo reconstructive surgery
Circuit Judge John Watson found the boy guilty of aggravated battery in the March 27 attack in which John D'Amico, 58, was beaten and stoned with a concrete block.
The child's mother left the courtroom noticeably upset and refused to comment. Before the hearing began, she was hopeful: "If he gets to come home today, I'm going to bust out crying."
(Excerpt) Read more at news4jax.com ...
> I thought NZ was relatively crime-free, and social programs kept “homelessness” to a minimum?
Per capita use and production of P-Methamphetamine is the highest in the OECD. We incarcerate per capita more of our population than any country in the OECD bar the United States. Child abuse is amongst the worst in the world. Plenty of crime here.
It’s a beautiful country, it was once relatively crime-free, but since the 1980’s it has been going thru a rapid evolution in crime. Our crime trends would be about 20 years behind yours in the US. So think 1980’s, that’s us.
There are not as many homeless in NZ as there are in the US — that said, there are more than plenty.
One thing I hadn't investigated was firearms ownership. If my ability to protect myself would be compromised by moving there, then my interest greatly diminishes.
Thanks for the insight! Dubh
You seem to be suggesting that maybe this bum got what he deserved. Do you actually believe a 58 y/o homeless alcoholic white guy is intentionally going to wander into a high crime black area looking for trouble? Not likely.
That's not what I am suggesting at all.
I am suggesting that his side of the story should not be accepted as gospel truth.
Do you actually believe a 58 y/o homeless alcoholic white guy is intentionally going to wander into a high crime black area looking for trouble? Not likely.
Bums, by definition, are past masters of making stupid choices.
Hey Dubh, wou write:
> I had been in contact with NZ officials about possibly emigrating there. I have worked remotely in NZ for years, but had never been there. The ad’s looked great, and it was listed as one of the top 5 countries to live.
What you have heard is true: I’m originally from North America, no plans of returning. This is as close to Paradise as it gets in the OECD.
> One thing I hadn’t investigated was firearms ownership. If my ability to protect myself would be compromised by moving there, then my interest greatly diminishes.
You can own firearms in NZ: the rules are much like Canada’s — it’s a privilege not a Constitutionally-protected right. There is a process and it takes time to get your license. If you want to own handguns, you need an endorsed license, which generally requires you to either be a bona-fide collector or a member-in-good-standing of a pistol club.
In terms of self-defense/citizen’s arrest, I suggest looking at the Crimes Act 1961, sections 39-45. “Reasonable force”, on a situational basis. The courts seem to interpret this to mean “minimum force”, in which case a handgun will seldom qualify (tho’ sometimes it might).
I had guns before emigrating, and have seen no requirement to own any here.
> I had planned on vacationing there sometime in the next year or so, just to check it out.
When you do, look me up — I’m always good for a cup of coffee and if I can, I’ll take you for a quick tour of Auckland. I can be reached thru the Guardian Angels website www.guardianangels.org (Waitakere City chapter.)
> However, the NZ emigration folks are warning me if I wait too long, my age will become a factor and may cause me to “miss the cut”, even though my job skills are in high demand there.
Don’t delay: the economy is good right now.
*DieHard the Hunter*
Do you have some alternative theory of what went down that you’d like to share, or do you just despise bums and assume he somehow he must have provoke these delinquents into attacking him? There have been numerous stories over the past couple of years of adolescent toughs seriously assaulting the homeless for no other reason but kicks, so unless you have additional evidence about this particular case that suggests the bum somehow was reponsible for this, I think it most likely the media account of this incident is probably accurate, and apparently the jury did too. Maybe you’ve had an unfortunate experience with bums in your past that has clouded your thinking here. If you think it likely a frail old alcoholic white guy is going to wander into the ghetto looking for a fight you are delusional.
I’ve seen similiar incidents around here as well.
You can’t help but wonder if the ten year old is a serial killer in the making. They usually have a track record of torturing/killing animals at that age. Going after a human this early....doesn’t bode well, to say the least.
> You can’t help but wonder if the ten year old is a serial killer in the making. They usually have a track record of torturing/killing animals at that age. Going after a human this early....doesn’t bode well, to say the least.
I think it a sure bet that you’re right. NZ’s youngest killer, Bailey Junior Kurariki, was twelve when he and a few others killed Michael Choy, a pizza delivery guy, with a baseball bat, then robbed him of the pizza and ate it. Only a few years ago, already up for parole.
Read about this human nitemare here: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=124&objectid=10421170
Check out the photo: the picture of innocense! Whodathunkit?
*DieHard*
Jeffrey Dalmer grew up not far from here (couple hundred miles). I’m sadly familiar with the ‘pattern’. Then there was Donald Harvey, also from Ohio. Hell, Charlie Manson was born and raised about ten blocks from where I grew up a decade later now that I think about it...
> Bums, by definition, are past masters of making stupid choices.
That’s a rather broad sweeping definition that I certainly disagree with.
I have met plenty of homeless folk — “bums” — who choose to be homeless for the lifestyle. They do not work (or if they do, it’s only a casual job for some ready cash), they do not commute, they do not pay rent or have a mortgage, they do not pay tax, and if they are clever and plan it well they can always eat reasonably good food for free and sleep dry and warm. They do not have a boss to answer to, or a schedule to keep, and probably enjoy more “freedoms” than you or I could possibly imagine.
Viewed that way, not a stupid choice if your personal constitution can handle subsistence and if you do not require creature comforts.
> (2) Don’t automatically assume that a bum is telling the truth. Bums are generally very nasty and/or crazy people. This is not the 1930s - people do not become bums for no reason at all anymore.
Another sweeping generalization. Some of the greatest unhanged villains I have ever met have been in a corporate environment, wearing suits. Bums are *not* generally nasty and/or crazy people. Some people become bums for the lifestyle — which is a legitimate life choice.
You probably shouldn’t automatically assume that *anybody* is telling the truth: that’s just naieve. But there are no more liars amongst bums than there are amongst corporates. In fact, I would suspect that per capita there would be more lawyers and accountants in gaol for fraud and/or deception and/or dishonesty crimes than there are bums in gaol on similar convictions.
If so, why single out bums for your opprobrium?
The defense produced an alternate "theory", not I.
There have been numerous stories over the past couple of years of adolescent toughs seriously assaulting the homeless for no other reason but kicks, so unless you have additional evidence about this particular case that suggests the bum somehow was reponsible for this, I think it most likely the media account of this incident is probably accurate, and apparently the jury did too.
The jury does not necessarily accept the media account - they merely believe that a crime was committed. And I'm certain one was committed as well - I just highly doubt the bum was minding his own business.
Maybe you’ve had an unfortunate experience with bums in your past that has clouded your thinking here. If you think it likely a frail old alcoholic white guy is going to wander into the ghetto looking for a fight you are delusional.
My only "unfortunate" experience with bums is the typical one.
Bums are losers who ask people for money and when no money is forthcoming they will often, as belligerent drunks are wont to do, get angry and insult people who don't give them money.
While I have enough self-control not to thrash them, it's obvious that plenty of people wouldn't.
And calling me delusional doesn't affect reality: degenerate alcoholics typically have a sense of invulnerability when they are drunk - I have seen white bums in their 50s insult black teenagers on the NYC subway on more than one occasion, oblivious to the fact that they could easily be beaten to death if the people they were insulting chose to do so.
Bums, by definition, are morons who do things that no sane person with common sense would do. That's why they live on the street, don't bathe, and eat garbage.
To reiterate: it is a crime to beat the crap out of people who verbally insult you, and people who hospitalize people in response to a verbal insult should be prosecuted.
However, it is a known fact that drunken losers like to run their mouths a lot, and I highly doubt the bum in question wasn't doing so.
Do you have stats to back this up, Noam Chomsky?
I've lived in NYC for 20 years and worked here for 18 years and spent 5 years living and working Chicago.
As a result, I have encountered unnumbered bums.
They are nasty or crazy or both and almost all of them have serious drug and alcohol problems.
Your romantic view of the carefree hobo is mythical nonsense, and your use of the word "corporate" as a derogatory term reveals the Marxism beneath the mythmaking.
With all due respect, you have zero idea what bums in America's cities are like.
This ain't hippy travelers in caravans.
> Bums, by definition, are morons who do things that no sane person with common sense would do.
No, many do it for the lifestyle. Just because they do not fit your definition of “sane” and “common sense” doesn’t make them morons.
> That’s why they live on the street, don’t bathe, and eat garbage.
Some of them subsist rather well: if you don’t need creature comforts to be happy, then all you need is dry shelter, clothing of some sort, and a full tummy. “Bums” are quite good at finding these things for cheap or free.
> I just highly doubt the bum was minding his own business.
He was probably minding his own business and got rolled for his troubles. Kids do that these days as a blood-sport. I have seen it happen and our Patrol has always intervened when it happens around us.
> Bums are losers
As opposed to, say, you who are a Winner. Gotcha.
> who ask people for money and when no money is forthcoming they will often, as belligerent drunks are wont to do, get angry and insult people who don’t give them money.
Seen plenty of people in the corporate world behave exactly like this, too.
> However, it is a known fact that drunken losers like to run their mouths a lot, and I highly doubt the bum in question wasn’t doing so.
It’s a known fact that adolescent delinquents run their mouths a lot, too: often to rap music. The main difference between the bum and the delinquents is probably that only one of the parties was seeking a violent altercation. And it wouldn’t have been the bum, I’d guess.
> Your romantic view of the carefree hobo is mythical nonsense,
No, it reflects first-hand experience as a Guardian Angel. We look after homeless folk who live under bridges and we will give them what help we can, get to know them by name and, when given the opportunity, will protect them from delinquent drunken teenage thugs who are hell-bent on giving them a beating. Done that a few times, now.
> and your use of the word “corporate” as a derogatory term reveals the Marxism beneath the mythmaking.
Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me. My use of the word “corporate” has absolutely nothing to do with Marxism.
> I’ve lived in NYC for 20 years and worked here for 18 years and spent 5 years living and working Chicago.
I know NYC and Chicago very well. Geez, all these worries you have about crazed bums causing havoc in your streets must keep you wideawake at nite, ay. Relax, mate! Take a deep breath: I can assure you that the “Bums” are not out to get you. You have much bigger, nastier and more dangerous enemies than the homeless fellow who talks to himself. We all do. Trust me.
> Do you have stats to back this up, Noam Chomsky?
I don’t need ‘em. “White Collar Crime” is an entire category of crime that generally encompasses fraud, deception and dishonesty crimes committed in a corporate environment. There isn’t really an equivalent for “bum crime” that encompasses fraud, deception and dishonesty crimes. Or perhaps you are suggesting that Bums caused Enron to collapse, for example?
I posed it as a “suspicion” and I suspect I am right. You are free to prove me wrong with stats. If there is a Great Bum Conspiracy lurking out there, I’m sure everybody needs to hear about it.
*DieHard*
> I’ve read your profile now and I see that you live in NZ - your comments now make more sense given your rareified context.
You’re guilty of yet another wide, sweeping generalization. I’m an Immigrant to New Zealand.
> With all due respect, you have zero idea what bums in America’s cities are like.
A huge assumption on your part. With all due respect, it is highly likely I have first-hand experience with more American cities and states than you have.
> This ain’t hippy travelers in caravans.
No, they’re homeless folk, and a good many of them are homeless by choice.
If working hard every day, providing for my family, spending my money on my family instead of drink and drugs, not committing crimes and paying my taxes make me a winner, then I'm a winner.
I prefer to think of myself as a man who does what a man is supposed to do.
And again, your experiences in Waitakere City are not the same as life in NYC or Chicago.
NYC has 54 times the population of Waitakere City and nearly twice the population of NZ.
There were 98 murders in NZ last year - how many in Waitakere City? 8? 10? 12?
There have been more than 98 murders in NYC alone so far this year - and that is a record low.
> And again, your experiences in Waitakere City are not the same as life in NYC or Chicago.
I didn’t always live in Waitakere City, mate. And there are parts of South Auckland where it would be inadvisable for even a tough guy from NYC like you to venture forth into. Trust me.
From where?
With all due respect, it is highly likely I have first-hand experience with more American cities and states than you have.
I've been to every state except AK, ND, MT, OR and HI, and I've spent significant amounts of time in NYC, Philadelphia, Boston, Baltimore, Atlanta, Washington DC, Newark NJ, Cincinnati, Chicago, New Orleans, Charleston, Memphis, Kansas City, Phoenix, Houston, LA, San Francisco/Oakland and Minneapolis.
I've visited probably every major city in the US except for Portland OR, Honolulu and, oddly, Denver.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.