Comments on: Panthers prospect accused of breaking into San Antonio house

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:25:16 +0000

ya clearly. w/e I thought it was funny lol

can’t hit ‘em all out of the park I guess.

By: georgejarkko

georgejarkko — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 17:03:32 +0000

I was just glad to hear it was an honest, old-fashioned, drunk mistake.

If he had been on the UF Gators, he would’ve been robbing the place.

By: georgejarkko

georgejarkko — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 17:00:33 +0000

never a good sign when you have to explain your “jokes.”

By: phillyphanatic77

phillyphanatic77 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 16:55:26 +0000

Well jpelle82, personally I’m glad you’re not involved with legislation. In no way does shooting two men in the BACK, when they weren’t threatening, make you a hero. What if it had been the home-owner, who had lost or forgotten his key, or a visiting family member who had done the same thing? It is NOT within the rights afforded us by Constitution to shoot whoever we like, especially when they’re in no way a threat to us. I suppose you’re one of those people who think George Zimmerman, was just doing his job as self-appointed “neighborhood watch” when he shot and killed Trayvon Martin for simply being black, with a hoodie on, in a neighborhood he doesn’t frequent? Should you be allowed to hassle anyone you don’t know that comes into your neighborhood just because you wanna protect your family? There are already excessive numbers of homicides, that dwarf our economic equivalents, when it comes to gun violence, so you really believe everyone should have a license to kill? And saying that you’re saving tax dollars from funding degenerates on welfare by shooting them is completely insane. You know not all criminals are minorities and not all minorities are on welfare, which seems to be a big misconception in rural areas, which is where I assume you live. Just because Fox news tells you the government is giving free rides to everyone that applies doesn’t make it true. In fact there are more Caucasians on welfare than any minority! I’m not support of criminals breaking into homes, no matter their color, but I’m also not in favor of allowing gun nuts in Texas (or any other state) crown themselves judge, jury, and executioner. We have a right to something called DUE PROCESS in this country, which means your innocent until PROVEN guilty. We don’t need “patriots” running around the streets making it their duty to “protect” their families by killing anyone who looks like a threat. Stand Your Ground laws give a license to kill and all you have to do is say you felt threatened. Even if you’re armed with a gun and your target (like Trayvon Martin) has nothing but candy in his hands.

By: jpelle82

jpelle82 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 15:14:25 +0000

he endangered his family by threatening them to get out of HIS house. he didnt know where he was at, it wasnt HIS house. a guy ate another guy’s face off in miami because he was on bath salts, how do you know that this guy isnt going to act on his menacing threats or posture?

By: jpelle82

jpelle82 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 15:01:23 +0000

that guy is a hero, saved tax payer dollars from continuing to fund the degenerates life of crime through the prison system and welfare later. if they dont value their own life then why should we…these guys get away and next time they bring a gun to their victims house and kill an innocent homeowner – then you have a guy who decides not to shoot and he therefore caused the death of someone else by not killing the criminal in the first place.

By: jpelle82

jpelle82 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:52:46 +0000

look, if someone is committing a crime, they are assuming risk to their own lives whether it be prison or death. they are fully aware of the consequences of entering another person’s home illegally. i wouldnt bat an eye at shooting someone in my home, and i would make sure they were dead too before the cops showed up. its against the law to be that drunk in public and you shouldnt be drinking to the point where you dont know where you are at…he couldve killed himself by walking into traffic or driving into a tree so why would you feel sorry for him if he died at the hand of someone else? if he wouldve died not wearing his seatbelt or driving drunk we wouldve been like “oh well, shouldnt drive drunk” but blame a homeowner if he kills a guy threatening his family…gimme a break.

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:42:17 +0000

lol really? you guys forgot about Riley Sheahan already?

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:37:23 +0000

…and murder, in 48 states.

By: homelanddefense

homelanddefense — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:24:26 +0000

I agree with much of what you have posted, but that Wild West mentality doesnt permeate thru much of the US. Mostly just the deep south. If you kill an intruder inside your house up in the North East you better have some serious life threatening wounds on you, or else you are gonna be seeing the slammer for a while.

By: buddysguys

buddysguys — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 12:11:10 +0000

sounds like texans just want a reason to shoot.

By: buddysguys

buddysguys — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 12:07:29 +0000

YEEEEEHAWWWWWW!!!

i bet he wouldn’t have been able to actually get him between the eyes, should have just said head.

By: multiplemiggs

multiplemiggs — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:12:38 +0000

^ correct. Now add “with the intent to commit a crime there-in” and its burglary. He wasnt in the right state of mind. Just criminal trespassing if anything. But the reason this story is so funny is bc have any of you seen what he looks like? Hahaha

By: nothanksimdriving123

nothanksimdriving123 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 06:26:18 +0000

esra: “can you break into someone’s home if it’s unlocked?” Yes, I don’t believe it matters where you think you are. If you enter another person’s home (or property) without their permission, it is trespassing.

By: ikillchicken

ikillchicken — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 06:23:44 +0000

Explain to me how exactly he “endangered his family”. I absolutely support a person’s right to defend themselves but you seriously need to read what bspray posted a couple posts up. I don’t see any indication that he did anything overtly threatening. There was really no reason they couldn’t handle this situation exactly as they did: Leave the house and call the police. Or for that matter, I don’t even object to the guy getting out his gun and forcing him to leave. But just shooting him outright? Just for sitting there? There’s no justification for that. That’s not self defence. That’s nothing but petty revenge.

By: phillyphanatic77

phillyphanatic77 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 05:40:29 +0000

Off the topic of hockey but…They seriously need to change those kind of laws, they go far beyond self-defense. It essentially legalizes murder as long as you say you felt threatened (even if they turn tail and run). There was a pretty well known case from relatively recently where a man saw his neighbors house being broken into, called 911, told the operator that he was going to shoot the intruders, operator pleaded him not to do so. So the man puts the phone down, goes outside, yells “you’re gonna die” and shoots and kills the two intruders in the back as they attempt to flee. And because he was in the state of Texas that was seen as perfectly acceptable. Now I ask, was that shooter in imminent danger? The answer is a resounding NO. He took it upon himself to become a vigilante and he took two lives to protect someone else’s possessions. It would’ve been totally different if the intruders entered his house. “Stand Your Ground” laws do not protect people, they provide a license to commit homicide. There have been dozens upon dozens of lives taken away by too many trigger happy vigilante’s, who are operating under the protection of a horrifying law. Timmins is seriously lucky he was not shot and killed, because the homeowners would’ve been well within their rights under Texas law.

By: blomfeld

blomfeld — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 03:46:36 +0000

I concur highcountrybear, as my comment was intended to merely highlight the cavernous difference between “candy ass” Canadian law and the “wild west” ways which still permeate throughout much of the US. Personally, I have absolutely no time for evil whatsoever and I’m seriously of the opinion that evil should be engaged and destroyed at “every and any” opportunity. That includes everything from “taking out” an armed intruder in the home, to putting the workplace bully in “his or her” place in the office or on the factory floor. As people go, I view the Albertans (ie: all prairie peoples in fact) as the most “decent, rational and fair-minded” folk of all in Canada … though Maritime folk would come a close second.

By: thehighcountrybear

thehighcountrybear — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 03:11:16 +0000

Hearing you blomfeld: Intruders have been protected by Statute in Canada, much as you describe. Common Law however, founded on notions of precedence in case law, has been changing. In Alberta, Courts have found for property owners in recent years: east of Calgary, a homeowner worked an unarmed but younger intruder over with a hammer and the intruder died resulting in a finding of justifiable manslaughter; and in another tragic incident north of Calgary, some kids came into a farmyard, cut some doughnuts with their pickup in the driveway, were followed by the property owner who stopped the kids then pointed a loaded rifle at the driver’s side window, the rifle discharged and killed the young man resulting in a finding of accidental manslaughter. Message, private property is sacrosanct…

By: jasndc75

jasndc75 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 03:10:29 +0000

Yes, because most of the time when someone breaks into a house it is just a drunk hockey player wanting to sleep on your couch, usually meaning no harm.

It is not a shoot first mentality. it is a shoot after someone breaks into your house endangering your family. people need to be responsible for their actions. Yes, it would have been awful if Timmins had gotten killed for such a stupid mistake. But he chose to trade away his freedom to alcohol that night.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 02:54:51 +0000

Imagine the horror that hockey players drink, who would ever think that?

By: blomfeld

blomfeld — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 02:51:33 +0000

And here in Canada …

the law stipulates that “you” as the property owner are 100% liable for the welfare and well-being of any person(s) on your property, be they an invited guest or an armed intruder. I’ll always remember a funny discussion which we had with our teacher in a law class back at college in the 80′s. The bottom line was that from a “legal” stand point, the best thing for a home owner to do is make a pot of coffee for the intruder, call up a moving company and then actually “assist” him in carrying your worldly goods to the truck! Any “defensive or protective” efforts on the part of the property owner should be reserved for the courtroom at a later date …

And then you have the good ol’ “shoot first and ask questions later” way of doing things like in Texas. Which way then is the correct way? Personally I’m completely in favor of striking down evil on sight. But what does a “red-blooded” man do if he wakes up to find someone like Megan Fox sashaying around in his place in the middle of the night? … shoot her on sight? And conversely, what would this woman have done if the intruder on her couch was someone like Brad Pitt or an intoxicated priest ?

The bottom line as I see it is that “youth and alcohol” can be a deadly mix and fortunately in this case, no one was killed or injured …

By: ikillchicken

ikillchicken — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 02:21:17 +0000

It’s really hilarious that this website is called “guns save lives” but the very first link (if you click on Texas) is “Store Owner Shoots and Kills Would Be Robber Armed With Toy Gun” Yup. We sure saved a life there boys!

By: ikillchicken

ikillchicken — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 02:14:52 +0000

This incident is actually a great example of why this ludicrous, shoot first mentality shouldn’t be acceptable. But of course, then some dumb, suburban Texan wouldn’t have the chance to beat his chest and talk about what a big man he is. And we certainly can’t have that.

By: bspray

bspray — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 02:13:38 +0000

Look at the number of stories per state. The only other state to come close to Texas in stories of legal homeowner gun usage against criminals is Florida. Florida with 80 stories, Texas with 107. If you don’t think Timmons would have been in serious danger had the homeowner been home, you might want to read some of these stories.

http://gunssavelives.net/browse-by-state/

By: bspray

bspray — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 02:06:34 +0000

It’s not harmless and the consequences could have been bad for Timmons. For those that don’t live in Texas, let me clarify the Texas Homestead statute. Not only could the homeowner have shot and killed Timmons just for being in his house, he could have shot and killed Timmons if he caught him breaking into his car in his driveway. Even if Timmons started running away, the homeowner could have legally shot and killed a fleeing Timmons and faced ZERO repurcussions. Meaning, the home owner wouldn’t have even seen the back of a police car for 5 minutes. This is a very dangerous situation and hardly a week goes by in Texas (or even San Antonio for that matter) where someone isn’t killed breaking into someone else’s home or private property. They never even get taken down to the station for questioning.

For those questioning the homeowner’s bold talk, I would do a little research into what actually goes on in Texas on a weekly, if not daily, basis before I made that claim.

By: chicagobtech

chicagobtech — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 01:33:15 +0000

Or John Belushi.

By: csilojohnson

csilojohnson — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 01:14:53 +0000

Jeez people need to lighten up. Stupid mistake on the players part.
Harmless though.

By: contraryguy

contraryguy — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 01:10:05 +0000

Putting a bullet through the eye of a passed out guy on a couch.

—–

Isn’t that how American ex-footballer Steve McNair got it?

By: travishenryskid

travishenryskid — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 01:03:15 +0000

If you aren’t in the NHL, you aren’t making a ton of money. If you are below the AHL, hockey has to be your second job. Some of the players in the ECHL make $300/week. You can make more working at Burger King.

By: esracerx46

esracerx46 — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 01:00:06 +0000

I’d agree with you if he was any good with Patrick Kane being the most obvious example. But, if you look at his (Timmins) salary I bet he’s making just above average