SPD pulling over people on S Montgomery

[mstateglfr]

Yeah again I know critical thought and reasoning isn’t your strong point.

I won’t waste my breath explaining it again.

I’ll add this though.
First person at fault will be the moron, then the cops, then people like you who normalize this type of stuff.

“Oh the poor innocent victim”

At no point did I say open the door and start blasting.

...

it could just be innocent kids. But when a home owner opens a door scared and blasts a “kid” standing there...

I am not sure how you can claim you didnt say 'open the door and start blasting' when early on you described a scenario where a home owner opens a door and blasts a kid who is just standing there.

But yeah sure, claim I lack critical thought.
You continue to try to justify shooting someone for just ringing a doorbell, but I am the one lacking critical thought.

 

[paindonthurt]

FYI, Mississippi's castle doctrine is slightly more nuanced than "you can shoot somebody if you feel threatened." In the 2:30 a.m. doorstep hypothetical, the homeowner must have a reasonable belief that the guy was attempting to kill the homeowner, or in the process of committing a felony, or attempting to forcibly enter the home. A guy knocking on your door meets none of these criteria. Now, whether the DA would bring charges is up for debate and probably depends on the jurisdiction.

Understood, and regardless of what anyone says, I’m not suggesting opening the door and start shooting, but these “kids” aren’t driving 3 or 4 miles to this neighborhood for some innocent pranks.

At some point someone is going to get hurt.

Again, my point is, cops can and should do something about it.

 

[paindonthurt]

...



I am not sure how you can claim you didnt say 'open the door and start blasting' when early on you described a scenario where a home owner opens a door and blasts a kid who is just standing there.

But yeah sure, claim I lack critical thought.
You continue to try to justify shooting someone for just ringing a doorbell, but I am the one lacking critical thought.

I described a scenario where a person could get killed. Yes I used the term “blast”.

That doesn’t imply one should or will just open the door and start shooting.

That does imply at 330 am a lot of scenarios could happen where someone gets hurt.

Maybe that will make it clear for you but I doubt it. You are just being you. WE ALL GET IT.

 

[FrontRangeDawg]

All bravado aside, I wouldn't ever want to have to defend myself with a gun at my own home when I could avoid it in any way. Have you ever thought about the legal/psychological/emotional fallout you'd have from shooting a person (justified or not), and then living in the home where you shot/killed someone in the den?

Just because you can do something (shoot a possible intruder), doesn't mean you should.

 

[paindonthurt]

All bravado aside, I wouldn't ever want to have to defend myself with a gun at my own home when I could avoid it in any way. Have you ever thought about the legal/psychological/emotional fallout you'd have from shooting a person (justified or not), and then living in the home where you shot/killed someone in the den?

Just because you can do something (shoot a possible intruder), doesn't mean you should.

I don’t want to kill anyone either, but if I feel like it’s me/family or them. It’s gonna be them.

AGAIN, problem solved if the police do just a little policing.

 

[mstateglfr]

Understood, and regardless of what anyone says, I’m not suggesting opening the door and start shooting, but these “kids” aren’t driving 3 or 4 miles to this neighborhood for some innocent pranks.

At some point someone is going to get hurt.

Again, my point is, cops can and should do something about it.

What are they in the neighborhood for? You posted a picture of one and claimed they arent just dingdong ditching, but then you said you have no idea what his intent is.
...but now you know the intent isnt innocent pranks.




Seriously, what the 17 are you talking about here? You seem to be assuming things and knowing things at the same time, talking out of both sides of your mouth.
You either actually know more or you are just assuming things and trying to walk a thin line.

 

[paindonthurt]

What are they in the neighborhood for? You posted a picture of one and claimed they arent just dingdong ditching, but then you said you have no idea what his intent is.
...but now you know the intent isnt innocent pranks.




Seriously, what the 17 are you talking about here? You seem to be assuming things and knowing things at the same time, talking out of both sides of your mouth.
You either actually know more or you are just assuming things and trying to walk a thin line.

When you stick to the main point I’ll talk to you like an adult.

Until then you’ll remain a douche bag retard.

I’m 99.9% sure the “kid” in that pic doesn’t live in the neighborhood. I’m 99.9% sure he wasn’t alone.

 

[ckDOG]

This is a lot of theory to go through for a simple solution of doorbell camera and knowing how to push 3 buttons on the phone.

I'd also feel pretty good on betting that most people who claim they are capable of identifying a legitimate threat to property and life would in reality be hiding in their closet on the phone with dispatch.

 

[FQDawg]

I find it hard to believe people can trivialize theft of private property. Those exceeding speed limits aren't intentionally trying to harm others. Ridding neighborhoods of parasitic vermin is MUCH more important.

No one is trivializing theft of private property. But so far, at least as far as what has been described in this thread, no one has actually had anything stolen. The only thing that has appeared to have occurred is that a young person knocked on a door or rang a doorbell in the middle of the night while wearing a hoodie. Which, while not advisable, is not currently illegal.

As for your comment about speeders not intentionally trying to harm others... it doesn't matter what their intentions are. Traffic accidents cause far more fatalities than break ins do. That is a verifiable fact. I find it hard to believe that people can trivialize people dying in traffic accidents.

 

[mstateglfr]

When you stick to the main point I’ll talk to you like an adult.

Until then you’ll remain a douche bag retard.

I’m 99.9% sure the “kid” in that pic doesn’t live in the neighborhood. I’m 99.9% sure he wasn’t alone.

Is there a main point? This thread reads like an expanded conversation that started with someone saying 'I am not a racist, but...'.

- is your main point that police need to stop something that is legal?
- is your main point that shooting someone who is simply standing on your stoop should be justified due to fear?
- is your main point that kids are doing more than dingdong ditching? If so, what more are they doing?

Dont be a menace to South Montgomery while drinking your juice in the hood.

 

[GloryDawg]

dingdong ditching

 

[paindonthurt]

Is there a main point? This thread reads like an expanded conversation that started with someone saying 'I am not a racist, but...'.

- is your main point that police need to stop something that is legal?
- is your main point that shooting someone who is simply standing on your stoop should be justified due to fear?
- is your main point that kids are doing more than dingdong ditching? If so, what more are they doing?

Dont be a menace to South Montgomery while drinking your juice in the hood.

My main point is you are an idiot.

 

[thatsbaseball]

All bravado aside, I wouldn't ever want to have to defend myself with a gun at my own home when I could avoid it in any way. Have you ever thought about the legal/psychological/emotional fallout you'd have from shooting a person (justified or not), and then living in the home where you shot/killed someone in the den?

Just because you can do something (shoot a possible intruder), doesn't mean you should.

If they're in my house and shouldn't be I'll shoot first and ask questions later. If they're at my door and I truly feel threatened I'll put the first bullet through the top of the door and hope they take the "hint" and leave. I hope myself and none of yall is ever faced with this as the "fallout" would absolutely be dreadful.

 

[LordMcBuckethead]

Spruill’s Starkville

That's funny. You do understand that this is happening all over the state and the country.

In 2021, there were almost 43,000 deaths in the U.S. as a result of motor vehicle crashes according to the Dept. of Transportation. That year, the CDC estimates that there were approximately 26,000 homicides in the U.S.

Even if every single one of those homicides was the result of a break in - and obviously they weren't - a car crash is still more likely to be deadly than a break in (especially on South Montgomery give how narrow it is).

Of course, neither scenario is good. You'd have to ask SPD why they can't do both - try to make traffic on S. Montgomery safer AND have someone patrol the neighborhood at night. Beyond the obvious fact that, legally, the police aren't obligated to protect private property.

But if, for some reason, SPD has to pick one or the other, it seems like focusing on traffic is the right course of action.

First, South Montgomery should be a 4 lane road with a turn lane. 35mph is way too slow for that road, and I understand why people speed going down it, as I do literally every single time I am on it about 3 times a week. The amount of people living down that road, as a major conduit to town, it should be 45 mph and the city should stop issuing building permits until they upgrade the roadway.

Second, deaths of cars and homicides have literally nothing to do with each other and to compare the two is asinine at best.

Police need to do their jobs, but so do parents. Parents have a huge responsibility in how their kids behave. When parents are absent, kids will do stupid ****. In today's world, stupid **** gets dangerous in a blink of an eye. These kids should know this, before it becomes a more serious situation. That is where the police and parents come in. Right now, it seems like you can do anything you want and there are zero consequences.

 

[The Cooterpoot]

Pop'm with a stun gun.

 

[LordMcBuckethead]

So let’s just allow them to keep staking the neighborhoods so they can get the home owners at the right time when they are gone?

this thread was started bc the police aren’t doing their jobs.

if they won’t maybe the homeowners will.

In a future court case, this seems to be exhibit A if you guys are keeping score.
Home owners do not have the right to shoot someone knocking on their door. Sorry, but they don't.
At least use bird shot or something.

 

[paindonthurt]

In a future court case, this seems to be exhibit A if you guys are keeping score.
Home owners do not have the right to shoot someone knocking on their door. Sorry, but they don't.
At least use bird shot or something.

 

[LordMcBuckethead]

Pop'm with a stun gun.

Not a bad idea, but what if they have a real gun?
Police need to have a handle on the going on with the younger generation around town.
If they are getting calls, they need to be out there catching these guys. At least a presence in the neighborhood would deter future stuff happening.

South Montgomery residence pay city taxes, right?

 

[LordMcBuckethead]

All of that was in jest, fella.

 

[paindonthurt]

Not a bad idea, but what if they have a real gun?
Police need to have a handle on the going on with the younger generation around town.
If they are getting calls, they need to be out there catching these guys. At least a presence in the neighborhood would deter future stuff happening.

South Montgomery residence pay city taxes, right?

Probably paying way more taxes than most of the rest of the city.

 

[T-TownDawgg]

Understood, and regardless of what anyone says, I’m not suggesting opening the door and start shooting, but these “kids” aren’t driving 3 or 4 miles to this neighborhood for some innocent pranks.

At some point someone is going to get hurt.

Again, my point is, cops can and should do something about it.

You keep saying the cops should step it up. Step up what.

The police are hamstrung by an impotent and unimposing justice system. They are not the “bad parents plan B pill”. Stop playing checkers with this vitriol toward the first thing you see.

This s h I t starts at home. When these punks get turned loose on the street and have no fear of consequences, even if the cops DO pick them up, justice is denied or delayed, and the system is doomed. The police are unfairly receiving the brunt for blame that should be cast upon parents, lawmakers, city councils, and judges.

I’m all for defending your person and property. These kids are playing with fire. The outcome is obvious and inevitable. But blasting a kid and blaming cops for not being “private big brothers” is naive, stupid, and clearly your balls are bigger than your brain.

And, by the way, many thanks to you and the rest of your partisan ilk who make all these once interesting threads get locked from biased bickering. 17 you all, no matter your political leanings.

I believe 100% that politics is Americas new dominant religion. If you find yourself all in on subscribing to Blue or Red on every damned subject you should step back, take a breath, think, and ask yourself if you are much different than religious extremists.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Pop'm with a stun gun.

I think people should dig pits in their front yard and put tigers in the bottom. Camouflage the pit openings of course

 

[ChE1997]

It’s also not illegal to defend yourself if you feel threatened.

Good idea?

if it’s my house? I want them scared shitless to never come back so when I’m gone I don’t have to worry about worthless pieces of 17ing with my stuff.

I hope you have a good lawyer.

Posting this means if it happens to you, the state would argue its pre-meditated.

And the man in Missouri is already facing first-degree assault and armed criminal action. It would have been Murder1 of the kid had died.

Oh and before you ask, Missouri has a "Stand your ground" and "Castle doctrine" laws.

Get a video doorbell and you can answer the door anytime and anywhere.

 

[The Peeper]

First, South Montgomery should be a 4 lane road with a turn lane. 35mph is way too slow for that road, and I understand why people speed going down it, as I do literally every single time I am on it about 3 times a week. The amount of people living down that road, as a major conduit to town, it should be 45 mph and the city should stop issuing building permits until they upgrade the roadway.

That was somewhat addressed in last weeks Columbus Dispatch, it was just recommended to the council by an engineering firm that a roundabout should be built at Academy Rd. to move more traffic through there quicker

 

[paindonthurt]

I hope you have a good lawyer.

Posting this means if it happens to you, the state would argue its pre-meditated.

And the man in Missouri is already facing first-degree assault and armed criminal action. It would have been Murder1 of the kid had died.

Oh and before you ask, Missouri has a "Stand your ground" and "Castle doctrine" laws.

Get a video doorbell and you can answer the door anytime and anywhere.

I dont live in this neighborhood.
I don’t have a video doorbell.

I’m not suggesting anyone shoot anyone.

Im saying if the cops don’t do something about it something bad is going to happen. It could be to the homeowner, to the perpetrators, etc. But they absolutely have the ability to prevent this.

 

[paindonthurt]

You keep saying the cops should step it up. Step up what.

The police are hamstrung by an impotent and unimposing justice system. They are not the “bad parents plan B pill”. Stop playing checkers with this vitriol toward the first thing you see.

This s h I t starts at home. When these punks get turned loose on the street and have no fear of consequences, even if the cops DO pick them up, justice is denied or delayed, and the system is doomed. The police are unfairly receiving the brunt for blame that should be cast upon parents, lawmakers, city councils, and judges.

I’m all for defending your person and property. These kids are playing with fire. The outcome is obvious and inevitable. But blasting a kid and blaming cops for not being “private big brothers” is naive, stupid, and clearly your balls are bigger than your brain.

And, by the way, many thanks to you and the rest of your partisan ilk who make all these once interesting threads get locked from biased bickering. 17 you all, no matter your political leanings.

I believe 100% that politics is Americas new dominant religion. If you find yourself all in on subscribing to Blue or Red on every damned subject you should step back, take a breath, think, and ask yourself if you are much different than religious extremists.

I 100% agree with you on most of what you said but I cant fix their parenting.

I’m simply asking the police to patrol these neighborhoods at night. If they don’t have the resources then reallocate the time spent giving speeding tickets in the same area during the day to patrolling the neighborhoods at night.

It would take 1 cop care between 2:00 am to 5:00 am 3 or 4 nights a week to stop it. Make the nights random but start with nights on which it has happened before.

 

[mstateglfr]

I 100% agree with you on most of what you said but I cant fix their parenting.

I’m simply asking the police to patrol these neighborhoods at night. If they don’t have the resources then reallocate the time spent giving speeding tickets in the same area during the day to patrolling the neighborhoods at night.

It would take 1 cop care between 2:00 am to 5:00 am 3 or 4 nights a week to stop it. Make the nights random but start with nights on which it has happened before.

Yeah, and on this I fully agree- it isnt unreasonable to ask police to make an intentional stop in a neighborhood a couple times a night for a week or two.
If multiple people complain about the issue, that is a reasonable request to make in my eyes. If this were happening on my street/block, it would seem very reasonable to ask police to focus on the area a couple times a night for a bit.

The rest of your posts in this thread, from the posting of a kid's picture, to your argument that opening a door and shooting someone standing outside due to feeling threatened, to the double speak about knowing what the real motive is- all of that is just trash.

But yeah, asking police to drive down a road a couple times each night isnt unreasonable.

 

[paindonthurt]

No one is trivializing theft of private property. But so far, at least as far as what has been described in this thread, no one has actually had anything stolen. The only thing that has appeared to have occurred is that a young person knocked on a door or rang a doorbell in the middle of the night while wearing a hoodie. Which, while not advisable, is not currently illegal.

As for your comment about speeders not intentionally trying to harm others... it doesn't matter what their intentions are. Traffic accidents cause far more fatalities than break ins do. That is a verifiable fact. I find it hard to believe that people can trivialize people dying in traffic accidents.

Things have been stolen.

It’s a trend.
I’m sorry you can’t see that trend.
I’m sorry you see a hooded person in a neighborhood at 330 am and think “just an innocent kid who means no harm”
I’m sorry I can’t list every single time something like this happens.
I’m sorry that even if I did you’d still find a way to defend the POSs doing it.
I’m sorry you are so soft.
I’m sorry you are most likely extremely hypocritical in many of your stances.

 

[paindonthurt]

Yeah, and on this I fully agree- it isnt unreasonable to ask police to make an intentional stop in a neighborhood a couple times a night for a week or two.
If multiple people complain about the issue, that is a reasonable request to make in my eyes. If this were happening on my street/block, it would seem very reasonable to ask police to focus on the area a couple times a night for a bit.

The rest of your posts in this thread, from the posting of a kid's picture, to your argument that opening a door and shooting someone standing outside due to feeling threatened, to the double speak about knowing what the real motive is- all of that is just trash.

But yeah, asking police to drive down a road a couple times each night isnt unreasonable.

I started this thread saying basically what you just agreed to. Thanks for finally being reasonable.

I’ll post the “kids” picture every time he or she or anyone does it. Maybe they’ll catch him and punish him accordingly before something bad happens to him.

maybe he’ll learn his lesson before something bad happens to him.

im not gonna hold my breath though.

 

[WrapItDog]

FYI, Mississippi's castle doctrine is slightly more nuanced than "you can shoot somebody if you feel threatened." In the 2:30 a.m. doorstep hypothetical, the homeowner must have a reasonable belief that the guy was attempting to kill the homeowner, or in the process of committing a felony, or attempting to forcibly enter the home. A guy knocking on your door meets none of these criteria. Now, whether the DA would bring charges is up for debate and probably depends on the jurisdiction.

A homeowner in Tupelo shot a guy on his back porch after he told him to leave. Guy didn't leave and stepped forward towards the homeowner who shot the guy dead. No charges were filed against the homeowner.

Breaking News: Tupelo Shooting Death June 6, 2013
TUPELO, Miss. (WCBI)- Police are investigating an early morning shooting in Tupelo that left one man dead. Detectives say the resident of 1208 Springdale claims he was awakened around 4:45 when he heard someone outside his back bedroom window. He told police he saw a man on the outside on the back deck, opened his door, and told the suspect to leave. Then the homeowner says the suspect moved toward him and he fired one round from a 410 shotgun. The suspect 41 year-old Brad Nance was dead at the scene. Police say homeowners have a right to protect their lives and property.​

Sheriff Jim Johnson tells WCBI, “They certainly have a right to protect their lives and property and while there’s nothing we have seen that would logically lead us to believe there was anything different we will certainly take all facts and circumstance and present them to a Lee County Grand Jury and let the citizens make the determination of what they feel happened.”

 

[FQDawg]

Things have been stolen.

It’s a trend.
I’m sorry you can’t see that trend.
I’m sorry you see a hooded person in a neighborhood at 330 am and think “just an innocent kid who means no harm”
I’m sorry I can’t list every single time something like this happens.
I’m sorry that even if I did you’d still find a way to defend the POSs doing it.
I’m sorry you are so soft.
I’m sorry you are most likely extremely hypocritical in many of your stances.

If you can't list every single time "something like this" happens, how do you know it's a trend? And what is "something like this" anyway? Is "this" actual theft? Is "this" kids wearing hoodies in your neighborhood at night? Is "this" kids knocking on doors at night? You've been all over the place.

If things have actually been stolen, call the police. I'll spare you the discussion about how the police aren't obligated to respond but, by all means, call them if there has been an actual theft. Or an actual break in. Or even an attempted break in. That's not rocket science. No one, not even me, has said you shouldn't call the police in that kind of situation. In fact, my very first post in this thread suggests calling the police: "You'd have to ask SPD why they can't do both - try to make traffic on S. Montgomery safer AND have someone patrol the neighborhood at night."

But most of your posts in this thread have simply described a kid, wearing a hoodie, knocking on doors or ringing doorbells in the middle of Saturday night. Which, while stupid, doesn't rise beyond anything but possibly trespassing. You started this thread with "...while last night more people are beating on doors in those neighborhoods at 3:30 to 4:30 am." If something else happened on Saturday night beyond "beating on doors" - like actual theft or an actual break in - you should have described that instead.

I have no idea if someone walking in my neighborhood in the middle of the night means any harm or not (whether or not they're wearing a hoodie is irrelevant). But I'm sure as hell not going to open the door at 3:30 a.m. to find out. And I sure as hell can't open the door and shoot them just because I think they might be up to no good.

 

[mstateglfr]

I started this thread saying basically what you just agreed to. Thanks for finally being reasonable.

I’ll post the “kids” picture every time he or she or anyone does it. Maybe they’ll catch him and punish him accordingly before something bad happens to him.

maybe he’ll learn his lesson before something bad happens to him.

im not gonna hold my breath though.

Why do you keep using quotes when you use the word kid?

 

[paindonthurt]

Why do you keep using quotes when you use the word kid?

Bc I think it’s hilarious that you think “kids” are all innocent and mean no harm.

 

[FQDawg]

Here you go, @paindonthurt. Be the change you want to see in the world.

https://secure4.saashr.com/ta/6153952.careers?CareersSearch. Just scroll down and look for Police Officer.

 

[paindonthurt]

Here you go, @paindonthurt. Be the change you want to see in the world.

https://secure4.saashr.com/ta/6153952.careers?CareersSearch. Just scroll down and look for Police Officer.

Nah bc then I’d have a bunch of leftist trying to defund me.

But those new social worker positions y’all are pushing? Got any links to those?

And I’m not blaming the actual officers. I’m blaming whoever is making the decision to spend more time checking speeding vs stopping theft, vandalism, potential future theft, potential future harm to citizens and yes even criminals.

 

[onewoof]

Despite any commentary here and random opinions, here is a summary of the law in MS. There is a reason you are not allowed to wear hoodies, sunglasses, bandanas over your nose and mouth in a bank. Wonder why? Maybe they want to protect their assets.

Stand Your Ground in Mississippi

Research Mississippi state laws on stand your ground, including what is regulated and what's not. Find related gun law details from Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence today.

giffords.org

You are also better off with a security camera that films any incident. Otherwise it is just your statement against the lawyer that may oppose your statement.

 

[Shane of Pisgah]

A homeowner in Tupelo shot a guy on his back porch after he told him to leave. Guy didn't leave and stepped forward towards the homeowner who shot the guy dead. No charges were filed against the homeowner.

Breaking News: Tupelo Shooting Death June 6, 2013​

TUPELO, Miss. (WCBI)- Police are investigating an early morning shooting in Tupelo that left one man dead. Detectives say the resident of 1208 Springdale claims he was awakened around 4:45 when he heard someone outside his back bedroom window. He told police he saw a man on the outside on the back deck, opened his door, and told the suspect to leave. Then the homeowner says the suspect moved toward him and he fired one round from a 410 shotgun. The suspect 41 year-old Brad Nance was dead at the scene. Police say homeowners have a right to protect their lives and property.​

Sheriff Jim Johnson tells WCBI, “They certainly have a right to protect their lives and property and while there’s nothing we have seen that would logically lead us to believe there was anything different we will certainly take all facts and circumstance and present them to a Lee County Grand Jury and let the citizens make the determination of what they feel happened.”

1. Read the last sentence. It says the case would be presented to a grand jury, which means the grand jury would decide whether or not to return an indictment. I have no idea whether an indictment was returned. If you feel confident in the grand jury process, then by all means, blast away.

2. It says that the suspect was outside the back bedroom window and when he confronted him, the suspect "moved toward him." So that's a bit different than a guy getting shot after merely ringing the doorbell.

 

[Darryl Steight]

You’re and idiot if you open the door at 330 in the morning. I don’t care if you’re legally in the right. Doubling down on stupid doesn’t help. If they are trying to rob you, opening the door helps them. So you have a gun, they might to. Would you rather them shoot at you through and open or closed door? I’m not defending the bell ringers.

I don't know about y'all, but when I rack my cruiser ready Remington 870, it can be heard clearly through my locked door. There will be no doubt in the bell ringers mind what he just heard. No need to open the door for any reason in this day and age.

 

[mcdawg22]

Bc I think it’s hilarious that you think “kids” are all innocent and mean no harm.

They are just good ole boys. They never mean any harm. It’s not their fault they have been in trouble with the law since the day they were born. They are making their way the only way they know how, unfortunately it’s a little bit more than the law will allow. They are just good ole boys. They wouldn’t change if they could. They are just fighting the system like a true modern day Robin Hood.

 

[ChE1997]

You can’t define what fearing for my life is.

I’m sure you’ll try and you’ll be inconsistent as 17 about it (Mike brown).

If he is on your Jury. He does get to "define what fearing for your life" is. Literally.