PA couple shot over long-going dispute with neighbor

[cubby]

Being rude and bothersome is not "trying to instigate a fight".

Don't downplay the couple's behavior. They were horrific, both on the video and according to witnesses. And they started the violence first, don't forget.

Even if it were, it wouldn't give any justification to anyone falling for the bait, even if it was just taking a swing at the guy.

The couple acted violently first, in this case. Just to remind everyone.

Going back in the house and getting a firearm just makes the response deliberate 2nd degree murder. Nobody gets pushed to that. That's someone who's got rage issues who was looking for an outlet. Blaming his victims does not hold any water.

Actually, that's first degree murder.

It didn't warrant a physical confrontation, and anyone choosing to get physical over that is a dangerous, violent individual. They were not made to be violent by the rudeness, that violence was there within them waiting for a chance to rise up.

The couple was violent first, though - does that change your answer at all?

This is not a "both sides a bit to blame" scenario. The blame for this is 100% on the shooter. No blame whatsoever of any kind on his victims. Whether or not they were nice or pleasant people is entirely irrelevant.

The victims hold responsibility for the escalating situation. It's just not a victim blaming situation - people need to stop using that here.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Being rude and bothersome is not "trying to instigate a fight".

Even if it were, it wouldn't give any justification to anyone falling for the bait, even if it was just taking a swing at the guy.

Going back in the house and getting a firearm just makes the response deliberate 2nd degree murder. Nobody gets pushed to that. That's someone who's got rage issues who was looking for an outlet. Blaming his victims does not hold any water.

I don't care if they shovelled snow into his drive.

I don't care if they called him nasty names and shouted a bunch.

It didn't warrant a physical confrontation, and anyone choosing to get physical over that is a dangerous, violent individual. They were not made to be violent by the rudeness, that violence was there within them waiting for a chance to rise up.

This is not a "both sides a bit to blame" scenario. The blame for this is 100% on the shooter. No blame whatsoever of any kind on his victims. Whether or not they were nice or pleasant people is entirely irrelevant.

No they instigated this and they for sure were looking to play a game of who gives a shit less.

Not everyone is going to take that kind of shit with a smile.

But sure Endus you feign shock and ignorance at what the law allows or shouldn’t.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Lol nicer no they instigated the situation.

Not to the point where lethal force was justified.

They didn't put the gun in his hand.

[cubby]

"Hey, she came up to me and was super flirty, and even touched my chest. That totally makes the violent ass-raping to death totally her fault, right, because she instigated?"

That's not a fucking argument, dude. Unless they went and armed themselves with lethal weaponry first, there was no "instigation" that would justify shooting them.

This isn't the same thing. People need to stop equating this to victim blaming in rape cases.

- - - Updated - - -

Fucker pushed his buttons, knowing he'd piss him off.
Other dude had enough and shot him.

Exactly. And initiated the violence (the couple acted with violence first - people keep ignoring this).

Sounds like it was a long time escalation.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

This isn't the same thing. People need to stop equating this to victim blaming in rape cases.

Again, you aren't making a case that this you aren't victim blaming. The case you are making is that you feel you are justified in doing so.

[cubby]

Would you use the kind of example if you were representing the man in court?

Maybe we should just agree to agree that it was a bad example and leave it at that.




It is though. You are saying if they had been nicer...they wouldn't have gotten shot.



Antagonism on both sides.



And that is victim blaming. That's literally what it means. You aren't arguing that it isn't victim blaming. You are arguing that you feel blaming the victims is justified in this case...but it's still victim blaming. Whatever provocations they may have provided...they didn't put the gun in the shooter's hands.



We have already established the concept of "re-escalation".

It's not victim blaming - I'm not going to keep having this same conversation with people. This is a violent escalation where both sides were at fault.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, you aren't making a case that this you aren't victim blaming. The case you are making is that you feel you are justified in doing so.

It's not victim blaming. Please stop using this phrase incorrectly.

[Doctor Amadeus]

"Hey, she came up to me and was super flirty, and even touched my chest. That totally makes the violent ass-raping to death totally her fault, right, because she instigated?"

That's not a fucking argument, dude. Unless they went and armed themselves with lethal weaponry first, there was no "instigation" that would justify shooting them.

Different set of circumstances. A woman isn’t asking for it either by the way she is dressed or acts.

This was a neighbor with prolonged exposure who was insulted threatened and specifically engaged for a confrontation.

Sorry dude but you’re comparison isn’t going to work.

This wasn’t a one and done in my opinion the man and his wife who were shot obviously had a serious habit with causing drama.

- - - Updated - - -

Not to the point where lethal force was justified.

They didn't put the gun in his hand.

Of course not. But the law isn’t going to protect you from life and in this case it doesn’t matter now right. 3 people are dead over one guys need to start shit and another’s reaction to end it.

[Endus]

Don't downplay the couple's behavior. They were horrific, both on the video and according to witnesses. And they started the violence first, don't forget.

I'm not downplaying it, I'm saying that how horrific they may have been is basically irrelevant. If they were violent (I watched the video and didn't notice it, but it didn't seem to catch the whole thing and wasn't tracking it and was pretty crappy resolution; I'm not disputing it I just have no frame of reference), then if they'd gotten into a slap-fight or whatever I'd say hit 'em all with disturbing the peace or something.

But we're talking about the shooting.

Doesn't matter how horrific they were, they didn't provoke the shooting. That's entirely the shooter's disturbed mind and penchant for murderous violence.

Actually, that's first degree murder.

Depends on where you draw the line of premeditation and how long you need to plan it; I was assuming it might've still only fit as second because it's still "heat of the moment", but thinking again going back into your house to get a weapon probably does cross that line.

IANAL, and I try not to leap to claims of first-degree murder unless it's literally "here's my complex weeks-long plot to kill a guy" clear.

The couple was violent first, though - does that change your answer at all?

Again, I don't have a frame of reference on exactly what their level of violence was. Assuming it was just slappy-smacks or similar belligerent brawling, then no. It doesn't change my answer one bit. I frankly do not see why it should. It could provide an excuse to respond in kind, but that's not what happened.

If this were a story about two neighbours who'd been duking it out fist-to-fist in the street, I'd say they both were to blame. That answer changes when one party bogs off and grabs a gun.

This isn't the same thing. People need to stop equating this to victim blaming in rape cases.

I'm not sure how it's meaningfully different. Is it that the victim in a rape case didn't commit a lesser crime? So would it be okay to blame a female burglar for being raped by the homeowner when he catches her in the act? Because fuck that, man.

I get that rape is an emotional kneejerk, but that's sort of the point. If you can clearly see why victim-blaming is horrible in a case of rape, why can't you see that victim-blaming in a case of murder is just as horrible?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

It's not victim blaming. Please stop using this phrase incorrectly.

It's the literal definition of the term.

You are assigning blame to the victims for the crime perpetrated against them.

Just because you feel you are justified in doing so doesn't change that it is exactly what you are doing.

[Endus]

Different set of circumstances. A woman isn’t asking for it either by the way she is dressed or acts.

And the two victims here weren't asking to be killed.

Sure seems comparable.

This was a neighbor with prolonged exposure who was insulted threatened and specifically engaged for a confrontation.

"No, man, you don't understand, she'd been flirting with me for months. Of course I had to rape her!"

Not an argument.

Sorry dude but you’re comparison isn’t going to work.

I'm getting a lot of complaints that it's a bad comparison, and not a single explanation as to why other than it makes you question your position.

Which is kind of the point.

[cubby]

It's the literal definition of the term.

You are assigning blame to the victims for the crime perpetuated against them.

Just because you feel you are justified in doing so doesn't change that it is exactly what you are doing.

It's not victim blaming. You keep using that term incorrectly. You want it to be because it fits what you need it to be.

It's been explained several times in this thread. Victim blaming, as an example, is when a woman who is raped is "blamed" for how she dressed or flirted. That is not this situation. AT ALL.

Here we have two sides who both used violence that went too far (obviously too far) with dire results. Entirely different.

[Forgettable]

You didn’t have a point. Being angry doesn’t make someone temporarily insane.

Wrong. A wise man said this long ago.

https://psychology-spot.com/anger-temporary-madness/

[Doctor Amadeus]

"Hey, she came up to me and was super flirty, and even touched my chest. That totally makes the violent ass-raping to death totally her fault, right, because she instigated?"

That's not a fucking argument, dude. Unless they went and armed themselves with lethal weaponry first, there was no "instigation" that would justify shooting them.

Wrong and you happily gleam right past your over stated point that doesn’t apply here right into justification.

Again I never said he’s justified I’m just not going to take your selected route they were innocent. That also doesn’t mean they should have been killed.

The guy shoveling the snow instigated this shit. You don’t give a fuck you don’t have to. But you aren’t him neither am I. I don’t know the situation I’m only giving my opinion.

My opinion is this wasn’t just over snow this was about an asshole neighbor looking to start shit and like so many felt the law and obligating others would keep him safe he was wrong.

Don’t get me wrong you can go right along not giving a fuck and telling me what the law is and how you feel it should be handled.

I’m staying with this and many situations like it could be avoided not by kissing someone’s ass but by being decent and not fucking with people because you feel you can.

But fuck it let’s ignore those social undertakings. I’m sure you waving your finger is going to bring anyone back and it sure as hell isn’t an attitude that serves anyone better.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

It's not victim blaming. You keep using that term incorrectly. You want it to be because it fits what you need it to be.

Define the term then. You keep on accusing people of using the term incorrectly but you aren't providing a definition.

It's been explained several times in this thread. Victim blaming, as an example, is when a woman who is raped is "blamed" for how she dressed or flirted. That is not this situation. AT ALL.

Victim blaming is when you blame the victim of a crime for the actions of the person who committed the crime. The only difference between this and the rape example is you feel that blaming the victim is justified in this case.

Here we have two sides who both used violence that went too far (obviously too far) with dire results. Entirely different.

By your own admission, you didn't even know about the initial violence (which still does not justify the use of lethal force) until recently...yet you formed your opinion long before that.

And we've already established the concept of re-escalation.

[cubby]

I'm not downplaying it, I'm saying that how horrific they may have been is basically irrelevant. If they were violent (I watched the video and didn't notice it, but it didn't seem to catch the whole thing and wasn't tracking it and was pretty crappy resolution; I'm not disputing it I just have no frame of reference), then if they'd gotten into a slap-fight or whatever I'd say hit 'em all with disturbing the peace or something.

But we're talking about the shooting.

You can't just take the shooting entirely out of context. The details matter and what led up to the shooting matters as well.

Depends on where you draw the line of premeditation and how long you need to plan it; I was assuming it might've still only fit as second because it's still "heat of the moment", but thinking again going back into your house to get a weapon probably does cross that line.

IANAL, and I try not to leap to claims of first-degree murder unless it's literally "here's my complex weeks-long plot to kill a guy" clear.

The going back to get another gun makes it premeditated, hence the first degree.

Again, I don't have a frame of reference on exactly what their level of violence was. Assuming it was just slappy-smacks or similar belligerent brawling, then no. It doesn't change my answer one bit. I frankly do not see why it should. It could provide an excuse to respond in kind, but that's not what happened.

If this were a story about two neighbours who'd been duking it out fist-to-fist in the street, I'd say they both were to blame. That answer changes when one party bogs off and grabs a gun.

The couple acted violent first, and the guy had a gun on him, and eventually shot both. Then went back for another gun. Shout out here - with bold please - if I'm getting the point regarding the shooter already being armed wrong, please. I want that to be clear in this conversation, if that makes sense.

I'm not sure how it's meaningfully different. Is it that the victim in a rape case didn't commit a lesser crime? So would it be okay to blame a female burglar for being raped by the homeowner when he catches her in the act? Because fuck that, man.
I get that rape is an emotional kneejerk, but that's sort of the point. If you can clearly see why victim-blaming is horrible in a case of rape, why can't you see that victim-blaming in a case of murder is just as horrible

This isn't rape. Making analogies to it is entirely wrong, on several levels. Use a bar fight example or something else.

- - - Updated - - -

Define the term then. You keep on accusing people of using the term incorrectly but you aren't providing a definition.

Victim blaming is when you blame the victim of a crime for the actions of the person who committed the crime.

By your own admission, you didn't even know about the initial violence (which still does not justify the use of lethal force) until recently...yet you formed your opinion long before that.

And we've already established the concept of re-escalation.

We can keep going back and forth - doesn't matter. To be blunt, you're entirely wrong. Victim blaming doesn't come into play here. Period.

This was a violent situation that escalated on both sides, from a long standing and highly antagonistic feud. Everyone involved is to at blame.

[Doctor Amadeus]

And the two victims here weren't asking to be killed.

Sure seems comparable.



"No, man, you don't understand, she'd been flirting with me for months. Of course I had to rape her!"

Not an argument.



I'm getting a lot of complaints that it's a bad comparison, and not a single explanation as to why other than it makes you question your position.

Which is kind of the point.

Oh but it is an argument. See because this isn’t a court of law and the stupidity in question left all parties fucking dead.

I really don’t want to hear your excuse for the shit comparison between this and fucking rape. Because they aren’t at all similar.

It’s not even a good moral argument which at this point you’re empty.

People don’t instigate rape and there is no behavior proven to provoke it. Other than one person wants sex and the other doesn’t.


The victim here instigated the fight period.

[cubby]

don't you have laws in the us that penalize people for doing this to their neighbours? the shovelling snow onto their driveway stuff...

Not sure on this one - maybe harassment? I don't know.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Y
We can keep going back and forth - doesn't matter. To be blunt, you're entirely wrong. Victim blaming doesn't come into play here. Period.

This was a violent situation that escalated on both sides, from a long standing and highly antagonistic feud.

You are blaming the victims of a crime for the actions of them man that committed that crime.

You haven't established that it isn't Victim Blaming.

All you have established is that you feel you are justified in blaming the victim.

[cubby]

lol... rape isn't about sex...

Interesting statement - because you're entirely right. Which is the exact reason the violence of the shooting situation is NOT victim blaming. In a rape case, the rapist was always going to rape, regardless of anything the victim did or didn't do. Which is why blaming the victim in a rape case is victim blaming.

But in this shooting case, both side were at fault for the escalating behavior.

- - - Updated - - -

You are blaming the victims of a crime for the actions of them man that committed that crime.

You haven't established that it isn't Victim Blaming.

All you have established is that you feel you are justified in blaming the victim.

Ok, let's try a different tact, because we're getting nowhere with yes/no.

Did the couple do anything at all before being shot? Yes.
Did they escalate the situation? Yes.

Those actions are separate from victim blaming. They contributed to the violence. They were partially at fault for creating the situation.

Think of a bar fight. Did the loser in the fight have no blame?

[Doctor Amadeus]

don't you have laws in the us that penalize people for doing this to their neighbours? the shovelling snow onto their driveway stuff...

There are millions of things this moron could have done instead of taking two peoples lives including his own.

I think Cubby is insane with man love for Elon Musk but I don’t think Cubby is suggesting or justifying this lunatics committing murder.

As to more specific it depends on the city where he lives the ordinances and ultimately proof.

That can be hard to get and even harder to prosecute. I mean it’s snow which is an act of GOD.

I think the issue and problem here is the overall frustration that boiled over into this horrific incident.