So now we can add another thing to the list of new terms: Wilding. "These kids get together and they'll start with a small group of kids and they'll begin to do what they call wilding ... or raging," Previtera said. "What they do is they start to run. And the small group will start to run and everyone will join them and pretty quickly it becomes a stampede."

I wonder how the woman in the wheelchair that was pushed over and robbed is doing.

For more on this,

http://www.policeone.com/Crowd-Control/articles/6851480-Stampede-of-teens-overwhelm-Fla-deputies-at-state-fair/

I kept the insurance that I have had for 35 years and have never used. I put Nancy on it, last year when she came to live with us. Over the years, I have had increases in what I pay, but now it is a sticker shock! Oh well, she is worth it.

I know that the government has had eyes on us for many years. I worked for the government and helped build some computer tools that allowed such snooping. At the time, I was sure that I was doing my part to help keep the US safe. Now I am not so sure. I guess it is how the tools are used. In years past, we kept tabs on who came into the country and some we watched their bank accounts. Now they are using the tools to watch the average American who is doing no more than going to work and raising their families. Someday, and I think it will be sooner rather than later, our homes will be wired so our every more can be watched and recorded. The internet is already controlled, only a selected and approved WEB addresses are being allowed. Our phones are monitored. Televisions that are "smart" or connected to the net allows you to be observed in your boxer shorts watching the weekly Nascar. It will not be a big step to tie into our home security cameras......Now are you going to have nightmares?

Here is another issue. I have an adopted daughter, I put her on my insurance in 2013. She is under medical and physiological care. My deduction was $500 each year. I know, great insurance plan. Anyway, on 1 January 2014 my premiums went up.....by about $300 a month, my deductible went up to $1200, still not too bad. Today I went to get her medication.....the price has tripled. So, thank you Obama for "giving" me a break!

It is instinct to protect one's family. I assure you, if someone was going to hurt my children, then they would not walk away. Who knows, if you had been there and depending on the circumstances then you might have been able to use SYG as defense. In FL you do not have to back away, make sure the other person is indeed going to cause grave harm or death; you only have to be scarred enough to think they are capable and have intent.

Thank you! Even me? A Jew?

Deal and no hard feeling, I respect your opinions and admire your suggestion to drop this. Thank you~! :thumbup: :thumbup:

Not just cars, but in stores, on sidewalks, restaurants, everyplace people go......the only places that are not under constant surveillance is public restrooms. And it would not surprise me for those to be wired soon. There is a proposal on the books in AZ where i******s will not be permitted to use public restrooms--they will be arrested. Now, just how would they monitor that without the use of cameras in the toilets?

It is difficult, if not impossible, to not h**e people who would let their child die when simple medication could have saved its life. Life is precious, all life. But, the same people who read this article and think how horrible, these people should be locked away for in perpetuity, I must ask; where do they stand on a******n? You may say that there is a big difference, but there is only one difference who is doing the k*****g. Yes, I see both as murder. I believe in God, I trust in God. But, as I said in the past, God is not a penny bank, nor is he a knight in shinning armor that rides to our rescue when we mess up. We are given the ability to make decisions and it is up to us to make the best decisions that we can. As for the snake handle preacher, well it would appear that he made the wrong decision.

I would not know, having never k**led anyone. I have seen people do some pretty strange things. I once came upon a car accident and the driver was quite dead, but the wife (I assume) or passenger or wh**ever her relationship was calming taking suitcases out of the trunk and asked if she could get a ride with me. Another time, while in Greece, one of our school buses was road side bombed by some unhappy Greeks. The school bus security monitor was crossing the street to a traverna to get suflocki. Children in the bus were burned, crying, dead, and some dying. I could tell you of others. One does not know what they will do in every case. I am not saying that Mr Dunn was in shock, but the strange behavior of the ones I saw with my own eyes were in shock and had no idea what had just happened.

Now, and I pray this is the last time I will need to say this, MR DUNN WAS WRONG. If I could say that louder to you, then I would. Right now you are what we say "kicking a dead horse."

Most children have a basic understanding of what is right and wrong. Even those that are challenged. And if the child is so challenged that they can not comprehend the concept, then they should be accompanied by an adult when out or they should be provided with an enclosed yard to allow unsupervised play. Children so disabled are not aware that steeping out in front of cars may result in their death. Personally, I have never met a child that is un-trainable. The other children, well their parents are once again responsible for their actions. Makes one wonder why they were using sticks on a car, and what about the cat?

I imagine that your situation took place during the daytime and not at 2 AM..... and I imagine that the children were not intentionally trying to damage your wife's vehicle. I do appreciate both apples and oranges, but to compare the two is a stretch.

Again, the man who shot the adult vandalizing his property was wrong. No question in my mind.

Right you are, but I bet her buddies will think twice about vandalizing other people's property. An ounce of prevention is more valuable than a pound of cure.

Should this man had shot the woman who smashed eggs mixed with debris and mayo on his car....no. He should have....but, do we all not think clearer when we are looking backward in time? And our vision and understanding is much better when looking at the lives of other people.

Let us assign fault. Certainly the shooter. And the adult that vandalized the property. A bigger fault lies with parents that have lost control or never had control of their off spring.

I bet that this was not the first time his property had been vandalized, and probably by the same people. I guess he was ready for them this time.

Lesson to learn. Parents, become responsible parents and raise your children with respect for themselves and others. If you do not, then expect that your children may not make it to old age.

Quite correct. Mr. Zimmerman is not white and the circumstances were entirely different.

Actually, the law is flawed. However, the instructions given to the jurors is very clear. Under those instructions, the jury came in with the only verdict possible.

If I were sitting on the jury, I too would question if it were stand your ground or not. The person in question went a block away to his car to get his loaded gun. If you are in fear for your life, you do not go back to the danger; you keep going away. That is what a prudent individual would do. Now, with gun in hand...and having the walk, did he have time to plan his moves? Having time to think, he went back with the apparent intent to wound or warn the aggressor by firing his gun. Not a move that I would recommend.

If he had the gun on his person (and had not gone off to retrieve it from his vehicle and had time to plan his next move) and he had been shoved to the ground and was being "gravely harmed" then if he pulled his gun and fired, then I could see stand your ground. But, if you read the initial reports, that is not how it went down.

The law does need to be changed. I do not think that there were enough discussions on the "what ifs" when this law was considered.

Your insult is a reflection on your character. Everyone is entitled to their opinions and they are entitled to post those beliefs. If you do not agree, then logically and methodically attack the post or position. Attacking people shows lack of intelligence or knowledge on the subject, or at least the inability to do enough research to propose an alternative view.

Due to the substance of your comment, I can not accept your apology.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: