Somebody ‘splain to me why this little shit doesn’t deserve to be taken out behind the courthouse and shot in the back of the neck, instead of being jailed for only 20 years. (Note that even without time off for “good behavior”, he’d be back on the streets at age 46.)
A California man has been sentenced to 20 years in prison for hoax calls that led police to fatally shoot an unarmed Kansas man following a dispute between two people over $1.50 bet in a ‘Call of Duty: WWII’ video game.
Tyler R. Barriss, 26, was sentenced on Friday by U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren sentenced under a deal in which he pleaded guilty in November to a total of 51 federal charges related to fake calls and threats.
The 2017 death of 28-year-old Andrew Finch drew national attention to the practice of ‘swatting,’ a form of retaliation in which someone reports a false emergency to get authorities, particularly a SWAT team, to descend on an address.
If there was ever a malevolent, spiteful crime, this one of “swatting” another person deserves a massive prison sentence — but if someone gets killed (see story), it should carry an automatic death penalty… pour encourager les autres assholes who want to play this sick little game.
Saw this pic (detail of #90 in the series) via one of Sarah’s posts. It’s of a Mongolian prisoner circa 1913:
…and it got me thinking. Why doesn’t this become standard prison attire for violent criminals in our system? (I can think of only one improvement, and that’s to add a shackle to the ankle so that the scumbag can’t use the chain as a weapon.) It would make prison breaks somewhat… problematic, shall we say; and to transport a few convicts as a group simply requires the addition of another length of chain.
And please tell me why the thought of a hundred or so MS-13 or Crips gang members thus attired in San Quentin doesn’t give you the Warm & Fuzzies…
Among the gun-controller / -abolitionist crowd, we often hear the
tripe trope that “Guns should be kept at gun clubs, which should be the only place you get to shoot them” and “All gun owners should be registered members of gun clubs”, and so on, all to do with how wonderful gun clubs are in terms of controlling gun use and allowing only lawful shooting. This, supposedly, will help end illegal gun use by criminals / terrorists / Trump supporters etc.
Then we see this little snippet:
Christchurch terror suspect ‘was member of New Zealand gun club where he practised shooting SAME AR-15 rifles used in horrific mosque massacres that left 49 dead’
…and another cherished little belief goes up in flames.
Gun clubs, and the restrictions attached thereto, do as much to stop random acts of violent crime as any of the other nostrums proposed by gun controllers, i.e. practically nothing.
So stop that shit. You’re not fooling anyone except others of your own ilk.
Afterthought: I would point out that this asshole, who was captured in the very act of his villainy, is no more a “suspect” than I’m a Democrat, but that’s an argument for another time.
The Christchurch terrorist was probably frightened off when he thought that the heroic guy who chased after him was armed, as noted here:
[Aziz] said the gunman ran back to his car to get another gun, so he threw a credit card machine at him.
He said he could hear his two youngest sons, 11 and five, urging him to come back inside.
The gunman returned firing but Mr Aziz said he ran past parked cars which prevented him from being shot. Mr Aziz spotted a gun the attacker had dropped and picked it up. He pointed it and squeezed the trigger but it was empty. He said the gunman ran back to the car for a second time to grab another weapon.
‘He gets into his car and I just got the gun and threw it on his window like an arrow and blasted his window,’ he said. ‘The windshield shattered, that’s why he got scared.’
He said the gunman was cursing at him, yelling that he was going to kill them all.
But he drove away and Mr Aziz said he chased the car down the street to a red light before it made a U-turn and sped away.
Couple-three points to be made here. Firstly, all praise and kudos to Our Hero — I mean, chasing down a gunman with a card-reader? Dude! And considering that Aziz came from Afghanistan, this was probably a walk in the park by comparison to what he’s seen. (“Only one gunman? Phooey. Try ten gunmen — now that’s scary.”)
Secondly, note that even though Aziz was unarmed, the asshole thought he had a gun and was shooting at him — hence the flight, and eventual capture. I leave it to the imagination as to what might have happened had a few congregants been armed, but we all know that story. Too bad it’s illegal to defend yourself with a gun in KiwiLand — because, of course, nothing bad has ever happened in New Zealand to justify that. Until something bad did happen. And this was really bad.
Finally, if any of those Muslim worshipers in Christchurch have ever supported, even philosophically, the acts of Muslim terrorism (and I’ll bet there are a few), just remember how it felt when it was happening to you. I know this prick was a nutcase — but so are the extremist Muslims who do the same, or worse, to non-Muslims.
Jihad cuts both ways, doesn’t it?
Here’s a report about a bunch of asshole rapists.
Now, before clicking on the link, guess the ethnicity (and probable religion) of the scum in question. (Hint: the headline reads, “Nine-strong Bradford sex abuse gang face years in jail for grooming and raping two 14-year-old girls ‘to satisfy their sexual desires’ “ )
If you guessed (following the “Bradford” clue) that they were all of Pakistani origin (and ergo Muslim), you’d be wrong. (I warned you this was a trick question.)
They weren’t all Pakis; only eight of the nine rapists were.
Teach you to jump to conclusions.
I’ve spoken about this topic before.
Adele Bellis, 26, from Suffolk was attacked when Anthony Riley arranged for acid to be thrown over her face in 2014, sustaining life-changing injuries.
She lost an ear in the brutal attack and was left partially bald, suffering serious burns to her face, neck and arm, and is still undergoing treatment today.
Either more assholes are playing with their chemistry sets than ever before, or else it’s just being reported more often. Either way, it’s a disgusting feature of modern life.
In the past, I think I’ve advocated a return to an older time, when “an eye for an eye” was considered a just punishment. Now I’m starting to think that we need to go back even further, to when the chemistry major would first suffer the torment he inflicted on someone else, and then be slowly immersed in a vat of boiling oil. I don’t remember who exactly came up with this excellent punishment, but I think it was either the Chinese or Japanese.
It’s not going medieval on someone; it’s going pre-medieval on their horrible asses. Maybe these toads would hold back a little, what with that prospect of retribution hanging over their heads. And by the way: the punishment would be visited on both the actual acid-thrower, and whoever caused it to happen.
Feel free to disagree with me in Comments, but you’d better have a good argument.