Four high school students picked the wrong guy to allegedly kidnap and rob. Texas border patrol agent Armando Alaniz was was vacationing with his family in Florida and was packing up his car when four teens jumped him and threw him into his car. Gregory McDonald, 19, Dante Askins, 18, and two other teens, 15 and 16, are accused of pistol-whipping the agent, tying him up, robbing him, and then abandoning him at a vacant drug house in Orlando. What is interesting is that an OnStar vehicle security representative called the car after the victim’s wife called police. The agent heard someone screaming for help and notified police.
The agent was confronted at gunpoint in an Orlando hotel parking lot Wednesday night as he was packing up his car. He was forced into the backseat, pistol-whipped, tied-up and robbed of his wallet. His was then held captive for two hours. His harrowing ordeal ended when the carjackers ditched the car at a vacant drug house and fled, the Orange County Sheriff’s Office said.
Askins, who is a reputed member of the street gang Death Over Mercy, added to his problem by being picked up Thursday in a stolen car. He was previously charged in a serious offense but avoided prosecution. In 2013, he was charged as an adult at 16 with attempted murder in a drive-by shooting targeting a member of the rival Gorilla gang. His co-defendants received lengthy sentences but the charges against Askins were eventually dropped.
The four face charges of armed kidnapping, carjacking and battery with a firearm. Askins has additional charges of multiple counts of stealing cars, resisting arrest without violence, burglary and possession of burglary tools.
Sheriff Jerry Demings (right) stated that “[t]hese high-school students were playing a dangerous game, and they got caught playing a dangerous game.” That comment struck me as rather odd. Hanging on the back of city buses and running on roof top is a dangerous game. Carjacking, kidnapping, and pistol-whipping people are serious crimes committed by serious felons. The victim was beaten and robbed. I fail to see how the word game would come into play on any level of this crime.
Issac … you seem to love statistics, but ignore human nature and selfish criminal minds as well. Using purely statistics, your statistics, we’d eliminate automobiles first on the grounds of even greater lethality.
I no longer care…I just lost the dearest animal in my life yesterday, so just about now life per se does’t mean jack squat to me.
“The ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment is obvious to anyone who can read.”
isaac,
The fundamental principles behind the purpose of the 2nd amendment is obvious to anyone who can think.
So keep reading and when you begin to actually think, then we can have a reasonable discussion.
Here is a great explanation of the 2nd amendment for everyone who believes conservatives have ‘overlooked’ the well regulated militia part of the law:
http://www.constitution.org/2ll/schol/2amd_grammar.htm
excerpt:
The Unabridged Second Amendment
by J. Neil Schulman
If you wanted to know all about the Big Bang, you’d ring up Carl Sagan, right? And if you wanted to know about desert warfare, the man to call would be Norman Schwarzkopf, no question about it. But who would you call if you wanted the top expert on American usage, to tell you the meaning of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution?
That was the question I asked A.C. Brocki, editorial coordinator of the Los Angeles Unified School District and formerly senior editor at Houghton Mifflin Publishers — who himself had been recommended to me as the foremost expert on English usage in the Los Angeles school system. Mr. Brocki told me to get in touch with Roy Copperud, a retired professor of journalism at the University of Southern California and the author of American Usage and Style: The Consensus.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/17/oath-keepers-announce-plans-for-blackope
Oops. It turns out the narrative that the Oath Keepers are a bunch of racist rednecks is completely false. Apparently those claiming them racist simply assumed that since these people didn’t act as the good leftists of the world do they must be racists.
It would be embarrassing were any of those people capable of embarrassment.
Olly
When one refers to sacred texts written hundreds of years ago in time and place specific conditions and interprets them to support a unique argument, one enjoys an extremely broad latitude. The ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment is obvious to anyone who can read.
Those interpreting the 2nd Amendment to mean absolute freedom to bear arms with no governmental oversight conveniently ignore or pervert the part that includes the words, ‘well regulated militia’. They create scenarios in their mind of themselves and their neighbors rallying at prearranged sites to turn back hordes of government ‘agents’. Armed to the teeth with the arms that are theirs by Constitutional right, they take back the country from the society that has run amok.
At the other extreme there are those who would see extremely limited gun ownership, perhaps for rural conditions and hunting alone, perhaps no guns at all in private hands.
The majority of Americans, however, do fall between the extremes; those that desire more effective controls of gun procurement, more diligent application of these and existing controls, mandatory education in all aspects of gun ownership, and other measures to limit the death, chaos, and mayhem resulting in the conditions that exist today.
That America has a problem with gun violence is obvious. Statistics prove this, the facts speak for themselves. That guns have been easily accessed by those mentally challenged who have gone on and slaughtered innocents by the dozens is a fact. That major gun stores wave the three day verification period in certain cases, is a fact. That anyone can obtain a gun with little or no problem without the knowledge or scrutiny of society is a fact. Statistics illustrate that measures could be taken to reduce the number of gun deaths without repealing the 2nd Amendment.
In 2010, guns took the lives of 31,076 Americans in homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings. This is the equivalent of more than 85 deaths each day and more than three deaths each hour.
1. 73,505 Americans were treated in hospital emergency departments for non-fatal gunshot wounds in 2010.
2. Firearms were the third-leading cause of injury-related deaths nationwide in 2010, following poisoning and motor vehicle accidents.
3. Between 1955 and 1975, the Vietnam War killed over 58,000 American soldiers – less than the number of civilians killed with guns in the U.S. in an average two-year period.
4. In the first seven years of the U.S.-Iraq War, over 4,400 American soldiers were killed. Almost as many civilians are killed with guns in the U.S., however, every seven weeks.
5. Homicide-Guns were used in 11,078 homicides in the U.S. in 2010, comprising almost 35% of all gun deaths, and over 68% of all homicides.
6. On average, 33 gun homicides were committed each day for the years 2005-2010.7
Regions and states with higher rates of gun ownership have significantly higher rates of homicide than states with lower rates of gun ownership
8. Where guns are prevalent, there are significantly more homicides, particularly gun homicides.
9. Suicide-Firearms were used in 19,392 suicides in the U.S. in 2010, constituting almost 62% of all gun deaths.
10. Over 50% of all suicides are committed with a firearm.
11. On average, 49 gun suicides were committed each day for the years 2005-2010.
12. White males, about 40% of the U.S. population, accounted for over 80% of firearm suicides in 2010.
13. A study of California handgun purchasers found that in the first year after the purchase of a handgun, suicide was the leading cause of death among the purchasers.
14. Firearms were used in nearly 44% of suicide deaths among persons under age 25 in 2010.
15. More than 75% of guns used in suicide attempts and unintentional injuries of 0-19 year-olds were stored in the residence of the victim, a relative, or a friend.
16. The risk of suicide increases in homes where guns are kept loaded and/or unlocked.
17. Unintentional Deaths and Injuries-In 2010, unintentional firearm injuries caused the deaths of 606 people.
18. From 2005-2010, almost 3,800 people in the U.S. died from unintentional shootings.
19. Over 1,300 victims of unintentional shootings for the period 2005–2010 were under 25 years of age.
20. People of all age groups are significantly more likely to die from unintentional firearm injuries when they live in states with more guns, relative to states with fewer guns. On average, states with the highest gun levels had nine times the rate of unintentional firearms deaths compared to states with the lowest gun level.
21. A federal government study of unintentional shootings found that 8% of such shooting deaths resulted from shots fired by children under the age of six.
22. The U.S. General Accounting Office has estimated that 31% of unintentional deaths caused by firearms might be prevented by the addition of two devices: a child-proof safety lock (8%) and a loading indicator (23%)
Now, there are those who feel that this is nothing more or less than the cost of freedom. These people tend to be at one extreme but are extremely well represented by the NRA and the gun industry. This is an example of a minority of dangerous people holding sway over the majority. What part of the history of our founding explains all this?
issac – when I came to Arizona I found that the Constitution of the state automatically made me a member of the militia. Since then I have always been armed.
Inga/Annie,
It’s become apparent now (took me way too long), that I made a mistake in assuming you had a working understanding of the history of our founding. What’s worse is you don’t seem to care that what you continually dismiss as a philosophy admired by conservatives is actually THE philosophy AND BASIS for our rule of law. That you cannot tell the difference between what is fact and what is opinion is certainly problematic for you in the hopes of providing a reasoned argument. Oh well, thanks.
Olly,
Why does your source know any better what the “nation is founded on”? Heritage and your other source reflect YOUR political philosophy, of course they don’t represent progressivism as a liberal might. You are welcome to your own opinions, but your sources and your opinion that they are the arbiters of truth is your opinion, not everyone else’s. I’m sure you don’t agree with my political philosophy and my opinion regarding progressivism. That OK. It’s a free country, we are allowed to have differing ideas on how the country is better served. I’m happy for you that you feel you have found the “truth”. You are welcome to it.
“Does it occur to you that there are differing political philosophies?”.
Yup, that’s kinda the whole point. You and isaac’s progressive philosophy is clearly laid out in that article. The article clearly explains how your progressive philosophy differs from the one our nation is founded on. The article clearly demonstrates how your progressive, administrative state is destroying this country and it debunks the myths commonly expressed by progressives about the return to the limited-government philosophy of our founding.
When you and your buddy isaac are done chuckling you could actually demonstrate some intellectual honesty and PROVE the points of the article wrong. I know you won’t because you cannot; you see the facts don’t benefit your argument, which is indeed a joke. 🙂
Issac, yes indeed.
Annie
Sometimes you just have to laugh.
Olly, where to begin. First off, it did not occur to you that I was away from my computer? Patience is a virtue. Secondly, you say if I don’t read your links, I come across as a troll? I asked YOU a question, I didn’t ask you to post a lengthy paper from a right wing think tank and expect people to simply digest it and say “It is good”. Does it occur to you that there are differing political philosophies? Just because your links made perfect sense and seemed like truth to you doesn’t make it so to everyone. Not everyone who doesn’t adhere to your political philosophy is wrong or a troll or disingenuous. I did read both articles and they did not answer this question I posed to you earlier that you are all hot under the collar over, because you feel I didn’t respond to you in a timely manner. Seriously, you’re lucky I responded to you at all with all the hostility.
I. Annie
1, August 17, 2015 at 9:57 am
“Perhaps Olly would explain what he thinks the “progressive movement” is. Who are some of these progressive Republicans and conservatives?”
Little hypocritical, whot?
Inga/Annie,
Your silence after my direct reply to your questions is not surprising. You have two problems however;
1. You have to read the article that answers your questions or else you come off as a troll.
2. You read the article and have to admit limited-government Republicans and Democrats actually have the best interests of ALL Americans at heart and that progressive Democrats and Republicans favor the authoritarian rule of the administrative state.
Of course you will deny you have either problem because THAT is not in your DNA. That would require intellectual honesty and again…
“Perhaps Olly would explain what he thinks the “progressive movement” is. Who are some of these progressive Republicans and conservatives?”
So Inga/Annie,
I’ve provided a link to answer your first question. Within that link are examples of progressive Republicans and Democrats, addressing your second question. They all share your opinion that ‘all rights come from government’. Now the question is do you have the courage to actually read the article and more importantly, do you defend or reject the principles of the progressive, administrative state?
As a long time liberal, blah blah blah blah Polishing his liberal bleeding heart credentials and buffing his epeen.
So, what do you want Randy? A trophy? Gold star?
Not all black people are gang bangers, criminals. No one said this. I know nice Mexican families too who don’t belong to gangs.. Big deal. The law abiding of ANY race or ethnicity also desire to keep and bear arms for their own protection.
The fact that you are the biggest bestest liberal who has black friends and family is completely immaterial to the discussion of the 2nd Amendment or the wisdom of staying away from high crime areas.
Thanks I. Annie … that map is disturbing…too many states with no “gun show” background check requirements for handguns or rifles. I note Michigan is as I said it is…all handguns must be vetted. I’d not be bothered if Michigan added the requirement for long guns as well. However, my long gun interest is solely target varieties of shot guns….few criminals are buying high priced over/under trap guns. That said, too many states make casual transfer too easy….a felon can easily acquire one at an un-vetted “show.” No reason for that. The NRA that I belong to and support may not agree with me on this issue. I figure if you have nothing to hide, don’t hide it.
Reblogged this on L'horreur islamique à l'âge des ténèbres ن and commented:
C’est moi ou ils ont quelque chose en commun à part le fait d’être “étudiants”?
Barkin lives in the St. Louis area, is no right winger, and made an INFORMED comment @ 11:39a.
Randy has family members who married black people, but he doesn’t mention any black friends. One gets to pick your friends, if indeed they have any. And, you can also pick your nose. But one can’t pick their family. We ALL lament that @ times.
Randy, When you “single handedly” desegregated an apartment complex were you wearing your cape?