Couldn't have smacked the nail harder.
The weaksauce in this thread is reaching vomitorious levels.
For the record (again) neither should the mobsters have 'been there' doing what they do, and without whose initiating presence, NONE of this would have happened.
The one blatant difference between the mob and the kid was their original intent in going to the area, which seems to have handily whiffed over a bunch of folk's heads here, in favor of finding some new nitpick to whinge about. JFC, how many 17 year olds these days do you know who would willingly travel to your business on their own time to scrub graffiti off it after a mob rampage?
Not to ride the armchair any harder than it's being ridden, but clearly NOBODY here really knows exactly why he went there or what his reasons for doing so were (yet).
However, given the obvious documentation, one can deduce that this all likely started as a perfectly normal, boring, and reasonable plan that did not include playing bullet-tag in the streets later that evening/next day. One can also assume there was likely plenty of adult supervision during the task; after all, I doubt anyone there just "showed up" to do the job.
I mean, come on, the kid didn't even have any gear other than some sort of lunchbag-med kit and a whopping ONE mag for a borrowed rifle (which, yes, apparently also did not commit the heinous act of crossing a line on a map).
Oh wait....should we take that lack of kit as further conjecture that he 'shouldn't have been' somewhere? Or if he did show up all tac'd out, would that now magically "prove" he was "looking for a fight"? After all I'm sure most folks here own all sort of fun toys 'cuz they're looking for a fight, and carry extra mag[s] as part of their daily CCW.... or would you NOT like to be portrayed that way if things go south?
And further, none of the other people guarding the business that night (which, might I also point out, nobody here as any idea of where THEY came from to be there, and apparently nobody cares), many of whom were way more geared up, got into a shooting. So what.... were the other guys just feeling lazy that night, or could we possibly deduce that NOBODY there was looking to start shit, and most likely subscribed to the misguided mentality that if you make a show of force the idiots will go away?
If B), then how was The Kid somehow unjustified in either his presence, accoutrements, or actions? What a quandry....
Finally, let us remember that, at least during some portion of the event, the foreshadowing events involving the deceased mob elements were taking place at a gas station, and since those tend to make a pretty hefty kaboom if the right conditions are met, and given the mob's preference for arson, the armed folks' presence at that specific spot was not only justifiable, but necessary for the safety of the community.
It seems to me... having people that "shouldn't be there" is how you DON'T end up like some 70 year old trying to stop the asswipes from looting your store and setting fire to it all by yourself, and getting bashed in the head for your trouble. It seems to me a goodly number of folks are going to be changing their tune if/when the madness comes for their businesses and property and they find themselves alone because they've proudly taken part in self-righteously shaming everyone they know into hanging separately by doing nothing.
Please remember, if your approved next door neighbor shows up under such circumstances with their non-approved cousin/uncle/nephew/etc from "the town over", to tell them to leave.
I'm guessing if this verdict doesn't go the way it should, there won't be an Athen's sequel on the kid's behalf....
Bookmarks