Last Night - Attempted Home Invasion at My House

[Grapeshot]

I was just looking at the profile of Hank T.
His sidebar shows him to be in 'invisible mode'. Too bad he couldn't go to DISAPPEARED mode.
Considering how long he's been a member he hasn't got one single friend here. One has to wonder how many (few?) friends he has in real life?

I was going to send him a PM rather than lambast him here publicly. Then I thought...do I REALLY want to be the first to send him a message??
No. I don't. It might set some kind of precedent.
I wonder what happened to Hank T in his past to make him such an as*hat?

HankT is our resident "stimulator of the cognitive process" - frequently he forces one to look at what should be obvious.

If someone can't deal with the repetitiveness of his style, how hard is it to activate "ignore"? I have found the water to be deeper than some might think - maybe it's because I look further/harder.

Let's not forget the "No personal Attack" rule either.

 

[noname762]

HankT is our resident "stimulator of the cognitive process" - frequently he forces one to look at what should be obvious.

If someone can't deal with the repetitiveness of his style, how hard is it to activate "ignore"? I have found the water to be deeper than some might think - maybe it's because I look further/harder.

Let's not forget the "No personal Attack" rule either.

Until 2 days or so ago I hadn't posted here in a pretty long time. Plus I was already aware that ole Hank was someone I'm sooo glad is not a neighbor on my street.

I did activate the 'ignore' apparatus particular to him. Less than 10 hours later I took him off the ignore status. Sometimes I find his posts as somewhat a comic relief in a really sarcastic way.

Surely my thoughts as to Hank were not construed as a personal attack...or were they?
As far as that goes for my post to receive attention from Grapeshot I consider that as quite the compliment. Same as I would from say Neoteric Bladesman or RN49 or Alma The Younger. D

 

[JoeH]

Castle Doctrine

I don't like all the laws in NC but we do have the right to shoot to "prevent" entry into our home. After I told him a third time to stop and that I was armed I would seriously start considering it. The way our law is written you may be better off shooting to prevent entry than waiting till the enter. Glad it worked out for you though. I find it appalling the cops took the incident so lightly. I'm sure they would not have done so if it was one of them. He should have to pay for doing something that stupid, fine, time or something.

Chief - We passed the Castle Doctrine here in Michigan several years ago. If you are in your home (includes garage, decks, and yard) the criterion for shooting someone are: 1) You fear that your life is threatened 2) you fear bodily harm 3) you fear a sexual attack. If you know the person, or have a relation history to them, you cannot shoot them unless you can make a damn good case for the three criterion mentioned, else you may be charged with murder.

In the case here the BG was on the GG property without permission. The GG and his family were afraid they would be harmed. It seems that shooting through a door is not wise at all for a lot of reasons. Had the intruder smashed through the door though he was fair game.

Check with a Michigan lawyer for details. I am not a lawyer.

 

[Grapeshot]

Surely my thoughts as to Hank were not construed as a personal attack...or were they?

Nah, just keeping my hand in and making an early week-end comment. :lol:

HankT can bring out a different side in people sometimes. :uhoh:

 

[eye95]

I read it as a necropost, written solely for the purpose of making the personal attack. The post discussed nothing of substance. It didn't even discuss any specific behaviors or words. Instead, it focused purely on the person, even using name-calling. The post was nothing but a personal attack.

Note, I am not defending the person being attacked. I am standing up against unprovoked personal attacks and mod acceptance of such attacks. I amazes me that a mod would say, "Nah," in response to whether comments that include name-calling were construed as a personal attack!!

 

[baldp8]

Coming in a little late, but hats off to the OP for handling this situation with a cool head. Very glad everything turned out okay for you and your family. I hope I can perform as well if ever faced with a situation like this.

 

[Superlite27]

You know, eye, I kinda' see it that way, myself.

I noticed "Last night" in the title....so I clicked on it to see what happened on July 22nd 2011...............

...only to find that the last post before noname 762's was from 2009!

So, I read what noname 762 considered to be so important regarding this break in that it had to be resurrected from 2009 in order to post.....

...and I get a bunch of irrellevant moaning and complaining about the delightful qualities of Hank T (as if we're completely unaware of them).

Needless to say, there went 2 minutes of my life (now 5, since I am replying) that I will never get back. Therefore, the only thing that can possibly be accomplished, is for me to, somehow, be rewarded for all this pointless activity by receiving an explanation from the one who started it all.

Well?....What, exactly, is the point of posting about Hank T in a two year old thread, other than to sucker curious folk such as myself into reading it? How does this make the poster any less of an ass than he accuses the person in his rant of being?

 

[Grapeshot]

I read it as a necropost, written solely for the purpose of making the personal attack. The post discussed nothing of substance. It didn't even discuss any specific behaviors or words. Instead, it focused purely on the person, even using name-calling. The post was nothing but a personal attack.

Note, I am not defending the person being attacked. I am standing up against unprovoked personal attacks and mod acceptance of such attacks. I amazes me that a mod would say, "Nah," in response to whether comments that include name-calling were construed as a personal attack!!

No moderator acceptance of personal attacks was intended. I think the message was delivered with a soft hand, that such is not acceptable. Didn't see the need to carry it further. Sometimes less is more.

 

[eye95]

No moderator acceptance of personal attacks was intended. I think the message was delivered with a soft hand, that such is not acceptable. Didn't see the need to carry it further. Sometimes less is more.

HankT - You know that I am not your biggest fan. However, your being called a name being allowed to stand unedited is, IMO, unacceptable. I apologize that my complaint was not sufficient to get it removed.

GS - Saying that the name-calling was not a personal attack is not just less. It is nothing. It is tacit acceptance of name-calling. Anyway, I made the point I was striving to make, so I will move on, noting that the vulgarly insulting word remains in place unedited.

 

[KansasMustang]

God Bless Kansas

Attempted B&E

Drunk and disorderly

Criminal trespass

Destruction of private property

... Yet these humps charged him with nothing? Whatinhell kind'a police you got up there?

Add to that list of charges "Public intoxication" "Attempted Breaking and Entering" Assault ,,I could go on and on. But in Kansas, outside the door or inside, All I had to do was tell him to leave my property and if he didn't I could have dropped him. Range laws apply for those outside of cities. He presented a potential threat to my family and my livestock. Aside from that I'd have gone out the other door and used my back porch clearance device my 12 guage coach gun. But you did a fine job and excersized control.