Comments
75,401 - 75,420 of 97,918 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago

“It made sense at the time....”

Since: May 09

Schaumburg, IL

#76403 Nov 28, 2012
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. Now, who in the Church limits it, I don't know but what I found on the website jives with what I've experienced and other people I know experienced. You are only allowed medication when you are dilated between 5 (I think) and 7 and they give you demerol. I experienced it first hand when I had my son by c-section after 30 hours of labor at a Catholic hospital. The only time I was not in extreme pain was as I was leaving and my doctor gave me a tylenol 3. I wouldn't know how closely all Catholic hospitals/doctors follow it in every hospital, however.
i have a friend who has had multiple surgeries in a catholic hosptital, and the times i've visited her, she has a morphine pump and nurses asking her about narcotic pills to help her sleep. another friend had a surgery at a different catholic hospital (different system, even) and also had a morphine pump.

again, not to get too personal, but if child birth is the only procedure you've had at a catholic hospital, i wonder (from my childless vantage point over here) if there is something to the child birth procedures instead that "regulate" how much pain medication and when it can be administered.

i just searched the USCCB (united states conference of catholic bishops) website and found several things on pain medication as part of palliative care and assisted suicide. They aren't against pain medication for palliative treatment (treating the pain), but basically warn against going too far with it to the point that it surpresses "normal" processes to the point that a patient dies.

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-...

This is a topic htat has been on my mind as my grandmother's cancer progresses, so it's a little more personally interesting to me at this point in time. It's not my intention to come across too snarky or "preachy"...

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#76404 Nov 28, 2012
Aisle Sitter wrote:
<quoted text>
i have a friend who has had multiple surgeries in a catholic hosptital, and the times i've visited her, she has a morphine pump and nurses asking her about narcotic pills to help her sleep. another friend had a surgery at a different catholic hospital (different system, even) and also had a morphine pump.
again, not to get too personal, but if child birth is the only procedure you've had at a catholic hospital, i wonder (from my childless vantage point over here) if there is something to the child birth procedures instead that "regulate" how much pain medication and when it can be administered.
i just searched the USCCB (united states conference of catholic bishops) website and found several things on pain medication as part of palliative care and assisted suicide. They aren't against pain medication for palliative treatment (treating the pain), but basically warn against going too far with it to the point that it surpresses "normal" processes to the point that a patient dies.
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-...
This is a topic htat has been on my mind as my grandmother's cancer progresses, so it's a little more personally interesting to me at this point in time. It's not my intention to come across too snarky or "preachy"...
You're not. I was specific that it was my experience and people I know who experience this. I think it might be "some" hospitals.

As for cancer, end of life, etc.-- it is not unusual that at the last stage they are given a lot of morphhine. It's actually a kindness. If you have three days to live and are in extreme pain, really are you NOT going to give as much pain medication as the patient wants/needs? You're going to prolong a life another day by having them in pain? Doctors know this and the good ones ride that line very well.

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#76405 Nov 28, 2012
And Aisle Sitter -- I'm sorry you're going through that.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#76406 Nov 28, 2012
On Thanksgiving, a man in rural/small town Minnesota shot and killed two teenagers who broke into his home to rob him. He’d had problems with thefts before (including $10K in money, guns, and other stuff being stolen in October).(He’s a retired U.S. State Department security guard.)

He expected to be robbed, so he made it look like he wasn’t home. Sat in his basement with loaded guns on his lap. He heard a window break upstairs. He waited until he saw feet coming down his basemetn steps. Then he saw the legs, then the hips, then he shot. The 17yo boy fell down the rest of the stairs, and the guy shot the kid in the face at point-blank range.

He put the body on a tarp and dragged it back to a workshop.

He heard someone else upstairs, so he waited. Same thing – once he saw the hips, he shot. She fell down the steps. His gun jammed, so he got his .22 (which doesn’t do much damage, really, relatively speaking) and shot her several times in the chest. He put her on a tarp and dragged her back to his workshop. She was gurgling and struggling to breathe, so he put a handgun under her chin and blew her brains out.

The next day, he called a neighbor to help find himself a lawyer. The neighbor called the cops.

Now it turns out the kids (cousins) had robbed someone else the day/night before – including breaking a sliding glass door to get in (which is very expensive).

So the guy who killed them is being charged with 2nd degree murder (as he should be – he had no legal right to kill them “in self defense” once they were incapacitated). No reasonable person is saying he had no right to shoot them when he saw them come down his basement stairs. But he should have called 911 as soon as he heard the window break upstairs.

The man they robbed the day before agrees that the killer crossed a line, but he added,“Of course, if they weren’t breaking into people’s homes to rob them, they’d still be alive.”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#76407 Nov 28, 2012
Aisle Sitter wrote:
i just searched the USCCB (united states conference of catholic bishops) website and found several things on pain medication as part of palliative care and assisted suicide. They aren't against pain medication for palliative treatment (treating the pain), but basically warn against going too far with it to the point that it surpresses "normal" processes to the point that a patient dies.
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-...
This is a topic htat has been on my mind as my grandmother's cancer progresses, so it's a little more personally interesting to me at this point in time. It's not my intention to come across too snarky or "preachy"...
It's very common that with hospice care, the pain meds get increased to a degree where they effect heart rate and breathing, and that leads to their death.

But big deal -- it leads to their death two days before it otherwise would have happened. At that point, pain management, to me, is more important than dragging another day or two of life out of a person.

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#76408 Nov 28, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
On Thanksgiving, a man in rural/small town Minnesota shot and killed two teenagers who broke into his home to rob him. He’d had problems with thefts before (including $10K in money, guns, and other stuff being stolen in October).(He’s a retired U.S. State Department security guard.)
He expected to be robbed, so he made it look like he wasn’t home. Sat in his basement with loaded guns on his lap. He heard a window break upstairs. He waited until he saw feet coming down his basemetn steps. Then he saw the legs, then the hips, then he shot. The 17yo boy fell down the rest of the stairs, and the guy shot the kid in the face at point-blank range.
He put the body on a tarp and dragged it back to a workshop.
He heard someone else upstairs, so he waited. Same thing – once he saw the hips, he shot. She fell down the steps. His gun jammed, so he got his .22 (which doesn’t do much damage, really, relatively speaking) and shot her several times in the chest. He put her on a tarp and dragged her back to his workshop. She was gurgling and struggling to breathe, so he put a handgun under her chin and blew her brains out.
The next day, he called a neighbor to help find himself a lawyer. The neighbor called the cops.
Now it turns out the kids (cousins) had robbed someone else the day/night before – including breaking a sliding glass door to get in (which is very expensive).
So the guy who killed them is being charged with 2nd degree murder (as he should be – he had no legal right to kill them “in self defense” once they were incapacitated). No reasonable person is saying he had no right to shoot them when he saw them come down his basement stairs. But he should have called 911 as soon as he heard the window break upstairs.
The man they robbed the day before agrees that the killer crossed a line, but he added,“Of course, if they weren’t breaking into people’s homes to rob them, they’d still be alive.”
That's someone who is hunting people. He should be shot in the groin and put in a cell and left to bleed.

Since when do you do a horrific thing in order to right a wrong?
Sam I Am

Knoxville, TN

#76409 Nov 28, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
On Thanksgiving, a man in rural/small town Minnesota shot and killed two teenagers who broke into his home to rob him. He’d had problems with thefts before (including $10K in money, guns, and other stuff being stolen in October).(He’s a retired U.S. State Department security guard.)
He expected to be robbed, so he made it look like he wasn’t home. Sat in his basement with loaded guns on his lap. He heard a window break upstairs. He waited until he saw feet coming down his basemetn steps. Then he saw the legs, then the hips, then he shot. The 17yo boy fell down the rest of the stairs, and the guy shot the kid in the face at point-blank range.
He put the body on a tarp and dragged it back to a workshop.
He heard someone else upstairs, so he waited. Same thing – once he saw the hips, he shot. She fell down the steps. His gun jammed, so he got his .22 (which doesn’t do much damage, really, relatively speaking) and shot her several times in the chest. He put her on a tarp and dragged her back to his workshop. She was gurgling and struggling to breathe, so he put a handgun under her chin and blew her brains out.
The next day, he called a neighbor to help find himself a lawyer. The neighbor called the cops.
Now it turns out the kids (cousins) had robbed someone else the day/night before – including breaking a sliding glass door to get in (which is very expensive).
So the guy who killed them is being charged with 2nd degree murder (as he should be – he had no legal right to kill them “in self defense” once they were incapacitated). No reasonable person is saying he had no right to shoot them when he saw them come down his basement stairs. But he should have called 911 as soon as he heard the window break upstairs.
The man they robbed the day before agrees that the killer crossed a line, but he added,“Of course, if they weren’t breaking into people’s homes to rob them, they’d still be alive.”
He's a hundred times worse than the robbers and so is any a-hole who would defend him. He laid in wait to kill them. All he had to do was show the gun and tell them to get the heck out. Stealing a guy's TV does not warrant a death sentence.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#76410 Nov 28, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
On Thanksgiving, a man in rural/small town Minnesota shot and killed two teenagers who broke into his home to rob him. He’d had problems with thefts before (including $10K in money, guns, and other stuff being stolen in October).(He’s a retired U.S. State Department security guard.)
He expected to be robbed, so he made it look like he wasn’t home. Sat in his basement with loaded guns on his lap. He heard a window break upstairs. He waited until he saw feet coming down his basemetn steps. Then he saw the legs, then the hips, then he shot. The 17yo boy fell down the rest of the stairs, and the guy shot the kid in the face at point-blank range.
He put the body on a tarp and dragged it back to a workshop.
He heard someone else upstairs, so he waited. Same thing – once he saw the hips, he shot. She fell down the steps. His gun jammed, so he got his .22 (which doesn’t do much damage, really, relatively speaking) and shot her several times in the chest. He put her on a tarp and dragged her back to his workshop. She was gurgling and struggling to breathe, so he put a handgun under her chin and blew her brains out.
The next day, he called a neighbor to help find himself a lawyer. The neighbor called the cops.
Now it turns out the kids (cousins) had robbed someone else the day/night before – including breaking a sliding glass door to get in (which is very expensive).
So the guy who killed them is being charged with 2nd degree murder (as he should be – he had no legal right to kill them “in self defense” once they were incapacitated). No reasonable person is saying he had no right to shoot them when he saw them come down his basement stairs. But he should have called 911 as soon as he heard the window break upstairs.
The man they robbed the day before agrees that the killer crossed a line, but he added,“Of course, if they weren’t breaking into people’s homes to rob them, they’d still be alive.”
I'm a firm believer that if you make the decision to break into someone's home with the intent of robbing them, you've made the decision to deserve whatever comes your way.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#76411 Nov 28, 2012
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
That's someone who is hunting people. He should be shot in the groin and put in a cell and left to bleed.
Since when do you do a horrific thing in order to right a wrong?
Yup. I don't blame him for being fed up with being robbed (he'd been robbed several times in the last five years), but shooting stupid kids until they're dead when you're in no immediate danger is beyond wrong.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#76412 Nov 28, 2012
I AM sick of hearing from the dead kids' families how they were such good kids.

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#76413 Nov 28, 2012
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a firm believer that if you make the decision to break into someone's home with the intent of robbing them, you've made the decision to deserve whatever comes your way.
Really? How do you know what their "intent" is? How much do people hate to get to a place where they shoot them dead when you're in no danger? How paranoid do you have to be in order to be so afraid to lose a possession that it's worth more than a life? I'm not saying give your stuff out, but there's a lot of room in between those two extremes.

It's too bad common sense has been lost for some.

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#76414 Nov 28, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup. I don't blame him for being fed up with being robbed (he'd been robbed several times in the last five years), but shooting stupid kids until they're dead when you're in no immediate danger is beyond wrong.
He could have just shot them in the legs from that vantage point. They'd have limped away as fast as possible and ended up in jail.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#76415 Nov 28, 2012
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>I'm a firm believer that if you make the decision to break into someone's home with the intent of robbing them, you've made the decision to deserve whatever comes your way.
I agree. One shouldn't have to take ANY risk whatsoever, no matter how minute, that one could be harmed by folks who break into your home. Even if you think someone is incapacitated what's to say they don't come to momentarily and pull a gun and shoot you. And if I were his lawyer I would argue that and also argue that he had no idea how many folks were involved. How is he to know there's not a third or a fourth person waiting upstairs for him. Should he really have to take a chance, leave one of them alive, risk that there are more people upstairs, and also face the risk that one of the two he thought were incapacitated might come to, in his own home?

He should have just killed them right away. Bang bang. One to take em down, one to the head to finish em off, in quick succession. He would have been fine or pumped them with so much lead as they came down the stairs that there is no way they would survive.

I have zero sympathy for those kids, but he will likely go to jail for how he went about it. It was too drawn out.

IMO, two less dirt bags on the earth is something to be celebrated.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#76416 Nov 28, 2012
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>Really? How do you know what their "intent" is? How much do people hate to get to a place where they shoot them dead when you're in no danger? How paranoid do you have to be in order to be so afraid to lose a possession that it's worth more than a life? I'm not saying give your stuff out, but there's a lot of room in between those two extremes.

It's too bad common sense has been lost for some.
Im pretty sure when someone breaks a window and breaks into your home that they have bad intent.

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#76417 Nov 28, 2012
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Im pretty sure when someone breaks a window and breaks into your home that they have bad intent.
It was a planned massacre. He should have dialed 911. He didn't. He killed a person after being incapacitated.

Yes, you should defend yourself if someone comes into your home. You don't lie in wait. From a legal dictionary:

"A person claiming self-defense must prove at trial that the self-defense was justified. Generally a person may use reasonable force when it appears reasonably necessary to prevent an impending injury. A person using force in self-defense should use only so much force as is required to repel the attack. Nondeadly force can be used to repel either a nondeadly attack or a deadly attack. Deadly Force may be used to fend off an attacker who is using deadly force but may not be used to repel an attacker who is not using deadly force."

I guess I was right. Common sense is not so common after all.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#76418 Nov 28, 2012
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>How paranoid do you have to be in order to be so afraid to lose a possession that it's worth more than a life?

It's too bad common sense has been lost for some.
If i had a choice of the following:

Person A will break into your home and steal your tv and a bunch of shyte or person A will die, i'd choose person A will die every time.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#76419 Nov 28, 2012
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>It was a planned massacre. He should have dialed 911. He didn't. He killed a person after being incapacitated.

Yes, you should defend yourself if someone comes into your home. You don't lie in wait. From a legal dictionary:

"A person claiming self-defense must prove at trial that the self-defense was justified. Generally a person may use reasonable force when it appears reasonably necessary to prevent an impending injury. A person using force in self-defense should use only so much force as is required to repel the attack. Nondeadly force can be used to repel either a nondeadly attack or a deadly attack. Deadly Force may be used to fend off an attacker who is using deadly force but may not be used to repel an attacker who is not using deadly force."

I guess I was right. Common sense is not so common after all.
I already said the guy is probably going to be found guilty.

Also citing a law doesn't mean the law is common sense. It's only the law because flaming liberals value the lives of low life scum bags more than they value the right of law abiding citizens to not be subjected to threats of harm in their own home.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#76420 Nov 28, 2012
You brak into my house and your life has zero value to me. If I were that guy I would have done it as I said and then laughed at all the people who felt I crossed the line. Don't like how I operate with intruders in my home ... It's simple don't intrude. You break into my home, I'm gonna tow tag ya mother f'er and leave you under a cover.

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#76421 Nov 28, 2012
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If i had a choice of the following:
Person A will break into your home and steal your tv and a bunch of shyte or person A will die, i'd choose person A will die every time.
And that, my friends, is what is wrong with our country. That's called vigilante unless you felt your life threatened. Not say you thought your life was threatened b/c you want to get out of trouble, that's still being a vigilante.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#76422 Nov 28, 2012
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>And that, my friends, is what is wrong with our country. That's called vigilante unless you felt your life threatened. Not say you thought your life was threatened b/c you want to get out of trouble, that's still being a vigilante.
until there is zero risk to my and my family's safety, i should be able to be a vigilante in my own home with folks who enter unlawfully.

And you talk about this guy being so messed up to lie in wait, but I image having your home robbed has to be a pretty traumatic experience. Never knowing when lying down at night if they are gonna come back and what they are gonna come back.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min woodtick57 1,099,962
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 11 min LessHypeMoreFact 46,300
Protestors march on West Side after fatal polic... 16 min reality is a crutch 1
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 27 min mahz 49,470
Amy 8-29 32 min Judge Janie 6
Al Qaeda wannabes told to target Las Vegas 39 min Alex Greg 1
Abby 8-29 40 min Mister Tonka 7
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr LRS 177,361
•••
Chicago Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••