+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 02/22/2018 05:36 PM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  4.342 Visits   2 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
09/02/2008 12:35 PM ID: 73117 Permalink   

16-Year-Old Shot Dead for Egging Cars


A 16-year-old boy in Columbus, Ohio has been fatally shot in the early hours of Saturday morning. Garrett Burton had been throwing eggs at cars with at least one other teenaged boy when he was killed.

The incident occurred in the backyard of a house, and police have said they don't have any suspects in the shooting. It is the second time a teen boy has been killed for egging cars in Columbus, with Danny Crawford shot dead in 2006.

    WebReporter: NuttyPrat Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
  Its America isn't it?  
Doesn't a person have a right to defend their property in America? I'd like to see more of this story come to light. Yes, I feel bad that he was shot "egging cars" but what if he had bigger plans?
  by: Raabz   09/02/2008 01:16 PM     
  I agree totally  
He could have stuffed old cheese down the ac vent. or lit a bag of pooh on the doorstep. your absolutly right.Kids?
who knows.
  by: woodrow rockefeller   09/02/2008 02:09 PM     
"what if he had bigger plans?"
What indeed. Does the phrase 'innocent until proven guilty' mean anything to you? We are talking about America, aren't we?

This kid did nothing to warrant death.
  by: Ec5618   09/02/2008 03:14 PM     
  Source is pretty sad  
Does not say if charges are filed, or if the shooter was even spoken to by police.
  by: hl2k   09/02/2008 03:25 PM     
  In most states  
they actually have to be in your home before you can blast 'em UNLESS you were being physically threatened. Most states also require you to attempt to retreat. In other words - if they're in your house, blast away. If they're outside and threatening you, attempt to retreat to a safe location and if that fails THEN you can shoot 'em.

Except in states like Texas (no surprise there) and Florida. In Florida you don't have to retreat and you just have to "feel" threatened for it to be a legal shooting, you don't have to actually BE threatened.

A lot of people forget that "innocent until proven guilty" thing we have here, so Raabz, don't feel too bad for it. Other people who forget are the media, the police, the judges, the prosecutors (and sometimes the defense) and the community at large. So while the chance were good for him to be found guilty of this particular crime, the punishment would not have been death. This does not warrant a shooting.

The police have no suspects? Not even a person of interest to question? Why not talk to the person whose back yard the kid was shot in? The most likely are they're just not sayin' right now.

  by: morgora     09/02/2008 03:45 PM     
  Egging moving cars not a terrorist act?  
The headline should read:
"Terrorist Shot Dead While Endangering Public in Columbus, Ohio"
  by: borderplex   09/02/2008 04:47 PM     
Did you not READ the friggin article?

"...and police have said they don't have any suspects in the shooting."

Yes, they spoke to the shooter...

Oh wait, no suspects!

  by: pcXXXtreme   09/02/2008 06:19 PM     
  he was a kid  
If your gonna shoot at them to teach them a lesson use a paint gun those things sting....What would u do if he TP'ed your trees.. Strangle him?
  by: mikkitaz   09/02/2008 08:10 PM     
  Egging moving cars not a terrorist act?  
Putting toilet paper on a tree is a prank. Throwing objects at moving vehicles is terrorizing. What if the driver was your brother, husband or father and he was blinded by an egg on his windshield that caused him to hit a truck head-on killing him and the truck driver. Is that like like TPing your house? Is that a kid's prank?
  by: borderplex   09/02/2008 08:23 PM     
  What if  
some snot-nosed brat TP'd your house and it rained and your dog ate the wet tissue and died of a bowel obstruction in the middle of the night after it crawled up on the porch and then your dad or your brother or your mother tripped over the dog's corpse while leaving for work before dawn at the last US flag factory that's actually in the US and fell and broke their neck and died, too - is that not a terrorist act????

Jus' wonderin'

  by: morgora     09/02/2008 08:39 PM     
  What if..  
Throwing objects at moving automobiles for reaction can only lead to a bad ending. As it did! No "what if" here. This 16 year old created his own bad ending. One thing's for sure. No one would have been hurt except for this young man's actions.
  by: borderplex   09/02/2008 08:58 PM     
Please stop being ridiculous. Throwing eggs is never 'terror'. It might be foolish and dangerous, but never terror.
  by: Ec5618   09/02/2008 09:01 PM     
  If it ends in death..  
It's Terror. That is undisputable!
  by: borderplex   09/02/2008 09:13 PM     
So, if I shoot you, you're a terrorist? Wow. You're an idiot.
  by: Ec5618   09/02/2008 09:16 PM     
  He should  
have tied the kid to a tree and egged him instead. That seems suitable.

I hope the guy doesn't get in too much trouble though. He probably feels pretty terrible (with some slight smug undertones.)
  by: jonnysodoff   09/02/2008 09:40 PM     
  Which came first?  
The bullet or the egg?
  by: borderplex   09/02/2008 10:04 PM     
  The article doesn't say  
where the shot came from. Also, whose yard was he hiding in when he was shot? His or a stranger's? Does Ohio have Castle Laws, which *might* making the shooting legal?

Oh, and I want borderplex on my jury if I ever go on trial for shooting someone. Apparently this person considers a minor annoyance a good reason to shoot someone because they *might* injure someone or *might* do something else. If I shoot someone my defense will be "I thought they could turn into a zombie and we all know that requires a head shot." If just the possibility of doing harm coupled with annoyance of others is enough to warrant the death sentence - well, I guess I will dust off that CCW and start carrying one of the small guns around. My ex husband lives in this area and he's ALWAYS annoying me. (Plus, he could hurt someone.)

  by: morgora     09/02/2008 10:27 PM     
  Bit harsh,  
I think it was probably a bit harsh to kill the kid, perhaps break his little hands but not kill him. Vandils piss me off, when i was you i was a total dick but i never tried to damage property or humiliate people.
  by: ShiftyFarker   09/03/2008 12:59 AM     
Hey Thanks - I really was curious- but I do live in the USA, just an Immigrant (English raised and fluent!)

I didn't actually mean he was asking for it, but due to there being no information in the article it did raise a few questions in my mind.

  by: raabz   09/03/2008 01:16 AM     
  @ borderplex  
No where in the story does it say that the cars were moving.. Lighten up dude and get off the terrorist act..& Not every death is a result of terrorism.
  by: mikkitaz   09/03/2008 01:30 AM     
  How many kids do they have to shoot  
before the kids get the hint not to egg
cars? Maybe this is a way to clean up
the gene pool.
  by: walter3ca   09/03/2008 04:55 AM     
  Nowhere does it say?  
Google "egging" in the news section and read the story as delivered from channel 4, Columbus, Ohio. The care was MOVING!
  by: borderplex   09/03/2008 06:17 AM     
  He died as a result of his own stupidity..  
"Not every death is a result of terrorism."
No! Sometimes it is just a thining of the herd.
  by: borderplex   09/03/2008 06:28 AM     
  It's just a short step  
from throwing eggs to throwing rocks.
There was an incident in Connecticut, the state I live in, where a teenage boy threw a large rock off an overpass. It went through the windshield of an oncoming car, struck and killed the driver.

The charges: Reckless endangerment resulting in death. Minimal sentence.
A few years served, then the kid gets his life back.

A lifetime of depression for the family of the victim.

Doesn't seem fair.
I can understand why someone might lose control and fatally injure the antagonist.
  by: White Albino   09/03/2008 09:08 AM     
  Home of The Frail  
lol why did he have to shoot the kid? why couldn't he just beat him a little.
  by: Amaze   09/03/2008 02:49 PM     
HAVE BEEN CALLED OUT FOR THEIR BULLSHIT ALREADY so I don't feel the need to repeat it, and though this kid was doing somethign stupid and wrong, jesus I feel sad for the poor fella. and whoever it was who said why didn't they give him a bit of a beating, hell ya, rough the young fella up a bit and send him home crying don't shoot him for eggs, the people defending the shooting should be ashamed of themselves, really ashamed.
  by: dieu_7     09/03/2008 03:21 PM     
  I don't think the kid should have been shot.  
I don't know what else could have been done though. If somebody beat them up then they file battery charges and get the other guy put in jail. They could also sue for damages and probably win because...
If they had been caught by the cops they couldn't have been charged with pretty much anything. Not even vandalism since no damage occurred to the cars they hit. In the end they may have had to pay for some car washes. Pretty much a slap on the wrist for something that very well could have caused people to hit other cars when an egg suddenly exploded across their windshield.
  by: qwerty017   09/03/2008 04:30 PM     
It will probably be a long time before a teenager in Columbus, Ohio, picks up an egg and hurls it at a car.

And, dieu_7, I am certainly not ashamed of my posts. Furthermore, I am not ashamed of the language I use in a public forum (as well you should be).
  by: borderplex   09/03/2008 05:20 PM     
So, you didn't notice how you showed
yourself to be a complete idiot? That
makes sense, I suppose.
  by: Ec5618   09/03/2008 05:37 PM     
  Name calling.. that's the answer  
When you disagree, but don't have any idea how to contribute to the conversation, you resort to name calling. Now that's what I call (that word "dieu_7" used).
  by: borderplex   09/03/2008 05:57 PM     
Oh, please. You said that anyone who gets killed is automatically a terrorist. What can one say to someone so dumb?
Please just shut up.
  by: Ec5618   09/03/2008 06:02 PM     
"How many kids do they have to shoot
before the kids get the hint not to egg
cars? Maybe this is a way to clean up
the gene pool."

so would banning anyone under an IQ of 115 from breeding. whoops that would exclude in the neighbourhood of 75% of north americans.

killing a kid over getting egged is a bit much, EVEN if the car was moving, EVEN if he cause an accident, if he caused an accident he (possibly and his family) ought to be held accountable... he wasn't threatening anyone life, and even if he had it would have been incidental, and that doen't make the victim the judge, jury and executioner, esspecially since an egg to my knowledge is not a deadly weapon... nor was (or likely could) it used as such.
  by: HAVOC666     09/03/2008 06:10 PM     
  16 Years Old.  
Act like a douche and you'll suffer the

Seriously, this guy's a douche. Maybe
he didn't deserve death but if by 16
you don't realize that you're acting
like frackin' asshat and don't realize
that you'll eventually piss off the
wrong person, you're not going to live
all that long one way or another.

Saves some of us an egging anyhow.

(Then again, I have strong feelings on
this because I've had a few things
thrown at me before... From cars
  by: edya   09/03/2008 11:11 PM     
  While death is too extream  
something has to be done in a more serious mannor to people who throw things at moving cars. In Australia we have had a spate of it recently where kids on overpasses throw rocks and meat pies ar car windows. in excess of 10 people have been seriously injured from this, and about 3 dead. They like hte meat pies because they cover the window, blinding the driver, then they get to see a crash. what do they get IF the cops catch up with them? Simple assault charge, maximum 3 years jail if its not their first offence, warning for a first offence.
Personally if someone endangers my life, or my families, i would be inclined to lose it also, and could not promise i would not throw that idiot from an overpass, just into an empty lane.
  by: ssxxxssssss   09/04/2008 01:21 AM     
Exactly right. These dregs of society need to be taken care of.

For people who say kids will be kids... These are teens. I'm not at all much older and I know what's right, wrong, will get me beaten black and blue or killed. I also know the consequences of most of my actions. I know that throwing ANYTHING at a car could possibly cause an accident. Ergo, I don't do it.

Cars aren't machines to be pranked. They're huge freakin' chunks of DOOM if something goes terribly wrong.
  by: edya   09/04/2008 07:23 AM     
  I actually would be impressed if that kid  
threw himself in front of a speeding bulldozer. Now that's a class act!
  by: White Albino   09/04/2008 08:51 AM     
  Brainwashed idiots!  
Whoever thinks its okay to kill someone for something as stupid as throwing eggs at someones car should hang out with crazy people that shoot other people for no reason and then come back here and write about how its okay to kill someone for doing nothing at all really.......
  by: liltrouble   09/04/2008 07:06 PM     
  Mess With the Bull & You'll Get the Horns  
I will bet the folks who complain about our attitude toward the terrorist who throws objects at moving traffic are the type of people who complain when others hold them accountable for their own actions. The Charlie Brown types.. "why is everyone always picking on me". If they can't see that this fool is dead because of his actions they are in for a lifetime of self-inflicted disillusionment.

  by: borderplex   09/04/2008 07:40 PM     
Since you still haven't taken back your
statement that any death is
automatically terrorism, you really
have no right to judge others.

Being accountable does not mean that
people should cavalierly kill you for
doing something stupid.
  by: Ec5618   09/04/2008 08:10 PM     
  I don't take back statements I haven't made  
I did not say "any death is automatically terrorism". You are trying to put words into my mouth. Misquoting me doesn't help you make your point. It only makes what you have say less credible.

Addressing this fool's actions, I wrote: "If it ends in death.. It's Terror. That is undisputable!"

Is death not terrible? Did he not initiate the action that brought about his own death?

You act as if I am defending the person who shot this young man. I haven’t even addressed the shooters actions. I have limited my posts ONLY to the action of the fool who decided to throw objects at moving traffic.

Again, I ask, which came first? The bullet or the egg?
  by: borderplex   09/04/2008 08:31 PM     
  @woodrow rockefeller  
Or he could have been pouring sugar in the fuel tank.
  by: ukpunk1   09/05/2008 09:53 AM     
You liar.
You called this kid a terrorist.
You justified this by saying that 'if
it ends in death, it's terror'.
The only death here is the kid's.
You called a dead boy a terrorist
because he died.
You called a dead boy a terrorist
because someone killed him.

If you didn't mean to write what you
did, you could have said so. So why are
you lying about what you wrote?

"Again, I ask, which came first? The
bullet or the egg?"
And if someone shoots you because
you're wearing pants (and he's
insane), pants came first. That doesn't
mean you deserved to be shot though,
nor that anyone wearing pants is a
  by: Ec5618   09/05/2008 10:11 AM     
  None of you children drive cars, I see  
It was 3 ayem. Even under ideal weather conditions, visibility is seriously reduced. The bars have just let out so some portion of the people on the road are impaired to some degree.

Some idiot kid, who is in violation of curfew to start with, and isn't carrying eggs to his mom to make a cake, decides to throw them at multi-ton projectiles being guided by possibly impaired drivers.

Suddenly, while driving along at about 50 feet per second, out of nowhere, a projectile explodes and blocks your vision. Even if you could react in the normal half second and put your wipers on, they'll only smear things, and you've already been driving blind for 25 feet, in a panic.

Does this justify killing the kid? No, of course not. Tying him to a tree and having a major league pitcher throw about three dozen eggs at him, maybe.

But the kid could very easily cause an accident, perhaps even a fatal one.
  by: biggfredd   09/12/2008 03:04 AM     
  That's why  
"why did he have to shoot the kid? why couldn't he just beat him a little."

Because when the kid recovered, he'd figure out some way to "get even", like burning the guy's house down with him in it. A kid out at 3ayem with eggs is not coming home from church.

And if the law caught him, he'd spend thousands of dollars on a lawyer defending himself about beating some sense into the kid.
  by: biggfredd   09/12/2008 03:10 AM     
Your comment shows just how big of an ignorant idiot you are. Innocent until proven guilty. Any person that sanctions vigilante justice on a 16 year old kid throwing harmless eggs may need clinical help.
  by: NicPre     09/12/2008 03:16 AM     
  Try this  
A lawsuit against the kid's parents for 100,000 dollars. Call it punitive damages for allowing their child to become a menace to society.
Better to deter the kid now rather than wait until he's done some real damage that results in him ending up in prison, doing hard time.

We've all seen that happen way too many times.
  by: White Albino   09/12/2008 08:07 AM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: