Ammo For Sale

« « I’d suggest a suppressed 22 and a deep fryer | Home | We’re winning » »

Throwing missiles at occupied vehicles

The felony name for snowball fight.

Posted in uncategorized on February 10th, 2010 by SayUncle | RSS 2.0 |

7 Responses to “Throwing missiles at occupied vehicles”

  1. John Smith Says:
    February 10th, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    If a snowball is a missile then a snowball with a rock in it must be a weapon of mass destruction.

  2. B Smith Says:
    February 10th, 2010 at 3:15 pm

    I prefer the fragmenting ‘ice-core’ option. The evidence melts if you don’t handle it properly/quickly enough 😀

  3. Joe Carpenter Says:
    February 10th, 2010 at 5:36 pm

    Just figures they’ll lock these two up for the full 5 years, and bump two felony murder guys out on parole after only 2.
    Look, can’t we just smack them upside the head on the spot and shout, “Stop being a dumbass!” Think of all the enviro-paper-saving we can accomplish just from that.

  4. Laughingdog Says:
    February 10th, 2010 at 6:14 pm

    The report says that its purpose was to “alert residents to the seriousness of throwing objects at vehicles, while the vehicle is in motion”. But nothing in the report actually says anything about the plow or the cop car being in motion. I actually find it really unlikely that they would be able to hit a moving vehicle with snow when they’re scooping it with shovels.

    Honestly, I think it’s reasonable to charge someone with a felony if they’re throwing snowballs at a moving car. Driving in the snow and ice is dangerous enough without someone busting your windows or obscuring your view. Hell, if you pack the snowball tight enough, you basically have an ice cube in the middle of that thing.

  5. Jake Says:
    February 10th, 2010 at 8:18 pm

    Honestly, I think it’s reasonable to charge someone with a felony if they’re throwing snowballs at a moving car.

    I don’t know that I’d go as far as a felony for a simple snowball (as opposed to the iceball you also mention). A misdemeanor, yes, but if there’s no injury or intent to cause injury, I just can’t see making it a felony being reasonable.

    Part of the problem here is that Virginia law doesn’t provide the option for a misdemeanor charge – it’s a felony, or nothing. The statute is Va Code Sec. 18.2-154.

    Any person who maliciously shoots at, or maliciously throws any missile at or against, […] any motor vehicle or other vehicles when occupied by one or more persons, whereby the life of any person on such […] motor vehicle or other vehicle, may be put in peril, is guilty of a Class 4 felony. […]

    If any such act is committed unlawfully, but not maliciously, the person so offending is guilty of a Class 6 felony and, in the event of the death of any such person, resulting from such unlawful act, the person so offending is guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

    [emphasis mine]

    The prosecutor is probably hoping, by charging them with a felony, that when he offers to reduce it to a misdemeanor (say, disturbing the peace or something) they’ll take the plea and he’ll get a conviction without having to work for it.

  6. straightarrow Says:
    February 10th, 2010 at 8:39 pm

    stupid.

  7. mariner Says:
    February 11th, 2010 at 12:47 pm

    Jake,

    If the choice is “no charges” or “felony”, it should be “no charges”.

    These cops and prosecutors are retards.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives