Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 1:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Neighborhood Watch programs were also discussed. Mullins suggested each neighborhood have a “kickoff,” a sort of block party, to let people know the problem was being addressed and how they could help"

((junkyarddawh)) were you the one 'fussin' about how everyone wants to just have party!! hehehe!! well that statement right there backed your 'fussin' up didn't it!! hahaha!

were is one at??? it's strange i'm the first to post....

Posted by peacerulz (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 1:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

ya just can't do anything with some of these ppl. hopeless they are.
what's up buttercup?????

Posted by Teach4Peace (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 7:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The police (law enforcement) are only as affective as the community at large is. People forget that a lot of crime and prevention and intervention, relies heavily on the public's effort as well. What happened to the nosey neighbor? As long as people are afraid to talk, the community will remain as it is. Silence is deadly. People need to also know that if they do talk, confidentiality will be held to the utmost. You can hold all the summits and meetings you want on crime, but until the infrastructure is solid, school, churches, homes, parenting, crime will not be significantly reduced. Listen, watching makes a difference. Studies have indicated, that people are far less willing to commit a crime, in locations they know they will take a chance at being caught in, due to being seen.

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 7:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

(((peacerulz))) what's up!! well after everybody on the forum fussing for me to get a life.. I finally decided to do just that!! haha!! i'm fixing to start 'BRINGING SEXY BACK' ( as justin timberlake and my 7 yr. old say) i joined a gym to overcome my dang addictions to this web page!!! hahaha!! be back on later though!@! hahahaha!!

Posted by NtzMom55 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 7:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Those attending said they wanted to cut crime, encourage residents to take a role in crime prevention and make people feel safe." I've implemented my own plan for protecting MY property.

Dr. Wayne Barnett....you could not have said it better!!! You are so correct with your responses.

The crime problem is largely due to the direct inaction coming from the D.A. and some of the justices. They are the ones who can and should have a direct impact on offenders, especially repeat offenders. The suspension of sentences and extremely low bonds are not working. Can they not get the message?

I can only imagine how disgusted our law enforcement departments are by seeing their efforts go to waste...having the criminal element back out on the streets after passing through the revolving doors in our court rooms.

Posted by Teach4Peace (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 8:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I would also have to agree that once the police do their jobs and arrest these thugs, it makes no sense to have a judicial system, that will constantly let these fools off who commit violent crimes.

Posted by JunkyardDawg (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

(((buttercup))) I wuz jus kid'n...did you think I was being serious? hahaha, Natchez party on!

Posted by JunkyardDawg (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

oh, that's the Cheif of police in the video? lol, I've been seeing him around for years. He's better looking than he used to be when he was skinny. But what was that blue light that kept flashing in the video?

Posted by destiny (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 10:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

>>DAWG<< it looked like a camera, but can't see it very clearly.

Posted by destiny (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

>>OFF THE SUBJECT<<< my$.02. We should all think about who we would like to have as mayor and throw their name in the pot. If all of us agree on one name or maybe two or three names we might can incourage them in a run off for the mayor's position. This would save whomever we select a lot of campaign money and encourage them to get their name on the ballot. I'll start off with JOJO Eidt, what say you????

Posted by USMBOY (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 11:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I guess we just need somebody to blame huh. Every time i long on to this web site i see more finger-pointing than problem-solving. Parents aren't around there kids all the time. They can teach right from wrong but its the kids choice to what they are going to do. Schools are for kids to go and learn and prepare them for college no a free babysitting program. Let's get it together NATCHEZ,MS

Posted by beammeupscotty (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Most of the drug arrests seem to be small time street corner arrests. Why doesn't the police go after the big dealers in town? I think we all have a good answer for that.

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

beammeupscotty, that's the same thing I've been wondering!

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 1:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Our justice system needs fixing because it's "off the track"!!!! There is something terribly wrong with the sentences some of these criminals have been given. Granting probation and light sentences for what most would consider to be serious crimes is just unnerving for us rational thinking concerned citizens.

However, for different reasons, both sides of the adversarial legal system--prosecutors and defense attorneys--like having probation as an option. When prosecutors and defense attorneys think that it's okay to grant probation to murderers, white-collar criminals, and other dangerous offenders, they are thumbing their noses at the interests of the victims and the public who expect justice to be served.

What they're bargaining away is the victim's right and the public's right to see punishment and prison imposed. One solution would be to outlaw probation for a murder sentence. Only the most extraordinary cases, such as a mercy killing would be considered for probation. Probation may be the option for the old man who pulls the plug on his dying wife who was suffering terribly from cancer.

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 1:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I also feel that some internal policies need reviewing. Some of the tactics used in the prosecutor's office and by the judges are allowing murders to walk with little or no time spent behind bars. We are seeing murderers getting less time than those convicted of burglary, robbery or lesser crimes.

Even though the criminal justice system lacks the resources to try a lot of these cases, they should not offer plea bargains and make deals that result in probation or little or no jail time. They should get as close to the truth as they can and offer an appropriate sentence. Use guidelines to ensure that the punishment fits the crime! Just compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges when determining the appropriate sentence. One of the key purposes of a fair penalty structure is that penalties should be relatively commensurate to the severity of the offense.

When you compare murder cases to theft or burglary cases, it's should be hard not to conclude that murder is always more serious. Yet, many thieves, burglars, etc. are getting more severe sentences than murderers.

If we can't trust the judges to do what is right when sentencing these criminals, then create a "sentencing committee" to determine the punishment.

We just need to come up with some rational solutions to these problems we have with the criminal justice system. It just behooves me that the average citizens tends to have more common sense than those we elect and appoint to these important positions. Maybe we need to rethink that process, too!!!!!

Posted by freedom42 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 2:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have been told that Jake Middleton is going to run for mayor. I think he was a supervisor at one time, but can't really remember him. I guess it was while I was living elsewhere.

Posted by thetinman (Keith Reynolds) on November 15, 2007 at 2:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well, many here know I have been trying to get on the force. Many wished me luck, Thanks for all the support here, but it has came to a stop. Didn't pass my civil service exam. don't know how, but missed it by 5 points I was told. I was wondering, I know in the past, veterans where given added points. I am going to check into it. If so, I may be able to get on this way. I just don't think I flunked it.

I know when I showed to take the exam, they said there was only hiring for FOUR "4" positions!!!! what a demand!!!!

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 3:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

oh!! I'M SECONDING THE NOMAITION OF JOE JOE RUNNING FOR MAYOR!! HEHE!!

((junkyard))) i know you where joking honey.. i thought about you when i read that part.. that's all!! haha! and i second what you say!! PARTY ON NATCHEZ!! :p

Posted by firered (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 4:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Sorry to hear that tinman! hopefully you can maybe get in by the loophole you found (maybe?!?!) 4 positions huh? that's a little surprising!

Posted by supertrucker47 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 6:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

WELL THATS JUST GREAT!A REALLY GREAT IDEA.IS THIS ALL THESE PEOPLE CAN UP WITH?PAYING THE POLICE OFFICERS THEY HAVE NOW MORE MONEY TO GET THEM TO STAY.THE OFFICERS THEY HAVE NOW NEED TO BE FIRED,NOT PAID MORE MONEY AND KEEP THEM ABOARD.JESUS CHRIST!THE PROBLEM IS THE POLICE ARENT DONING THERE DAMN JOB BOTTOM LINE.I SPOKE WITH AN OFFICER THE OTHER DAY ON THE NPD AND HE SAID PALINLY>THE POLICE ARE SCARED OF THE THUGS,SOMEWHAT AFRAID,THEY MIGHT BREAK OUT THERE NINE AND BUST A CAP!AND HIRING MORE POLICE?ADDING TO THERE NOW INCOMPITANT POLICE FORCE IS STUPID.MR.WEST WHY DONT YOU TAKE CONTROLL OF THIS PROBLEM LIKE MAYOR FRANK MELTON OF JACKSON MS DID?FRANK MELTON REALLY GOT INVOLVED FORCEING POLICE OFFICERS TO DO THERE JOBS.KNOCKING DOWN THESE CRANK HOUSES,BUSTING THESE GANGS.MR. MULLINS IS A JOKE.CHIEF OF POLICE HES NOT.HES AN OVER PAID POLITICIAN.THESE PEOPLE ARE YELLOW BELLY COWARDS THATS THE PROBLEM.IF I WAS MAYOR YOU WOULDNT BE ABLE TO FIND A JOB SCRAPING GARBAGE CANS MR.MULLINS.AND MR.MAYOR IF YOU RAN FOR DOG CATCHER I WOULDNT VOTE FOR YOU.THE BOARD OF ALTERMAN IS RAN BY A BUNCH OF PANZY ASS SISSYS WHO CANT EVEN TIE THERE OWN SHOE MUCH LESS CONFRONT THE CRIME PROBLEM.TY

Posted by peacerulz (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 6:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Is it Mike Mullins fault that these ppl are so dangerous that ppl are afraid to step up? The citizens are afraid to speak up and say anything and if a guy would put 30 slugs into another human being i for one don't want to be anywhere near the fool either. Chief Mullins had nothing to do with making these criminals go bad. Please try not to blame the wrong ppl is what i'm asking.

Posted by supertrucker47 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 6:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

MULLINS IS RESPONSABLE FOR KEEPING THE PEACE LADY.HE IS THE CHEIF.AND IF HE CANT MAKE POLICE DO THERE JOBS WEVE PAID THEM TO DO WHICH IS PROTECT AND SERVE>WELL HE NEEDS TO BE FIRED.NOBODY SAID HES MAKING THESE CRIMINALS BREAK THE LAW.AND IF THESE POLICE ARE AFRAID OF THE CRIMINALS?AND THEY ARE!THEN THE PEOPLE NEED TO HIRE OTHER OFFICERS NOT AFRAID TO THERE JOBS.DONT PAY THESE COPS WE HAVE ALREADY MORE MONEY TO GET THEM TO STAY.FIRE THEM AND HIRE COPS THAT WILL DO THERE JOBS.

Posted by thetinman (Keith Reynolds) on November 15, 2007 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Super Trucker Don't agree with you on many aspects. but I am sure the police are doing a job to what they got to deal with. I know I was surprised yesterday when I took the Civil Service exam they where looking to fill only four positions. From the news articles in the Natchez Democrat, seems they will need more then four. I have to agree they ones that on the force already, yes I do agree need better pay. BUT, I find the problem is that the punishment for crimes in our nation as a whole, well crime has gotten so out of control and the liberals that want to be the bleeding hearts that got so many laws changed or passed, well has done our nation a dis-service.

Yes i will agree we need tough mayors like Frank Melton, He does have the courage to get the job done. ALSO another great hero of mine is Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona. This man doesn't take "BLEEEP" from no one. He seems to make National headlines all the time. Check out his web site
http://www.mcso.org/index.php?a=Home

If we had more people like Mayor Melton and Sheriff Arpaio, trust me, this country would be much much safer

Posted by peacerulz (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 6:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And where are we going to get all of these men that want to go up to guys that are so hardcore that they will try to put 30 bullets into another human being? Just wondering if you know where they will come from. I'm sure that there are policemen everywhere that have certain ppl/places that they avoid. Wonder how many cops are fired up to go into the Ninth Ward in New Orleans after dark, maybe before it's even dark? Just like so many other cities all over this country. Get the courts to lock them behind bars where they belong like alot of ppl have been discussing lately. You know yourself the jails are'nt big enough to hold all of these idiots. And i'm not arguing with you in any way at all supertrucker.

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 7:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

They may be looking to fill only four (4) positions because they only have funds to pay four salaries.

Yeah, we discussed Sheriff Joe Arpaio over a month ago -- he was also featured on Nightline a couple of weeks ago, too. I believe he can supplement his income by hosting bootcamps to teach other law enforcement officers how the job should be done.

Posted by peacerulz (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 7:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Does anyone here know what happened to the Lipscomb boy???

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 9:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

well as far as MULLINS GOES.. supertrucker you can just eat them word honey!!! he is a GOOD MAN!! HE LISTENS, HE TRIED TO FIND A SOLUTION TO ANY PROBLEM!! MULLINS IS FOR PROTECTING CITY OF NATCHEZ.. YOU ARE JUST ENJOYING TYPING TONIGHT BECAUSE YOU ARE MAKING NO SENSE!!

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 9:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

(((ijohnson))) hey darling... since you were the first one to really break me in this natchez forum.. hehe :) i have an article for you to read... i'll be waiting on your opion.. I'M NOT trying to start a confrontation.. i have came to like and respect you!! :) i'm just curious as to what your opinion would be on this certain article..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071116/ap_o...

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

please don't forget to read it and give me your feed back... take care darlin!! hope to hear from you soon!!

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 10:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OH AND LET ME SHARE A LIL LAUGH EVERYONE AT THE GYM HAD AT MY EXPENSE THIS EVENING!! Hahaha!!

soo, i went to the gym again this evening and i'm working that tread mill!! I MEAN WORKING IT!! BUT i was also getting very distracted by an article i was reading in a magzine.. so i'm rreading and i'm working the tread mil hard!!

NEXT THING I KNOW I'M ON THE GROUND!!!!! I HAD SMOOTHLY ALLOWED THE TREAD MILL TO RUN MY butt RIGHT OFF OF IT!! EVERY ONE IN THAT GYM HAD ONE GOOD LAUGH!!@! I GUESS IT WAS A HAD TO BE THERE KIND OF THING...

I DIDN'T LET IT GET TO ME THOUGH! HAHAHA!! ALL I SAID WAS 's$$$' I LOST MY PAGE I WAS ON!! AND GOT RIGHT BACK UP THERE AND STARTING WORKING IT AGAIN!! HAHAHA!

THOUGHT I'D GIVE YA;LL A LAUGH!! :)

Posted by peacerulz (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 10:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

funny buttercup. you're gonna be hurting real soon. take a couple of aspirin when it starts. or Aleve or whatever.

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 10:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey, butter!! I just left the "BB gun" story and left a comment over there regarding that story.

As far as the story goes, my feelings are mixed. First of all, they must have had a death wish to go into someone's home at 4 o'clock in the morning with a baseball bat--they must have known that someone would be there. Secondly, a homeowner has every right to protect himself, his family and his property with deadly force. However, shooting someone in the back does not quite constitute self-defense. Usually when a person is fleeing, they are not posing a threat. From what I gather from the article, these three guys did not have any firearms, only a bat.

Even though I consider a bat to be a lethal weapon in a case like this, I don't consider it to have the same swift lethal volatility as a gun or firearm.

Thirdly, even though the surviving suspect was involved in the attack, to charge him with "murder" is a bet far-fetched and "suspect". I would have to question the real motive for that maneuver. Especially under the circumstances. In my opinion, the homeowner should have been bound over to a grand jury to determine if he should be charged with murder or manslaughter based on the evidence. Then, determine if it was a case of self-defense and no bill him.

I just think all these sly maneuvers with the laws and criminal justice system to protect one injustice is only opening the doors for many others.

The circumstances surrounding this incident is extremely sad. You have a 19-year old young man just beginning his life who was left practically an invalid because of the beating he got at the hands of these guys. You have two young men dead as a result of a stupid action they committed (all for the sake of DRUGS) who have families grieving for them, too. And, you have a man whose life has been changed forever because he has killed two men and has an invalid son he will have to care for probably for the rest of his life.

SAD, SAD, SAD. I just feel so sad when young people put themselves in compromising positions that result in the loss of their life. When you're young, you have tend to think that you are immortal -- nothing will happen to you. Then, when the adrenalin is at an all-time high, in a twinkling of an eye, it's over, for good. The realization that life is not a dress rehearsal but the real thing only dawns on them when they have floated outside their bodies and are looking down on their body's shell, of what used to be. SAD, SAD, SAD.

Posted by rocketman (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 10:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hey butter, you are so full of it! Yes you made at least me laugh tonight. Glad to see someone in a good humor.

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 10:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

buttercup, that treadmill story was just TOO FUNNY! //(*_*)\\

I guess you decided to start 'BRINGING SEXY BACK' by hitting the gym. So, . . . (I'm picturing it now and laughing) you found yourself on the floor!! Jumped up, said "Where was I?", and kept kicking! That's just too funny, buttercup.

Who knows, maybe you'll see yourself on YouTube tonight. With all these camera phones, somebody's bound to have caught it on camera. Ask the people at the gym if they have operating cameras. Get the film and send it to "America's Funniest Videos"!!!!!!!!

Ha-ha-ha-ha!!!! THAT'S JUST T-O-O-O FUNNY!!

On a serious note, though, I hope you didn't hurt yourself.

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 11:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

uh oh!!! i didnt think about tidays technogloy abd how we have camera phones!! hahaha!! well that was to happen then some one best tell me about it before they post it on you tube so i cna be one of the first to laugh my butt off about it!! hahahaha!! oh no i didn't get hurt!! hahaa! what's bad is i didn't even hurt my pride or anything like that.. i think something wrong with me???? i should;ve been embrassed at least for that but wasn't!! haha!! i just giggled to myself and hopped right back on there, WITHOUT THAT STUPID MAGZINE MAY I ADD!!

((ijohnson)) that one article is a strange one.. but how can you not consider the bat (the one that has put the boy in a home due to the fact he is basically a veggy it sounds) as bad of a weapon as a gun??? a couple more swings and the bat would've done exaclt what the guns did.. KILL... i don't think the fella that shot them should be asked questions about shooting the three men either.. backs turned or not.. they could've turned their back and started haulling tail when they saw ole dad show up with a gun in his hand... those guys probably would of ever turned and run if dad didn't havew a gun... and as far as charging the only surivor with murder??? oh my goodness! i need to go back and read what state this is in.. they sound more messed up then natchez does... lol

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 11:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh, buttercup, I do think a bat is as deadly as a gun, which I stated above. However, I don't think it poses the same kind of threat that a gun does. I'll give you an example of what I mean: If you and me are fighting in a bar, you pull out your pistol at the other end of the pool table and I pull up a pool stick or a bat, your pistol would probably beat out the bat. You would have the upper hand because you could get to me first, with a bullet, before I could make it around that pool table to hit you with the bat or pool stick.

So, when you really compare the power of the two weapons, the gun would be the MOST lethal because of your ability to reach your target faster, at a greater distance and with more force.

Whenever you have a shooting situation where someone has been shot in the back, you really have to question the circumstances. You MUST determine if it was a case of self-defense or mere murder. To put it in perspective, again, using the same example above. If I put my pool stick down, pick up my purse and beer and began to walk out the door BUT you shoot me in the back. I would hope the prosecutor wouldn't consider it self-defense.

You must always determine the motive. Were you so mad or enraged you decided to shoot me anyway? Were you afraid I was going to get a gun and decided to shoot me? Did you accidently pull the trigger? Were you suffering from some type of mental disorder or was "hearing voices" that told you to shoot?

These are just a few things to consider when you have a shooting whereby someone is shot in the back. Were they running away and not posing a danger anymore? If they were running away, especially when they realized someone had a gun, then you can reasonably surmise that they are no longer a danger but retreating. If you don't weigh the circumstances, what will stop people from going down the street shooting you in the back and claiming it was self-defense?

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 15, 2007 at 11:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

true... but!! they had just beat this mans son almost to death... should the man of dropped to his knees and stayed with him during his sons last few mins while the others just ran off and probably never would;ve came before jutice.. i still think the man was defending his family!! and as far as that other story.. well i posted my comment about that one on the other article we were justo on. hahaha! we are just jumpoin around tonight huh... haha

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 16, 2007 at 12:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Or, to really put it in perspective, //(*_*)\\ what would keep the girl at Wal-Mart from shooting you in the back when you start clowning with her up in there?!?!?!?!?

Remember that scenario you wrote about a couple of months ago when we first met online? Well, let's use that scenario. You get into it with one of the cashiers at Wal-Mart. When you get out of her face and head for the door or Customer Service to report her to the manager, she reaches under her smock, pulls out her pistol and shoots you in the back. Then she hollers "self-defense" or claims that she was in fear of her life being taken. Her claim would not be true. Her claim would not be a fair assessment of the circumstances or the chain of events.

As I said before, you can't arbitrarily apply the law at your own discretion however or whenever you see fit because you open the door for too many innocent people to get victimized. A lot of unsavory folks with bad intentions will use any loophole or lame defense they can use to get away with murder.

Posted by buttercup26 (anonymous) on November 16, 2007 at 12:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

the girl at walmart shot me after i turned my back to her from a confrontation then yea that;s murder!! but if my child had just been beaten to a pulp and the men where still in my home i would have to do something to make sure they did not get away with almost killing my son!! they had a bat!! me and the girl at walmart just had words...
haha! i guess we argeeing to disagree on ths one too huh??

I LIKE YOU!! you keep me on my toes!!! :)

Posted by peacerulz (anonymous) on November 16, 2007 at 12:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

alot of ppl would have fired at these guys after what they did. just like the group of white ppl that tortured that poor black woman need to be blown off the face of the earth.

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 16, 2007 at 1:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Another example of how this type of thing plays out: There have been instances when the cops kick in the door of a home to conduct a raid. The homeowner shoots the cop(s) and claim that the thought they were being robbed. The homeowner is almost always charged with "murder" if he kills a cop.

If the father was not hit with the bat or threatened, then he needs to explain why he would shoot someone running away from the scene. Being a vigilante is not what we want in a civilized society. Call the police and let them do their job.

I feel everybody's life should be valued.

Posted by truelies (anonymous) on November 16, 2007 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

BS ijohnson.
"Call the police and let them do their job"
Have they caught the 30 round shooter?
Yeah, let them go. Breaking & entering, attempted murder.
Son's a veg. Americans have a right to protect them and theirs from this asinine assault.
Come to my home. I'm insured by Smith and Wesson.

Posted by 000117 (anonymous) on November 16, 2007 at 11:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

To all of you that have given your comments. I wonder how many of you ever go to a Alderman or Supervisor meeting and voice you concerns in person. Or are you all like the BATHROOM POET? How many of you vote for the RIGHT PERSON for the job? Or do you vote for the good ol boy, or for your church member, party member, friend, family member, or best of all for the one that has given you the most money or favors. If you fall into of these, why do you sat a CRY? I JUST WONDER.

Posted by peacerulz (anonymous) on November 16, 2007 at 7:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

vigilantes are not what we want in a civilized society????? ummmm, what we don't want are thugs kicking our doors in for any reason. gimme a friggin break!!!!!

Posted by truelies (anonymous) on November 17, 2007 at 8:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Amen peacerulz.
No one said we must be vigilantes.
But, I say we must not be victims.
I will not confront an intruding thug with a phone call.
My 911 will come from a .44 mag.

Posted by charliesangel (anonymous) on November 18, 2007 at 12:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Maybe if you set up police substations in areas that are high in crime such as Maryland/Cambridge Heights, Broadmoor and other areas as well, this would possibly decrease some of the crime. Years ago Williams Apartments used to be an area high in crime, and a police substation was set up there and it decreased crime tremendously. You hardly ever here of crime in williams apartments any more. Just an idea

Posted by gunther57 (anonymous) on November 18, 2007 at 4:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

i really dont like this super trucker guy, like i have said may times before i am a cop. i am just deployed. i love my job and who else can say they save lives daily. its not the police officers. crime will happen and it will get worse no matter what anyone does...i know people will say it and i will also...when they took prayer out of the school crime went up...then parents started not caring about there kids...then you had teens( not the ones that took the resposibility) that started getting pregnat and everyone said it was ok...now listen to the music these kids listen too...i will admit i like some rap but i hate the stuff that says every word in the book and talks about killing a man for looking at another wrong....parents of these new kids need there ass kicked and brought back to reality...i can say that cause i do see both worlds...from iraq and the streets of natchez....i know some yall are saying oh he must not be a parent....i am a father i have a daughter....and when she gets to that age she will know that daddy dont play, cause i was raised right and i will raise my kid the same....another problem is that everyone blames the school or the police or somthing else....older people who are reading this think back...if you did somthing wrong you caught hell when you got home cause mrs knows everyting done called your parents...chief mullins is a good chief and a good man...if anyone dont know him personaly or as a boss doesnt diserve a comment on this page about him...that is stupidity talking...before you blame the police look at the parents of the child...i am off my soap box now

Posted by freedom42 (anonymous) on November 18, 2007 at 5:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mike Mullins is one of the finest men to walk the earth. He really cares about his city and his job. He takes each case very seriously. He is a good Christian man and loves his family. Nuff said! I talked to him once about just the above sceniaros - someone breaking into my home. Know what he told me, as a woman alone with kids - shoot to kill. Otherwise I may not make it to a phone to call the police. I have taken him at his word.

Posted by ijohnson (anonymous) on November 19, 2007 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Whether you are a vigilante, victim or vulture, my comments about "calling the police" ONLY pertain to instances when the intruder has retreated and is running away. WHEN YOU SHOOT SOMEBODY IN THE BACK, most state laws question whether it was "self-defense". That's my point.

So, if you want to take the cowardly way out and shoot somebody in the back, then be man or woman enough to take the rap for murder or manslaughter. Be prepared to spend a little time in jail while law enforcement sorts out the evidence. Otherwise, you better think out a real clear plan of action BEFORE the perpetrator kicks in your door.

In my personal opinion, the only way you can justify shooting or killing someone else and claiming it was self-defense, is if you have been threatened and in fear of losing you life, the perpetrator is holding or was holding a deadly weapon, and there' evidence to support the claim that there was forceable entry. Then, the shot would come FROM THE FRONT, not the back. Otherwise, you've got some real explaining to do!