Article Comment 

Columbus police probe similar crimes





Columbus police are investigating a pair of armed robberies which took place early Sunday. 


The first robbery occurred at 1:38 a.m. at 1127 15th St. N., where a 45-year-old man, who lives at that address, was sitting on his porch when he claims three masked black men approached him and demanded his wallet. The victim reported the men hit him in the face with a pistol, splitting his lip. 


The victim was transported to Baptist Memorial Hospital-Golden Triangle, where he received stitches for his injuries. 


The second robbery occurred at 4:50 a.m. at 2206 Main St., the Economy Inn, where a 58-year-old black male claimed two masked black men kicked in the door to his room and demanded money. 


The second victim also claims he was struck with a pistol, but declined a trip to the hospital.  


The crime was not reported until 5:38 a.m. The victim told police he did not call immediately because the assailants warned him not to call the police and he was scared. 


Investigators said they were uncertain if the two robberies are related.




printer friendly version | back to top


Reader Comments

Article Comment raymond commented at 7/13/2010 8:02:00 AM:

The poor guy who phrased the term "Columbus, the friendly city" is probably turning over in his grave. But surely it's not the citizens of our quiet town who go around robbing and beating up old people. It's probably just some punks coming in from Starkville, West Point and Aberdeen trying to give Columbus a bad reputation. Reckon? This is why the pawn shops are selling out of guns and ammo. Sorta like Arizona border towns, shoot first and ask questions later, especially us older folks. I know I pack heat when I sit on the porch or even walk outside the house. The new law in LA which allows guns in church might be a stretch but it's probably gonna come to that here in Columbus before it's over. When a few of these hoodlums are shot dead by those they are trying to rob --that's when our police can take a break because the word will travel fast that old people in Columbus have loaded guns and will shoot to kill when provoked. It's called "self defense", justifiable homicide. It's been the right thing to do since Biblical days. We ant gonna take it no more!!!


Article Comment kj commented at 7/13/2010 10:27:00 AM:

Indeed...Who Would Jesus Shoot? Obviously any of these low-lifes.


Article Comment raymond commented at 7/13/2010 10:21:00 PM:

kj probably doesn't have a Bible handy, hence ,the following reference to aid in his understanding of my comments. Luke 12:39---
39.But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what hour the thief was coming, he would not have let his house be broken into.
The question is not "What would Jesus do" but rather what would kj do if he was pistol whipped and robbed of all his belongings? If physically able after the pistol whipping , he would be much more empathetic and go purchase a revolver plus ammo so's to be ready for the next punk who wanted to hold him up and do him bodily harm.
In the old days , it was "walk softly and carry a big stick". Now it's "always be alert and ready and carry at least one high caliber magnum pistol. Plus keep the 12 gauge loaded with 00 Buckshot at home. If someone is crazy enough to break into your house while you are there, you have to be ready to defend yourself because the thief is not breaking in just to say hi and how are things going.


Article Comment kj commented at 7/13/2010 10:38:00 PM:

But that's exactly my point...if someone broke into Jesus' house, I'm sure he'd be willing to shoot him in self defense. Do I need a bible to tell me otherwise? Or do you?


Article Comment raymond commented at 7/13/2010 10:59:00 PM:

kj, kj, kj. The Bible tells you a whole lot more, now all you need to do is find one and see for yourself. I think I understand your point, maybe not exactly, could be reading too much between the lines. I think you were supporting my post plus adding something of your own about our creator.


Article Comment kj commented at 7/14/2010 8:14:00 AM:

Your ability to read between the lines of my posts is matched only by your agape, of that I have no doubt.


Article Comment doj commented at 7/14/2010 8:41:00 AM:

Self-defense may actually result in one of the greatest examples of human love. Christ Himself said, "Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:14). When protecting one's family or neighbor, a Christian is unselfishly risking his or her life for the sake of others.


Article Comment kj commented at 7/14/2010 11:58:00 AM:

Your examples are of self-sacrifice, not self-defense.


Article Comment doj commented at 7/14/2010 1:18:00 PM:

kj -- What part of what I wrote didn't you understand? Or, it the meaning too profound for you? To permit murder when one could have prevented it is morally wrong. To allow a rape when one could have hindered it is an evil. To watch an act of cruelty to children without trying to intervene is morally inexcusable. In brief, not resisting evil is an evil of omission, and an evil of omission can be just as evil as an evil of commission. Any man who refuses to protect his wife and children against a violent intruder fails them morally.


Article Comment kj commented at 7/14/2010 1:29:00 PM:

You weren't unclear, doj. I'm not disagreeing with the fact that any of the situations you've defined as evil or morally inexcusable are. But self-sacrifice isn't the same as self-defense. Clearly Jesus would shoot someone to prevent a murder or hinder a rape or as an intervention in an act of cruelty against a child.


Article Comment sharp nasal kent commented at 7/14/2010 1:56:00 PM:

Jesus wouldn't have to use a gun. He could just turn the guy into wine or a pig or something.


Article Comment doj commented at 7/14/2010 2:07:00 PM:

kj --Your question asks a popular but misleading moral question: "Who Would Jesus Shoot?" The submerged premise, of course, is that Jesus wouldn't shoot anyone, and that, by implication, no one else should, either. That doesn't follow. Jesus had a unique mission. He is certainly, for Christians, the supreme moral example. But it doesn't follow that everything that Jesus should or would do is identical with what I should or would do. Jesus came into the world to die for sinners, to absorb, as it were, the evils of the world. I can't do that. The right question for the Christian is: "What Would Jesus Have Me Do?" To put it sharply, the Christian will have occasion to ask: "Would Jesus have me shoot someone in this situation?" The question yields an automatic "no" only if pacifism applies to everyone in every situation. It doesn't.


Article Comment kj commented at 7/14/2010 3:16:00 PM:

OK, so in what situation would Jesus have someone get an abortion?


Article Comment doj commented at 7/14/2010 6:21:00 PM:

kj -- So where are we going with this? Another speculative question with no definitive answer. As I recall, the Bible is mute on the subject of abortion. It was permissible under Roman law in Jesus time, but Jesus made no mention of it, nor has it been prohibited under Jewish law. From what I have read from both sides, pro-life or pro-choice, the various proponents seem to plagiarize the Bible to suit their arguments. In my view, man has freedom of choice to do right or wrong, and must face judgement for his mistakes. It is not my perogative to offer up judgement. That belongs to God alone.


Article Comment kj commented at 7/15/2010 12:45:00 AM:

"From what I have read from both sides, pro-life or pro-choice, the various proponents seem to plagiarize the Bible to suit their arguments."

That idea is where I've been going with this; except that I submit the Bible is plagiarized to suit any number of arguments, pro and con, and--in the case of many self-identifying christians--with little regard as to how well those arguments match up with the christian ideal of Jesus as a moral ideal or example.

I will cop to judging, but I have been trying in this instance to use Jesus as the yardstick, rather than my own beliefs.


Article Comment raymond commented at 7/15/2010 12:53:00 PM:

Are you the same kj who used to claim to be an atheist? I'm pretty sure you and someone who goes by jc bragged before about being atheist. If so, why do you refer to the Bible and the One we Christians believe to be our creator for your support? Since you don't believe He exist, how much credibility do you think you show when you use His name in vain on you postings to belittle other posters? Another point about your judgement of me not haveing agape --how can an atheist believe in agape? Huh? Could kj really stand for "kill joy"?
Hope you have a day of rejoicing.


Article Comment kj commented at 7/15/2010 2:04:00 PM:

I'm just giving you the courtesy of measuring you by your own stated belief system.


Article Comment sharp nasal kent commented at 7/17/2010 9:08:00 AM:

how can an atheist believe in agape?

History lesson, Ray: use of the word "agape" to mean selfless and unconditional love predates Christianity. Although Christians have appropriated it, it does not have any inherent religious meaning.


Article Comment law dog commented at 8/18/2010 2:06:00 PM:

maybe these thugs need to read a document called the castle doctrine if u break in my house they wont need the police just the coroner


back to top





Follow Us:

Follow Us on Facebook

Follow Us on Twitter

Follow Us via Email