Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KTLA Los Angeles)   For those who bet on "Suspect in home invasion was not pregnant," please step up to collect your prize   (ktla.com) divider line 330
    More: Followup, Long Beach, Los Angeles County District Attorney, elder abuse, weapon possession, burglary, homeowners  
•       •       •

10282 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jul 2014 at 12:13 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



330 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-26 01:12:25 PM  

plmyfngr: how come y'all are so upset about a guy shooting a criminal who robbed and beat him but you don't get your panties in a wad about all the shootings in Chicago??.....BY CRIMINALS


maybe more people can relate to being the victim of crime in their own home than being in Chicago?
maybe more people have debated the "castle doctrine" than have witnessed a drive by?

maybe the two things aren't related in any but the most tenuous of ways and the analogy is bad?
 
2014-07-26 01:14:35 PM  

parasol: plmyfngr: how come y'all are so upset about a guy shooting a criminal who robbed and beat him but you don't get your panties in a wad about all the shootings in Chicago??.....BY CRIMINALS

maybe more people can relate to being the victim of crime in their own home than being in Chicago?
maybe more people have debated the "castle doctrine" than have witnessed a drive by?

maybe the two things aren't related in any but the most tenuous of ways and the analogy is bad?


so shootings by criminals is okay.....gotcha..
 
2014-07-26 01:14:47 PM  

plmyfngr: how come y'all are so upset about a guy shooting a criminal who robbed and beat him but you don't get your panties in a wad about all the shootings in Chicago??.....BY CRIMINALS


Because nobody is saying shooters in Chicago should go free. It's not that hard.
 
2014-07-26 01:15:54 PM  
From the looks of this crew, that non-existent fetus was lucky what with all that DNA to work with.

tribktla.files.wordpress.com
tribktla.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-07-26 01:16:14 PM  

BSABSVR: Holy shiat that guy's mom just made me blind.


Mom, I thought that was Rik Flair.
 
2014-07-26 01:16:48 PM  

Roook: If we're really pushing to move towards a society where it's ok for victims to execute criminals can I at least propose a compromise?


No.
 
2014-07-26 01:16:49 PM  
If societal values are such that they protect home invasion robbers to a greater degree than they protect the victims of those robberies then that society cannot long stand or advance until its values have changed.
 
2014-07-26 01:18:29 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: At first I was all "How could someone shoot someone in the back that was running away?"

And then i read about how they beat the shiat out of him and had robbed him multiple times so i could kinda see how in the moment with the adrenaline pumping you could do something like that with the fear that they might come back again.

Not saying its ok but its hardly 1st degree murder.


No it's not but definitely 2nd degree.
 
2014-07-26 01:19:08 PM  

mikaloyd: If societal values are such that they protect home invasion robbers to a greater degree than they protect the victims of those robberies then that society cannot long stand or advance until its values have changed.


She was still in his home and threatening him when he killed her, this wouldn't even be a story.
 
2014-07-26 01:19:54 PM  

birchman: mikaloyd: If societal values are such that they protect home invasion robbers to a greater degree than they protect the victims of those robberies then that society cannot long stand or advance until its values have changed.

She was still in his home and threatening him when he killed her, this wouldn't even be a story.


*If she was

FTFM
 
2014-07-26 01:20:33 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: Doktor_Zhivago: At first I was all "How could someone shoot someone in the back that was running away?"

And then i read about how they beat the shiat out of him and had robbed him multiple times so i could kinda see how in the moment with the adrenaline pumping you could do something like that with the fear that they might come back again.

Not saying its ok but its hardly 1st degree murder.

No it's not but definitely 2nd degree.


Jury nullification.

Old man did everyone a favor by putting some chlorine in the gene pool.
 
2014-07-26 01:21:24 PM  
When you rob and assault someone, you take your chances.  I'm not saying the old guy was right or wrong for following her into an alley and killing her, but when people are pushed to their limit you can't exactly rely on them thinking about the consequences of their own actions to keep you from harm.
 
2014-07-26 01:22:40 PM  

mongbiohazard: He chased her down and wounded her already. If he had stopped there, even though he had chased her down, I'd be on his side completely. But he then stood over her as she literally - according to his own admission - lay there bleeding and begging him desperately for her life. He thought about it and deliberately decided to take it upon himself to execute her. Not kill in self defense, not kill out of fear... To look her in the eyes, listen to her pleas and end her instead of letting the police handle things from there out. Hell, they might have gotten the accomplice too if he hadn't killed her and she could name him.


I cannot find any link that says this is what happened.

In fact, the physical facts do not agree with your portrayal of the events: "he stood over her and looked her in the eyes while she begged for her life and then shot her" is physically impossible. She was shot in the back twice - I am having a hard time conceiving of a scenarios where you could look someone in the eyes while shooting them in the back. In fact, his own story makes it sound like she said "don't shoot I'm pregnant" before or while she ran out into the alley. He says when he drug her back by his house she was already dead, so he didn't move her and then shoot her closer to the house.

And I still can't find a link that describes anything even resembling your version actually happening.

So what I'm getting at is this: source your version of the story. Otherwise, you're knowingly making up bullshiat fantasies to support your views and anything you say can be disregarded, now and in the future.
 
2014-07-26 01:22:42 PM  

MBrady: brap: MBrady: brap: Oh well in that case please, blast away with impunity!

so what you do hotshot?  apologize for in the house when the two career criminals robbed a senior citizen baby boomer multiple times and beat the shiat out of him?  Is that okay?   It must be okay because we all know that FarkliberalsTM hate baby boomers and want them all dead because they farked the economy and are living too long, and they are in the process of farking up social security.

amirite?


[i253.photobucket.com image 421x600]

so you would just call the cops instead and plead for your life?  yea, you probably would.

whiny little biatch, right?


You're calling a mod a whiny little biatch?  Shouldn't you be teaching a Rex Kwon do jo class.
/forget about it
 
2014-07-26 01:22:44 PM  
Don't start no shiat won't be no shiat. He didn't start no shiat...so you must acquit.
 
2014-07-26 01:22:46 PM  

mikaloyd: If societal values are such that they protect home invasion robbers to a greater degree than they protect the victims of those robberies then that society cannot long stand or advance until its values have changed.


That's just the way it is. People hate guns that much.
 
2014-07-26 01:22:52 PM  

fat boy: BSABSVR: Holy shiat that guy's mom just made me blind.

Mom, I thought that was Rik Flair.


No rick flair is much more attractive,  and that's coming from a straight male!
 
2014-07-26 01:23:28 PM  
I'm sure if the situation were different conservative DAs would love to charge the shooter with attempted murder since he was notified she was with child but shot anyway.
 
2014-07-26 01:23:41 PM  

plmyfngr: parasol: Repack Rider: Speaking as an Army vet (E-5, Honorable Discharge), that's why I don't own a gun.

I would MUCH RATHER get the crap beaten out of me than live with having killed someone.

YMMV but your patriotism does not exceed mine.

I don't want to own a gun because I wouldn't want to kill someone.....were I an 80-y/o repeat victim I would likely  opt to shoot for the kneecaps......some say an eye for an eye....how about limited mobility and join pain for life - much like the senior you targeted?
,
This makes me a bad Christian, apparently. Only love of Apple Pie marks me as a patriot.

you obviously don't know what you're talking about...ANY self defense course will tell you to aim for body mass...kneecaps and arm shots are for the movies..


actually, you don't know what I know - or how

my post was rather tongue-in-cheek - a fark-hued ITG response that wasn't intended as workable method of self-defense - do note it began "i wouldn't want to kill someone"
 
2014-07-26 01:23:51 PM  

Hickory-smoked: Why did this come up in the first place? Did someone tell the police that Miller was pregnant, or was she just suspiciously fat?


When she was lying in the alley wounded, the elderly guy walked up and pointed this gun. He told a reporter that she said "I'm pregnant. I'm going to have a baby." Then he shot her in the head.
 
2014-07-26 01:24:17 PM  
So, why was the other robber charged with murder?

Aren't all you lawyers saying that it requires premeditation or something? He didn't shoot her, he was just along for the crime.
 
2014-07-26 01:25:20 PM  

Elegy: I cannot find any link that says this is what happened.


Its fan fiction.

Just like klansman zimmerman and the fetus of saint Traytray
 
2014-07-26 01:25:25 PM  

Friction8r: Don't start no shiat won't be no shiat. He didn't start no shiat...so you must acquit.


This... This is good
 
2014-07-26 01:27:08 PM  

beakerxf: Hickory-smoked: Why did this come up in the first place? Did someone tell the police that Miller was pregnant, or was she just suspiciously fat?

When she was lying in the alley wounded, the elderly guy walked up and pointed this gun. He told a reporter that she said "I'm pregnant. I'm going to have a baby." Then he shot her in the head.


It would have been awesome if he has said, "Not anymore, biatch" right before he blasted her, 70's action movie style
 
2014-07-26 01:28:49 PM  

plmyfngr: parasol: plmyfngr: how come y'all are so upset about a guy shooting a criminal who robbed and beat him but you don't get your panties in a wad about all the shootings in Chicago??.....BY CRIMINALS

maybe more people can relate to being the victim of crime in their own home than being in Chicago?
maybe more people have debated the "castle doctrine" than have witnessed a drive by?

maybe the two things aren't related in any but the most tenuous of ways and the analogy is bad?

so shootings by criminals is okay.....gotcha..


what we have here....is failure to communicate......
 
2014-07-26 01:28:51 PM  

lucksi: So, why was the other robber charged with murder?

Aren't all you lawyers saying that it requires premeditation or something? He didn't shoot her, he was just along for the crime.


There is precendent and case law that covers accomplices where if an accomplice is killed during the commission of a crime you get charged with their murder.


If Trayvon had a partner who was helping to beat up Zimmerman, Trayvons accomplice would be charged with Trayvons murder.
 
2014-07-26 01:28:55 PM  

beakerxf: Hickory-smoked: Why did this come up in the first place? Did someone tell the police that Miller was pregnant, or was she just suspiciously fat?

When she was lying in the alley wounded, the elderly guy walked up and pointed this gun. He told a reporter that she said "I'm pregnant. I'm going to have a baby." Then he shot her in the head.


So a reporter was talking to the guy before he shot her in the head? Timing is everything! But you are right, she was "lying" in the alley!
 
2014-07-26 01:30:22 PM  

Friction8r: beakerxf: Hickory-smoked: Why did this come up in the first place? Did someone tell the police that Miller was pregnant, or was she just suspiciously fat?

When she was lying in the alley wounded, the elderly guy walked up and pointed this gun. He told a reporter that she said "I'm pregnant. I'm going to have a baby." Then he shot her in the head.

So a reporter was talking to the guy before he shot her in the head? Timing is everything! But you are right, she was "lying" in the alley!


Maybe that's why he had to shoot her.

"Damn, this biatch is pregnant. Gotta stop the spread"
 
2014-07-26 01:30:50 PM  

mongbiohazard: beany: vudutek: Doktor_Zhivago: At first I was all "How could someone shoot someone in the back that was running away?"

And then i read about how they beat the shiat out of him and had robbed him multiple times so i could kinda see how in the moment with the adrenaline pumping you could do something like that with the fear that they might come back again.

Not saying its ok but its hardly 1st degree murder.

Actually, it looks very much like first degree murder. Shooting an unarmed person in the back. Twice.

My intensive legal training (Law & Order, Seasons 1 through 15) leads me to believe this counts as second-degree murder. First-degree involves some premeditation and planning. This was deliberate, but also heat of the moment.

In the original thread one of Fark's prominent actual lawyers explained how the courts actually do consider what he did to fall under 1st degree murder.

Because as she lay wounded, laying on the ground begging for her life he listened to her then intentionally executed her - he stopped and took the time to contemplate his actions. That the courts generally consider to be enough to be pre-meditation.

Personally, my thoughts on the whole thing... Nothing of value was lost. Her and her accomplice were unrepentant scumbags. I don't mourn their passing... But that still doesn't make it right to execute her like he did.

He chased her down and wounded her already. If he had stopped there, even though he had chased her down, I'd be on his side completely. But he then stood over her as she literally - according to his own admission - lay there bleeding and begging him desperately for her life. He thought about it and deliberately decided to take it upon himself to execute her. Not kill in self defense, not kill out of fear... To look her in the eyes, listen to her pleas and end her instead of letting the police handle things from there out. Hell, they might have gotten the accomplice too if he hadn't killed her and she could name him.

I hope he is charged with her murder (what degree I don't care), I hope her accomplice is found and charged for his involvement in her death as well as his burglary and battery charges too. They all farked up big time.


This.

And her accomplice was caught and has been charged with murder, which is appropriate.

But yeah, the old guy executing her on the ground. We can't tolerate that in a civilized society.
 
2014-07-26 01:32:07 PM  
Agreed, he should be charged, and let the jury decide.
 
2014-07-26 01:32:48 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: mikaloyd: If societal values are such that they protect home invasion robbers to a greater degree than they protect the victims of those robberies then that society cannot long stand or advance until its values have changed.

That's just the way it is. People hate guns that much.


In a more perfect world we'd all get together to give the geezer a public service medal and pay for the ammunition he used.
 
2014-07-26 01:33:12 PM  

brap: AngryDragon: brap: Oh well in that case please, blast away with impunity!

As someone who has been a victim of a home invasion, I agree.  Someone violates my home in the commission of a crime and I don't care why they are there.  If you are then forced to defend yourself as a result, it is perfectly acceptable for him/her/them to never get up again.

Rock on Mr. Bronson.  My worldview differs from yours!   You should try consider Jainism.  It helps you let go of the "stuff" in the world.


Actually it was my wife that grabbed the first gun to hold them off (she woke up faster than I did).  I joined with the shotgun shortly after.  While my son called the police.

All three of us were under threat by three people who just picked our house at random at 5:00 in the morning.  Luckily, no one was injured and those three are now behind bars.

I would say that I hope it happens to you so that you understand, but I can't.  It shouldn't happen to anyone.  If it does though, you should be afforded the right of self-defense by the most effective means possible.

Yes, even you.
 
2014-07-26 01:33:32 PM  

sithon: Doktor_Zhivago: At first I was all "How could someone shoot someone in the back that was running away?"

And then i read about how they beat the shiat out of him and had robbed him multiple times so i could kinda see how in the moment with the adrenaline pumping you could do something like that with the fear that they might come back again.

Not saying its ok but its hardly 1st degree murder.

The old man hasn't been charged.
This is the USA.
In Canada the old guy would be charged with manslaughter


No he wouldn't have been. Maybe a weapons charge depending on the legality of the weapon.

The idea that you aren't allowed to defend yourself in Canada is retarded. You absolutely can.
 
2014-07-26 01:33:54 PM  

mongbiohazard: beany: vudutek: Doktor_Zhivago: At first I was all "How could someone shoot someone in the back that was running away?"

And then i read about how they beat the shiat out of him and had robbed him multiple times so i could kinda see how in the moment with the adrenaline pumping you could do something like that with the fear that they might come back again.

Not saying its ok but its hardly 1st degree murder.

Actually, it looks very much like first degree murder. Shooting an unarmed person in the back. Twice.

My intensive legal training (Law & Order, Seasons 1 through 15) leads me to believe this counts as second-degree murder. First-degree involves some premeditation and planning. This was deliberate, but also heat of the moment.

In the original thread one of Fark's prominent actual lawyers explained how the courts actually do consider what he did to fall under 1st degree murder.

Because as she lay wounded, laying on the ground begging for her life he listened to her then intentionally executed her - he stopped and took the time to contemplate his actions. That the courts generally consider to be enough to be pre-meditation.

Personally, my thoughts on the whole thing... Nothing of value was lost. Her and her accomplice were unrepentant scumbags. I don't mourn their passing... But that still doesn't make it right to execute her like he did.

He chased her down and wounded her already. If he had stopped there, even though he had chased her down, I'd be on his side completely. But he then stood over her as she literally - according to his own admission - lay there bleeding and begging him desperately for her life. He thought about it and deliberately decided to take it upon himself to execute her. Not kill in self defense, not kill out of fear... To look her in the eyes, listen to her pleas and end her instead of letting the police handle things from there out. Hell, they might have gotten the accomplice too if he hadn't killed her and she could name him.

I hope ...


Except we don't know that it happened that way.  We were operating under the assumption that he shot her twice outside in the alley in the back based on the media interview. In the police news conference it appeared that they are operating under a different set of facts with shooting taking place inside the house as well as outside after the shooter was knocked down and beaten by the two burglars. We don't know what shots fired where and determining that may take some effort due to the fact that the .22 revolver he used doesn't eject shell casings which provide a clue where the shots were fired, and the .22 round may not reveal a lot in terms of blood splatter when the hits took place. Life isn't CSI and making that determination can be more difficult than you imagine. Also note the charges filed against the accomplice included grand theft firearm and felon with a firearm so the deceased woman and accomplice caught later may have armed themselves from getting in his gun safe which changes the calculations and reasonableness of fear the 80 year old may have had even outside his home.

The 80 year old certainly could still be charged with murder.  The shooter running outside the home pursuing someone after the fact is a very stupid idea in California, especially in Los Angeles county. However with the DA apparently throwing the book at the accomplice, it appears they are going to throw all the responsibility on the dead womans accomplice and let the 80 year old slide.  If they charge the 80 year old as well, then they would undermine the case against the male accomplice as he can easily point to the 80 year old for responsibility creating reasonable doubt.  That isn't to say he won't anyway, but when the person you are pointing to is criminally charged for the conduct, it carries a bit more weight.
 
2014-07-26 01:36:31 PM  
... but with her dead, who will cure cancer?
 
2014-07-26 01:37:36 PM  
I am disgusted by the "sympathy" expressed for the killer. Assault, battery and burglary are not, as others have noted, capital crimes. Therefore, deadly force is never a valid response to any of them. A victim of such crimes should simply call the police and allow the police to perform their duty of protecting the public.

Being a criminal is not itself a waiver to the right to a safe work environment.
 
2014-07-26 01:38:44 PM  

Boo_Guy: fat boy: BSABSVR: Holy shiat that guy's mom just made me blind.

Mom, I thought that was Rik Flair.

No rick flair is much more attractive,  and that's coming from a straight male!


I can see the Rick Flair vibe, but he had better makeup I guess.
 
2014-07-26 01:39:33 PM  

Yogimus: ... but with her dead, who will cure cancer?


Well, the old guy cured one kind of cancer, that's for sure
 
2014-07-26 01:41:31 PM  

LavenderWolf: The idea that you aren't allowed to defend yourself in Canada is retarded. You absolutely can.


The only time in my recent memory in which a victim of a home robbery was charged with unlawful discharge of a firearm was when he called up his neighbours after the perps fled and they hunted them down via snowmobile. Two of the bad guys caught buckshot in the legs. The farmer got probation and a firearm ban. Had he shot them in the home, I really doubt he would have been charged at all, unless one died. And in this particular rural community, the jury would have been hung at best.
 
2014-07-26 01:41:47 PM  
I predict they will charge the old guy with 2nd-degree murder and then offer voluntary manslaughter with time served and probation if he pleads guilty. If it goes to trial he probably won't be convicted by a jury of peers.

/L&O chung-chung
 
2014-07-26 01:42:12 PM  

parasol: plmyfngr: parasol: plmyfngr: how come y'all are so upset about a guy shooting a criminal who robbed and beat him but you don't get your panties in a wad about all the shootings in Chicago??.....BY CRIMINALS

maybe more people can relate to being the victim of crime in their own home than being in Chicago?
maybe more people have debated the "castle doctrine" than have witnessed a drive by?

maybe the two things aren't related in any but the most tenuous of ways and the analogy is bad?

so shootings by criminals is okay.....gotcha..

what we have here....is failure to communicate......


Yeah there are the people saying he had every right to defend himself and his property with his firearm that no one is disputing.

Then the people who read the article and know that's not what anyone is talking about.
 
2014-07-26 01:42:36 PM  

Dimensio: I am disgusted by the "sympathy" expressed for the killer. Assault, battery and burglary are not, as others have noted, capital crimes. Therefore, deadly force is never a valid response to any of them. A victim of such crimes should simply call the police and allow the police to perform their duty of protecting the public.

Being a criminal is not itself a waiver to the right to a safe work environment.


these ARE capital crimes at my house......sorry about yours..
 
2014-07-26 01:43:13 PM  

lucksi: So, why was the other robber charged with murder?

Aren't all you lawyers saying that it requires premeditation or something? He didn't shoot her, he was just along for the crime.


Felony murder rule.  Roughly speaking if in the commission of crime someone is killed, those who participate in the crime can be held liable under the theory that the death wouldn't have occurred but for the crime taking place regardless of the intent of the particular participates in the crime. The most common application is when police shoot and kill one of the suspects during a crime, the offenders are usually charged with the murder because they put the cop in the position where he killed someone. There is a discussion of the theory and the potential application in the other thread if you are interested but it probably won't be rehashed here. It certainly may be applicable but there are potential problems with it in what we think the facts of the case are.
 
2014-07-26 01:43:41 PM  

beakerxf: Hickory-smoked: Why did this come up in the first place? Did someone tell the police that Miller was pregnant, or was she just suspiciously fat?

When she was lying in the alley wounded, the elderly guy walked up and pointed this gun. He told a reporter that she said "I'm pregnant. I'm going to have a baby." Then he shot her in the head.


And then he said a clever pun, lit a cigar with a piece of burning wreckage and stepped onto a ladder dropped by a helicopter that was waiting to extricate him from the country.
 
2014-07-26 01:44:04 PM  
i.ytimg.com
 
2014-07-26 01:45:36 PM  

Dimensio: I am disgusted by the "sympathy" expressed for the killer. Assault, battery and burglary are not, as others have noted, capital crimes. Therefore, deadly force is never a valid response to any of them. A victim of such crimes should simply call the police and allow the police to perform their duty of protecting the public.

Being a criminal is not itself a waiver to the right to a safe work environment.


Somebody kicks the crap out of you in your own home and you are gonna have a rational response? What..run to the computer and post on Fark pleading for help? Hell I think the old man's attorney may have a great case to plead temporary insanity. If someone soaks you in gasoline and lights you on fire, you probably wont react in a rational manner.
 
2014-07-26 01:46:31 PM  

Daedalus27: lucksi: So, why was the other robber charged with murder?

Aren't all you lawyers saying that it requires premeditation or something? He didn't shoot her, he was just along for the crime.

Felony murder rule.  Roughly speaking if in the commission of crime someone is killed, those who participate in the crime can be held liable under the theory that the death wouldn't have occurred but for the crime taking place regardless of the intent of the particular participates in the crime. The most common application is when police shoot and kill one of the suspects during a crime, the offenders are usually charged with the murder because they put the cop in the position where he killed someone. There is a discussion of the theory and the potential application in the other thread if you are interested but it probably won't be rehashed here. It certainly may be applicable but there are potential problems with it in what we think the facts of the case are.


The felony murder rule is quite honestly bullshiat.  Has no backing in logical thought other than another law on the books to get people with technicalities.

This guy didn't just shoot an intruder (which would have been fine)  This guy chased down someone and shot them in cold blood while she was already injured (no longer a threat) and begging for her life.
 
2014-07-26 01:46:39 PM  

plmyfngr: Dimensio: I am disgusted by the "sympathy" expressed for the killer. Assault, battery and burglary are not, as others have noted, capital crimes. Therefore, deadly force is never a valid response to any of them. A victim of such crimes should simply call the police and allow the police to perform their duty of protecting the public.

Being a criminal is not itself a waiver to the right to a safe work environment.

these ARE capital crimes at my house......sorry about yours..


I fervently hope that you allow members of the jury to use the good towels in the guest bath....
 
2014-07-26 01:47:23 PM  
Raw video of Greer's interview.
 
2014-07-26 01:48:44 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: I got no problem with him shooting any criminal in his house, even in the back.  But you CAN'T chase them into the alley, shoot them in the back, and then execute them on the ground.


Not legally.
This case seems to be one where they were in his sight the whole time but there's a common enough case where you run outside with your gun and people see you and start running away. It the heat of the moment are you sure enough to fire? I hope not, unless of course they are wearing a hoodie because I've been told that the universal signal for "I confess, it was me".
 
Displayed 50 of 330 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report