loose357: I will agree with you about drunk drivers losing their cars but as far as these two morons getting the same as a slap on the wrist for what they did, I'd have to say you are no smarter then they are. jmac420: you didn't have to spell out a thing for me, it's pretty easy to see why the NRA wouldn't stand up for morons like this, if you can't see that maybe you need someone to spell it out for you?????.

The address is deceptively close. But it's across the railroad tracks and a fence. A different neighborhood.

gfan- I don't have any idea how to address the rest of that jibberish, but someone engaged in tax evasion does not endanger lives.

And if you're on foot: what's littering, jaywalking, and giving the finger to someone who blows their at you equal to? Failure to pay a fine for an overdue book at the library?

truth..., what's a DUI, failure to yield, and inattentive driving equal to? Income tax evasion?

I do believe, however, that for DUI to be equal to the shooting, the Drunk driver would also have to be speeding or have run a red light or some additional combination.

loose357- If you scroll down a few days, you'll see that I'm making the same argument you are....I'm glad someone that agrees with me has posted on here.

I will be curios as to the penalty these idiots get. I bet it is more than a first offense DWI. I really don't see the difference. When a drunk gets behind the wheel it really is no different than shooting a bullet down the street. You might not be aiming at any one but if you do it often enough it is gonna kill or hurt somebody. The fine for a first offence DWI should be the same as what these guys get for charges of endangering safety by use of dangerous weapon, first-degree recklessly endangering safety and disorderly conduct while armed. These guys will probably lose their guns for life. Maybe we ought to take vehicle ownership away for life. Twice in 5 years we have had drunk drivers jump the curbs and hit houses or pole in the yards. What if someone was walking down the street. Drunk driving is just as dangerous as drunk shooting.

justaguy, the comment i made on nov 11 was a "joke" i said where was the NRA because everytime something happens that they can defend guns they do, but when some clown does something stupid with guns you NEVER hear from them. Thought it was clear what i was trying to say. Sorry i had to spell it out for ya.

hannah...I re-read my post and don't see where I made any reference to your spelling. Some people can't spell well, others, like myself, try to type too fast and hit the wrong keys (I personally blame this Iraqi keyboard I am using). I also never said I disagreed with any of your opinions. I look at content, not spelling.

My comment was more in reference to your "military excuse crap" comment, the 50-60 bullets you claim he shot, and the fact, now, that you claim he was in the Army.

Mr. Botsford isn't quoted anywhere in the article as blaming this incident on PTSD or any other challenge related to his service, it was pointed out to you that it was 47 shots, not 50-60. Finally, it has been stated several times that Mr. Botsford was in the Navy (not the Army as you put in your response to me).

Read the article and the posts, understand what is written, and respond intelligently. When you misrepresent or just plain ignore established facts you lose credibility and weaken your position. And...noone takes you seriously. Kind of like I am now (not taking you seriously).

Oh...and DUH? Really??? My 10 year old says DUH!! Kind of immature, don't you think?

Ooops! ...."people's houses"....sticky fingers.

Oh, and I have another idea. Since those bullets went over the property line, I'd take them damn things back . . . . oh, shoot, they're in the river and people's houses. . . Well, heck, just go to those people houses pry them out and take them back to wherever you bought 'em and explain the situation. I'm sure you'll get your money back as they were faulty. Dang, the luck.
.
I was gonna call 'em rednecks. However, I know people from down south and they ain't that red. That would be an insult to them.

Why, absolutely!!
.
And another "common sense" (?) idea. . . If there's any of you people that have moron family members that do stupid s@$#, DON'T READ THE BLOGS. That way you won't get YOUR feelings hurt. Capeche? What's that you say?? . . Oh, in other words, "Got it"?

Hey, some girl on girl action.

But seriously, have they made bail?

SwissChick, I think I love you, will you be my new best friend?

I suggest that if people don't want to get their feelings hurt, they shouldn't do stupid s@#* to get their names in the paper. Ya think??

I honestly didn't know that bullets knew to stop and drop when they got to the property line. Huh.

I suggest the family members stop reading these blogs if they are so upset/hurt by them. Do they think it makes a difference when they get on here and talk about how they are family and they have "feelings". There is a reason why they allow blogs. These blogs aren't about staying within the guidelines of what won't "upset" or "hurt" people the article is about.

hannah
Nov 11, 2009 at 2:02 p.m.
Suggest removal Blah, Blah, Blah,...Cant fix stupid I guess. You're absolutely correct. I know because I've seen people try with you many, many times and still you prove every time you post that you " Cant fix stupid I guess"

Sorry, I'm a veteran and I'm gonna play my "military excuse crap" card

Anyone who rushes to defend the actions of these two MORONS is just as idiotic as they are.

"lovethemidwest--- i'll bet you actually had to look that up in the dictionary didn't you?"
==========
Wow, youre a bright one arent you. Does my post not say the definition FROM THE DICTIONARY? What a surprise that you would defend these two morons.

It would be quite obvious that neither of these fellows could be considered a bright bulb in the light fixture

uhm i am because one of them is my family

Uhm, why would anyone defend or justify the actions of these two men? Why must we be so petty about "name-calling?" Who cares about the content of their character or their background! What they did was reckless, irresponsible, extremely dangerous to human life, and just plain STUPID.

but you are right and mooks is more fun to say.

they might be foolish but at least one of them is not insignificant

I'd call 'em 'mooks' - a foolish, insignificant, or contemptible person.
A couple of mooks! Sounds nicer than morons and it's more fun to say.

lovethemidwest--- i'll bet you actually had to look that up in the dictionary didn't you?

littleone, calling them morons is, technically, not really name calling. They both fit the websters dictionarys definition of "moron".
=====================
moron 
Pronunciation [mawr-on]
–noun 1. a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.
--------------
"lacking in good judgement"! DING DING DING!!!!

Hannah The trees and bird houses they were supposably aiming at are on BOTSFORD PROPERTY.

thank you to all who know and support Paul's family and loved ones. To the rest of you--- what ever.

"Innocent until proven guilty" means he can't be punished by the legal system in any way until proven guilty. (His current incarceration is the result of an appropriate legal process.) "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't mean he didn't do it. If this were the case, then OJ didn't kill his wife and that guy.

Just to be clear, I am opposed to Paul being punished by the legal system unless and until his legal guilt has been determined by the appropriate legal process. You're nitpicking.

jpm...., a "non-military veteran" is someone who is not a military veteran. I'm sure you've met some of these people.

jpm84092-"President and the Army are asking Americans to reserve judgement until all facts are known." Get a clue. Theyre not talking about the shooter, they're asking Americans to reserve judgment on the military brass because they want to cover their own @##es. There's a good chance some heads will roll before the smoke clears on this one. This guy appeared to have some "issues" when he was at Walter Reed and the military elite in their divine wisdom gave him a transfer rather than a discharge.

I have worn the uniform of my Country with great pride for 25 years and still, I have never encountered a "non-military veteran".

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal determination. "Presumption of innocence" is a right enjoyed by every American because of the US Constitution including the Bill of Rights. I am amazed that those who claim military service would call that into question.

I concede that the evidence, particularly the apparent confession by one party in the post below, strongly suggests guilt - and I have my own belief. Out of respect for the presumption of innocence, I will keep that opinion to myself.

As for obviousness, the situation at Fort Hood appears obvious, but the President and the Army are asking Americans to reserve judgement until all facts are known.

I continue to believe that the endless rant and name calling serve no purpose except to further embarass family and friends. It is unlikely that either gentleman has internet access and is able to read these posts. There is no good that can possibly come from writing things that embarass family and friends. They did not pull those triggers and are just as mortified by what has happened - perhaps much more so.

thekai,
the fact is that these white men will recieve less prison time then a minority. ibet money on that it is a fact of janesville. this town has been like that for a long time. waite and see.

jpm...., "Innocent till proven guilty" is a legal determination. It doesn't mean that a person didn't do it. It means that guilt hasn't been proven in a court of law or by some other legal process. In this particular case, it is especially unrealistic to believe that people aren't going to pass judgment on the obviousness of what happened.

littleone, I don't want to hear about how a military past is somehow contributory to what happened. Military veterans -including combat veterans (which I'm sure Paul isn't)- do not commit acts like this any more than non-military veterans do.

Also, a diagnosis of a mental disorder, too, doesn't mitigate in any way what he did. For years he HASN'T been judged mentally incompetent. It would contribute to his assault on society to excuse his behavior in any way.

Page 3A in today's Gazette
******
"Splinter later told police he and Botsford were intoxicated and decided to shoot toward a large tree, bird feeder and bird house, according to the criminal complaint"

I do know one of these two "morons" as some of you put it. And I am not ashamed to admit it. I love him, he is in my family. I don't agree with what he did, and I do believe that he should be punished. But all of you people need to get a grip. Yes, this was very bad, yes, I would be outraged if I lived there, heck I am outraged now! But, please think about some of the things you are posting. Some of you mentioned about getting him help so this type of thing wouldn't happen. How do you know that he hasn't had help? You dont know! Don't talk about what you don't know people! Be outraged if you want, but stop making his family feel like crap. It wasn't his family's fault. His family has been helping him. He can't have a family member with him every minute of every day. He's a grown man.

And, there was another person involved with this that had every bit as much to do with anything that happened.

Here is the truth. They were drinking, they fired 47 rounds, they hit 2 houses, they were lucky no one died. They should both be punished. But find something else to do, and stop punishing his family with your insults.

For god's sake this isn't an unsolved mystery or a case of mistaken identity. Whether or not they get convicted we all know it was those 2 idiots that were shootin' up the town! I really don't think the "innocent until proven guilty" applies here. They did it it's just a matter of how they're going to defend their actions. Whether they blame it on alcohol, disease, an uncontrollable impulse, or each other the fact remains they did it. I just hope somewhere in those proceedings their right to purchase/own any firearms is taken away for life.

Hannah - In response to your question, I have never met Mr. Splinter and cannot comment on what might have motivated him or what he may or may not have done. I likewise cannot comment on which one motivated the other to do or not do something. None of us were there and may not learn the truth until Trial.

Please do not misunderstand. If Paul or Mr. Splinter are indeed guilty of the deeds they have been accused of, I am mortified and am not in any way trying to defend either of them - other than to remind everyone of every American's right to the "presumption of innocence".

And, you are absolutely right, Paul should not drink, not even one. I can not speak to the matter of Mr. Splinter as I have never met him and know nothing beyond what was printed in the Janesville Gazette. We may not learn until Trial the facts regarding which person did what, fired which weapons, or how many times. I doubt that we may ever learn the truth about what was going through their minds. As one experienced in the safe handling of firearms, and if indeed they are guilty, I cannot comprehend what might have been going through either of their minds. Several Wisconsin Laws and every safety rule taught by the NRA was violated that night.

However, I am a firm believer in support of victims and leave the sorting out of the facts and metting out of punishment to a jury of one's peers in a Court of Law. Name calling and stating the obvious (eg: Moron) is not constructive and is a bit self-rightous.

Littleone and PB3, hang in there. If Paul and/or Mr. Splinter actually did what they are accused of doing, the sort of name calling that is happening here is somewhat a function of the baser side of human nature.

Say a prayer that those who are villifying Mr. Botsford and Mr. Splinter never find themselves in a position of having a close friend or family member accused of what these two men are accused of. If Paul and Mr. Splinter did the deeds they are accused of, it is OK to admit there is no defense. Do not try to offer one. Just grit your teeth, and love these guys enough to allow them the human dignity of being fully responsible for their own behavior. And - don't take it personally.

littleone - FULL STORY?? What information could possibly be missing that would absolutely change my mind about what a couple of dips they are?? You've actually got to be kidding.
.
BTW, if these were my relatives, I wouldn't be on this forum defending them. Geez. YOU don't get it.

While I am no longer a resident of Janesville, I did grow up and attend high school (Craig) and my first two years of undergraduate school (U-Rock) in Janesville before moving away. I have known Paul Botsford, his brothers and sisters, and his (late) parents for over 40 years. I appeal to all those who post here to please try to remember that one of the precious freedoms we enjoy in this Country is the "presumption of innocence"; that a person is innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law.

As somebody who has been injured by the actions of a careless hunter who fired on a deer but missed and the round went into my house and struck me, I have a special empathy for those homeowners who lived across the river. That gnawing feeling of "what if" must be sickening. I wish you the best as you move on and deal with this.

If the allegations made against Paul are true, as a longtime friend I too am sickened and feel many of the feeligns that Paul's wife, PB3 and Littleone are feeling. If Paul has actually done these deeds, there are many "victims". He owes restitution to the State, to the homeowners whose homes were struck, and to his family and friends. Some of this debt can never be adequately repaid.

I would also like to remind those who post on this venue of something they have often heard at Chruch; "Judge not lest ye be judged" - leave that to a Court of Law.

Paul has a disease. It is not an excuse. It is a reason. Hopefully he will get the help he needs and deal with it so that there is no "next time".

littleone: I would hope no one in my family would be so stupid as to do something like this. Someone could have so easily been killed in one of those houses, but if a family member of mine did something that stupid how could I defend them, on what grounds? give the excuse that they were drunk? that's stupid all on it's own, say they don't know how to handle a loaded gun in a safe manner? well then they should have left the guns alone. But then you get these 2 yahoos drunk and with loaded guns and that equals 2 morons, so it all comes out the same no matter who did it.

i could say the same thing for most of you on here you don't care what the full story is or anything else that happened you hear part of it and are already making judgements and being closed minded once again i will state yes they do deserve to have to deal with what they did and the court system will take care of that their families don't need to deal with all of you and your name calling and putting them down WHAT IF IT WAS YOUR FAMILY WHAT WOULD YOU DO THEN

if everyone had a gun???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECcS1leZQ...

littleone-All I can say is I only hope you are never chosen to serve on a jury for a criminal case.

justaguy when have i ever said that what they did was not bad i have not i have stated that it is bad however that does not mean that gives everyone the right to name call PB3 has stated that paul is her father and she has kids that are good with the internet and asked to watch your comments how hard is it to act like an adult and not little kids and not name call

This was so stupid and so dangerous....Paul Botsford is my father and I am shocked and very dismayed by his behavior. As a mother of 3 small children myself I don't think a slap on the wrist will do this time. No one has had their heart broken by Paul as many times as I have. I am very sad for him, his wife and my Aunts and Uncles. I am truly sorry to the families who were affected by his childish acts......however Paul is a Botsford and the Botsford's are amazing people. I am embarrassed by his actions but I am and always will be proud to be a Botsford and even though I was not raised by Paul, no matter what, I will always love my father...
Please remember when posting comments, he is someone's father, son, husband, brother and Grandfather. Some of us have children who are very good with the internet and will see these statements someday. Please don't think I am not dismissing this in the least--I just want to express my feelings for him. I also want to let the people of Janesville know that yes this was stupid and yes he needs to pay the price whatever that might be, but he does have good in him. Please pray that he gets the help he needs and pray for his family to get trough this. It has been a tough year for our family. God Bless.

littleone: What would it take for you to figure out how bad this really was ... a death? an injury? They are just acouple lucky morons no one was hit or killed, it was luck only. They earned the moron award ... if the shoe fits ... and the shoe fits tightly.

I also live across the river and was awokened by the noise. It was no fun trying to figure out where it was coming from and whether we were in danger so please remember it affected a lot more than just those 2 houses that were hit. I woke my kids and we all slept on the floor in the middle of the house after it went on so long!!!

thank you so much you get the point that i have been trying to make :)

littleone -- Calling them names serves no useful purpose. That type of conduct can not be condoned, justified or accepted in a civilized society.
If you are family, you are very lucky you are not planning a funeral(s).

retiredautoguy i completely agree that it was stupid and careless behavior however i do want to say thank you for not calling them morons and you were one of the people that were directly affected by this

It was only by the grace of God that no one was seriously injured or killed by this incredibly stupid, careless conduct. Also one of those 47 bullets could have hit a vehicle or boat parked in several of the back yards and caused a fire or explosion!!

I have been reading all these bogus comments about drunk driving, running your car into trees, etc. -- none of these comments have anything to do with what happened Sunday night-Monday morning.
Living across the river form Paul, the bang,bang, bangs started shorthly after 11:00pm and continued until about 1:35am in bursts of 1,2,4,5 and 6. We were awaken from sleep thinking someone was shooting off fireworks! After several more series of bangs, I concluded the bangs were not fireworks but were actually small caliber rounds, a shotgun and probably a bigger gun(9mm or 45 cal.)
We called 911 @11:40 and again @12:30 when the gun fire did not stop. Our neighbors also called 911 twice. Both of us told 911, the shots were coming from the west side of Rock River, in the Mole-Stadler subdivision where the flooding was last summer.
I do not know when the police actually got to the west side of the river. We heard their PA system @1:30am identify themselves and told gunman to lay down firearm and come out with hands over head. After the second or third time, the 2 shooters did come out. ( Gazette said a call was made into house also).

you people just don't get it

littleone - I bet in front of a jury of peers of these two, they will also agree these guys are morons.....

First off, I wouldnt be so MORONIC as to put myself into a situation like this. Secondly as far as calling them morons, if the shoe fits wear it. And the shoe fits so well it must have been custom tailored to fit these two.

These two are definitely a few fries short of a happy meal. Without a doubt!

Just because they made a horrible choice does not mean that they are morons. everyone has had a lapse in judgement at some point in there lives granted most people not this severe but everyone has had a lapse in judgement. why can't people simply say that the choice that they made was bad why would you sink yourself to the level of name calling i am completely amazed that people are so quick to judge others from one thing yet they don't honestly know the people that they are judging i am sure that if it was you that were being judged you would want someone to give you the opportunity to know you before they made judgements so unless you have the intent on getting to know them why don't we act more grown up and stop the name calling.

HA! I second that! MORONS!!!!!!!

No I dont THANK GOD! Id be ashamed to admit if I did know these morons. How do I know theyre morons? THEY FIRED 47 SHOTS OUT A BEDROOM WINDOW AND HIT HOUSES!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thats all the evidence I need

and how do you know they are morons do you know them personally?

No, and these morons are VERy lucky nobody was hurt. But YOU said "what if's and could have's mean nothing in court". And that is totally false.

it does create a risk that you are right about but it is not saying what if they killed someone because that is a different charge completely were they reckless yes did they kill someone no was someone hurt no

Oh but they sure DO! Look it up! Ever heard fo reckless endangerment?

"In US law, endangerment comprises several types of crimes involving conduct that is wrongful and reckless or wanton, and likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm to another person.
The offense is intended to prohibit and therefore deter reckless or wanton conduct that wrongfully creates a substantial risk of death or serious injury to others.
_________-

Get the part about "creates a substantial RISK"? Pretty sure firing your guns towards other houses WITH PEOPLE IN THEM creates a substantial risk.

it may be a fact that they COULD have killed someone but THEY DIDN'T NO ONE WAS INJURED time and time again we keep coming back to this and i will tell you what if's and could have's mean nothing in court

pretty sure that "they could have killed someone" is a FACT! Its a FACT that these morons risked the lives of innocent people because they dont have the brain power to know that what they are doing is not right.

frelnc u say stick to the issues here but you yourself are stating what if's "Could they have killed someone?" so how bout you stick to the facts and not the what if's

freInc,

Wonderful post!

Seems everyone here has gotten sidetracked from the reality of this situation. This situation had nothing to do with drunk driving. There were no cars. Reckless use of a firearm WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS cannot be compared to drunk driving. It's a red herring that has you all snapping at one another for no good reason.

There is plenty of reason to be upset here. As a resident of Janesville I'm appalled that anyone would try to justify their behavior.

Two men, one whom someone here asserts has a mental issue, took THREE handguns, loaded them and shot 47 times live rounds across the river from a second story apartment, striking two HOMES and a storage shed. Had any one of those bullets taken a different trajectory a person could be dead.

Don't you get it?

This isn't about whether anyone was killed or not. It isn't about whether this incident is worse than drunk driving or not.

It's about absolutely unacceptable behavior by two grown men who should have known better. There should be red hot outrage at their behavior. Instead we've got the drunk driving comparison conversation, the "you don't know him, he's really a nice guy" conversation, the "why don't you shut up, I don't like your opinion" conversation when in reality there should be only one conversation.

Could they have killed someone?

Absolutely. Only God knows why they didn't.

Should they be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? You betcha.

Are they still in jail where they can't do any more harm? They damn well better be.

I absolutely do not care how nice either of them are - or were.

Don't care what personal problems they have or had.

Don't care if they had military backgrounds or not.

Don't care if they're sad, mentally ill, unhappy, unemployed or rich, sane, working regularly and happy.

Only care about how narrowly the City of Janesville dodged this bullet - literally.

They hit TWO HOUSES for crying out loud. How much worse does it have to get before it sinks in? These guys put the lives of every single human being within range of those pistols in danger. There is absolutely NO excuse for what they did. NONE.

Come on people. Focus...

"i agree whole heartedly that what they did was very stupid, but we've ALL DONE STUPID THINGS."
----------------------
I dont think weve all carelessly shot guns out of a house window drunk, nearly missing a childs window. Thats beyond STUPID!

"Legalwise", no, recklessness is recklessness.

I don't believe the legal definition of recklessness has anything to do with whether they actually hit something.

you are so very correct when you said that they never intended to hurt anyone

One more thing I want to point out is that the shooters didn't "intend" to hurt anyone.

mespl- We will agree to disagree, its been good....

In making comparisons between the those reckless behaviors, its also important to determine how many of those gunshots were ACTUALLY FOUND to have hit something....

Truth: Your statement of hitting things and going end over end are all true that is why in my statement I said “It can be done, you must be observant when driving though.” You need to pay attention and think quickly about what you are going to do and determine the best possible course of action. I am not saying in every situation that is the best solution it was one example. Now I would like to quote you twice the first time is from one of your latest statements. You recently said “…some threaten the lives of others to MUCH greater degrees.” When you had said in an earlier statement “We need EQUAL punishment for endangering/injuring/killing no matter the method.” All I was ever arguing is that there are varying degrees of threatening lives between shooting a gun into a community and driving drunk. You said that there are varying degrees of that when simply driving drunk so by default there are also varying degrees when shooting a gun compared to driving drunk. That was my sole argument. It is my belief that shooting the gun is a greater degree of threat however you can disagree with that if you want.

And some drivers with NO alcohol greatly threaten lives by their driving behavior.

mespl- To answer that Q .... it would depend on how many other reckless driving behaviors the intoxicated driver did.....Not EVERY driver over .08 acts the same way behind the wheel, some threaten the lives of others to MUCH greater degrees.

...also depending on the terrain, being run off the road can EASILY make you go end over end which you have no control over

So you don't want to answer my question?

mepl - You're fortunate you haven't hit a pole, tree, building foundation, or whatever or another person when you were run off......And not everyone that leaves the bar with *ONE* too many also engage in other reckless driving behaviors like speeding.....I'm only saying that those over .20 bac or so, OR those that blow lights along with driving way over the limit are as bad as the shooters.

"We both know two cars coming at each other at 60mph equals 120mph"

The acceleration produced will not be 120 mph. If everything is equal (car weight and speed) they wil only move each other back the same distance not necessarily accelerate to 120 mph.

Although the forces are equal, the accelerations are not.

This depends on the mass of each car according to Newtons 2nd law. If one car is heavier than the other one car will push the other with greater force. If you have a 1977 lincoln town car hit a 1988 Yugo both going at 60 mph the town car will not recoil as much as the Yugo.

Truth: You are not confined to the road (I do not look at myself as confined to the road), I have a small car that I drive almost every day, I have taken that car through the ditch at 65mph because another car has run me off the road, it handled just fine, yes you need to know how to handle the car to drive it off the road and then back on at those speeds however it is perfectly possible. I actually know quite a few people who have been run off the road by drunks and by sober people just the same. It can be done, you must be observant when driving though. Please answer this question which would you prefer every night at bar close each drunk drives home or each drunk fires 47 rounds in random directions from guns while they safely walk home?

mespl- Again, I agree with a lot of that except that "seeing a drunk/reckless coming" and trying to avoid getting hit is easier said than done......We both know two cars coming at each other at 60mph equals 120mph....no better chance to avoid that than avoiding a bullet....Not only that, but in a car I'm "confined" to the road and can't choose many options to escape.

Truth: It is true that they should know better and we can say that there is some training involved with learning to drive. However I honestly believe that there is not enough training and that it is too easy to get a driver’s license. (However that is not my call) And yes it is that most of the bad drivers just make a conscious effort to disregard the laws, however at least when I am driving I have a choice of what I am in so that I can give myself the advantage over the driver who is disregarding the law and I am protected by a safety cage. I am not saying that drunk drivers are not a problem. Yes bullets are small and chances of getting hit by a drunk randomly shooting are slim, however it is a more dangerous weapon in the hands of a drunk in my opinion. A drunk in a car I can see I can avoid and if I am observant I have no problem accomplishing those tasks. A drunk with a gun shooting out of a window I do not see the bullets. I would rather have drunks driving around at 2am after bar close than drunks shooting up neighborhoods after bar close. But that is my preference.

mespl- I agree with most of that except that drivers are also "trained" before they get a driver's license and should "know better", as well, but some of them choose to engage in behavior that results in injury and death.

Truth: you didn’t realize that on your own; just consider how many miles people drive every day. Only about half of the people in the country are gun owners, and then on top of that most gun owners don’t shoot every day, most don’t shoot every week. Car owners drive most days, make multiple trips, and encounter other drivers and cars. There are more restrictions on gun ownership than on car ownership, felons can own a car and drive, people with suspended licenses can get occupational licenses, habitual drunks can keep their cars. Laws are stricter on who has the common sense to handle a gun because of the capabilities of a gun. At least one of these individuals had been trained in the handling of a firearm and should have known better. Now it has been stated that he has mental stability issues and that is for the courts to determine. But the point is with your argument that there are more cars out every day than guns the statistics say that there will be more deaths from that than from guns. That is not saying that guns are safer; there are less of them out on a daily basis being used.

Only a couple things come to mind (other than the obvious safety hazard these two posed)..."can't fix stupid" and "here's your sign". geez. Maybe they should move to the hills of West Virginia or build a bunker in Wyoming. It's a serious problem, of course, but my gosh, Janesville hands us a new kind of stupid on a daily basis!

One fact about gun violence versus motor-vehicle violence, is that even with drug violence, gang violence, shooting accidents, willful gun-murders and all gun-related incidents combined,.....more peple are killed every year by motor vehicles than with guns....Even I didn't think that until I looked it up.

One thing is true- A car can't go through buildings and come out the other side after it's gone through someones body more than a half a mile away from where it came from.
Also, when driving a car you are voluntarily taking a chance that others won't run into you and you are able to drive defensively to help avoid a collision, while if someone is sleeping in their bed you assume they aren't taking any chances that they are going to get shot in the safety of their home. Is it important to try and compare to this or that? Fact remains, these two took way too many chances on a lot of lives.

thekai- I fall into the category of people that believes there are different levels of drunk driving....No, someone that has *ONE* too many and otherwise *tries* to be safe is not as bad as these shooters, but someone that drives super-drunk and speeds, or someone that is in the habit of blowing lights along with excessive speeding even without being drunk is just as bad as they are.

once again hannah you don't know him he was in the service in the navy as a matter of fact and yes he does have mental illness from it and the va has confirmed that he has it so BACK OFF

hannah have you ever thought that maybe the things you have said are hurtful to other people and you obviously don't know them because if you did know them you would know that paul is a very wonderful person who has made a very big mistake in his life right now and i am sure that he will get the help that he needs you on the other hand have no respect for other people or their feelings

"hannah
Nov 11, 2009 at 2:05 p.m.
Suggest removal

So if Paul has this military excuse crap"

It's Veteran's day. Military excuse crap? Have some respect! He did something stupid. If anything, his military record works AGAINST HIM here. Military excuse crap... really? Hannah, please, knock it off.

hannah maybe you don't know and so you shouldn't say anything at all you are one of those people that make things like this worse because you like to make them seem worse then what they are which just feeds into everyone else. point being you weren't there i will bet you don't know either of them so how do you know anything else other then what you read in the paper and then you can't even correctly restate that until someone points it out to you

hannah how do you get 50-60 bullets from 47 shell casings???? once again someone on here trying to make things worse then what happened i am not saying that what they did isn't bad but you are exagerating the truth which just feeds into everyone else and makes it worse once again i will state STICK TO THE FACTS if you do now know them then maybe you should find them out before making a post

916WI,
Janesville is becoming an increasingly harder place to make a living in. That doesn't mean it is a bad place to live, though. If you have a steady job, and you aren't being as effected by this recession, then Janesville is still a very nice place to live. There are a ton of very nice neighborhoods in Janesville. The same can not be said for Beloit, though. (There are some nicer places in Beloit, but Janesville over all is still a nicer place to live.) If you disagree, and you live in Janesville, then move to Beloit :-p. I'll take Janesville over Beloit any day.
°
truth1,
Have you ever tried to dodge a bullet? I've dodged cars before. I've dodged cars on foot, bike, and even in my own car. I've tried to dodge paint balls and failed miserably, though. The thing about paint balls, is you can see them coming. You don't see a bullet coming. Firing weapons randomly, while drunk, in the direction of others, is blatant disregard for anyone else's safety. Imagine for just one moment that instead of having a huge drunk driving problem, we had a problem of people firing multiple guns in random directions when they get drunk. Which scenario is worse? These two just lack the common sense that even a drunk idiot who gets behind the wheel usually has.

mespl- There are only a few people that post on here, and I'm saying the public danger levels are comparable.

mespl- Yes, if the bullet was fired AT me, otherwise there would be very little chance of getting hit by the first one or two.

Something to keep in mind: A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila.

No one is saying not to prosecute everyone else who endangers lives, however almost all (but you) are saying that there are levels of danger and these two were very high up on that list.

truth: if you saw that car though it would be fairly easy to get out of the way, but good luck getting out of the way of a bullet.

Prosecute them for endangering lives, but prosecute EVERYONE ELSE that recklessly endanger lives too.

Seeing posts that I "must be related" is getting old..I'm not related, don't know them and have never seen or heard them.

ouisch- You're really far off, what you said bears no resemblance to what I stated.

916WI- Well, if I was standing on the sidewalk or driving a car and saw a car swerving around, blowing lights at 80mph in town coming towards me, I think I would be just as afraid as someone on the next block firing random shots.

Why are so many people making something simple so complicated on here today? I don't care what irresponsible method results in the death of my loved one(s). I am going to be heartbroken either way. And the grief is going to be closely followed by anger --- so the one responsible better look out.

Wow, ya know I took a stab... and I wasn't too far off was I!

Arithmetic will show that any randomly fired bullet has a minute chance of even hitting someone unless fired into a crowd, given the small size of it, far, far less is the chance of doing serious damage by hitting vital body areas.

Still though, I'm afraid you're either related or you're going to start comparing the speed of a bullet vs a car and life's too short for all that pile of fruit.

Good point truth1. And we agree they both need to be prosecuted. If you'd have just left your comments at that then I would have agreed but I wouldn't be caught trying to find similarities in crimes for shooting a gun 50 times not knowing what is at the other end though.
And since you asked, yeah, I do read previous posts. In fact, that's how I noticed your apparent confusion to the race remark "Race card"???...HUH???" because to me it looked like you didn't know what earlier post justaguys' comment was referring to. But it's not a contest.

Truth.....I would much rather be on the road with someone who is drinking and driving than be in a situation where a drunk person is unloading a gun in my direction........The two situations are not even remotely comparable.......

That is true a car driven by a drunk can hit another car and kill multiple people with the one hit. However once the cars hit the situation has finalized and the paramedics are on the way. On the other hand the bullet can only hit once and kill once each time the gun is fired. The bullet can kill one person in that car at a time. However they fired about 50 bullets that is 50 separate possible incidences, 50 possible locations where paramedics are needed. 50 projectiles are worse than one projectile, even if the one is bigger that all 50 combined. Yes you could come close to 50 cars driving drunk however how much stuff dose a bullet pass before it hits something. Also each bullet is guaranteed to hit something; the car will most likely hit something. 50 guaranteed hits verses one likely hit. Like I said they need to be prosecuted more severely than a drunk driver, however both are dangerous and wrong just different levels of dangerous.

thekai.....just wait until the unemployment checks dry up--there are a significant amount of people who started claiming those benefits the same time.....With the lack of any industry coming to Janesville and a massive amount of labor that will never see the pay scales it once saw, Janesville will be an absolute mess. At least they will have a multi-million dollar ice rink to give the unemployed a place to gather:)

i am not saying what they did was right because it was not right by any means however as i said before you are all worried about the what if's and trying to compare it to something that is completely different truth of the matter is NO ONE was injured with that being said i am sure they will get the punishment that the justice system feels is appropriate for their actions. i think everyone is in agreement that what they did was wrong i am sure they have realized what they did was wrong

ouisch- Do you READ the previous posts?....I said they should be prosecuted just like anyone else...No discrimination.

Ouisch- So, you want to compare the 50 shots...I'll bet a drunk driving 100mph comes in close vicinity of 50 cars before their rampage is over.

mespl- No,a car driven drunk/reckless can't hit a girl on the 2nd floor, but it can hit the car her parent is driving, in fact it can kill multiple children in the same car with one hit.

Sure, there are a million ways people can get killed by others but no, truth1, those 2 things are hardly alike. Just a small example; the one doing the shooting isn't risking his life when the gun is pointing out his window.
Someone trying to compare those two things ranks right up there next to these two yahoos, probably related. 50 shots! Possibly that many lives compromised. Absurd.

littleone,
I would feel very similar to how PB3 feels. Family or not, it was a very stupid thing to do, and they need to take responsibility for their actions.
°
I can't imagine the scenario where this was okay. Did they think they saw a bunch of robbers across the river and were misguided in the belief that the best course of action was to open fire, even though they had been drinking and innocent people might intercept a bullet?
I don't know the entire story, sure. I can't imagine one where they would be in the right, though. I can't imagine an instance where what they did could be considered okay. It sounds an awful lot like a couple of drunks who were bored and made a poor decision, to me.

IT WOULD BE .20.....2.0 IS NOT POSSIBLE

What is the full story?

Ok truth I will talk logistics of a car verses a bullet with you. Yes a car is larger however a car cannot hit a little girl sleeping in her bedroom on the second floor. Also even the people that drive 20 over smashed have a destination. What was the intended destination of the bullets that these men were shooting? The destination was anywhere that they wanted. There is a reason why the army uses bullets and not cars to kill! Cars can be effective however it has been proven a bullet works better. Multiple bullets in a community with no specific target directed by drunks ranks more dangerous than one drunk in one car speeding. Both should be prosecuted however I believe these men should be prosecuted more severely than a drunk (who buy the way is not prosecuted severely enough as it is)

you all are worried about what could have happened and not the actual facts so how bout we stick to them yes what they did was not a good choice and they will have to suffer for their actions however remember that you are all being quick to judge without knowing the full story. how can people defend them i bet that if it was your family member or close friend that you would defend them and try to help them if they needed it what if the shoe was on the other foot

mespl- Neither the drunk driver nor the shooter is "torturing" anyone, so that scenario does not apply.

mespl- I'm not talking about people who drink a couple and at least *TRY* to be as safe as they can trying to get home WITHOUT SPEEDING IN THE PROCESS......People that WILLFULLY speed while drunk or drive twice the speed linit are just as dangerous as these two......ALSO, a car/truck is much *LARGER* than a bullet.

truth1: You said “We need EQUAL punishment for endangering/injuring/killing no matter the method.” I disagree with that, we need varying punishments for varying crimes. You are saying that a serial killer who cuts up his victims while they are alive deserves the same punishment as a person who caught his wife in bed with another man and lost it and killed the man. They are very different; both need to go to jail for a very long time however the serial killer will kill again, whereas the man most likely will never commit a crime similar to that again. I don’t believe that there can just be a blanket standard, the motives and the chance of death or injury need to be taken into account. The chance of injury between a person who drinks and drives and a person who randomly fires a gun into a community are different. The gun is firing multiple bullets in multiple directions and just one can kill anyone walking on the sidewalk or in their yard. The car is only one projectile and the majority of other people around are also in cars and as such protected by a metal roll cage. Also the motives are different the drunk driver is trying to get home taking the shortest route to get there, that is his motive, the drunk shooter is bored and is just shooting randomly not caring what he hits. These are two different crimes, both require strict punishments most likely stricter punishments than either will get but they are different crimes please stop trying to make them out to be the same. I believe that they are more dangerous they are firing multiple projectiles (bullets) whereas a car is a single projectile. It seems quite simple.

I don't need to be accused of "defending" them either..Dangerous people should ALL be prosecuted EQUALLY.

These guys are no "dumber" or more of a public danger than anyone that drives at 2.0 alcohol or drives double the speed limit.

Mikki - I now have coffee on my screen because I read your post!! (I had just taken a sip.) Ooops. "Mental midget". . . . Good one to remember!! LOL!

truth1: I guess I just can't see the reason your bringing up drunk drivers into this story, where drunk driving should be handled much harsher than it is I see no tie in the 2 subjects. These guys are about as dumb as they come.

thekai: yes good to see we can agree on something ;-) the race card came up yesterday on this subject, italiajc just had to bring the race card into this story even tho it doesn't fit.

justaguy- I don't defend what these guys did any more than I defend anyone else that grossly endangers the lives of others by ANY method....We need EQUAL punishment for endangering/injuring/killing no matter the method.

If even someone who normally makes terrible decisions can see the folly in what these two men did, then I think all it does is further exaggerate my point.
Justaguy was talking about a previous post I made in response to someone else who was playing the race card. So, it is true then, Justaguy, you and I -can- agree on some things ;-).

jamc420: I really don't see the NRA defending these 2 morons ... get a clue. truth1: It sounds like your trying to defend these 2 guy by somehow bringing drunk driving into this story? What they did has nothing to do with drunk driving. Do you know these 2 morons? "by the way i do hate drunk driving also"

thekai- Yeah, like we need to ask the opinion of people that speed drunk ....tooo funny..

"Race card"???...HUH???

I believe driving drunk at high speeds is far less moronic (while still a really stupid thing to do). Case in point, again, ask all of those people who speed down the road when they're drunk if they would fire guns in the direction of nearby houses when they're drunk, and you will find that most will have a reaction similar to, "No, that's just stupid."

thekai: For once I will agree with you, let's not bring the race card into this story for no reason at all, I hate it when people always bring the race card into a non race related story.

Where is the NRA to defend the 2nd ammendent for these two? What a joke! Alcohol and guns, what a great mix!

I believe the two can very much be equated.

Reckless/speeding combined with drunk driving is no less "moronic".

Guns are commonly manufactured and used to end lives. I believe that's their number one purpose. Cars, on the other hand, are not usually intended for that purpose. Both may be equally dangerous, because both can take lives, but they still are not the same. I don't think you can really equate the two, regardless of what statistical data shows. Perhaps there are less deaths from drunken gun-slingers because there are simply less people out there who make the moronic decision to fire guns toward houses when they're drunk.

...people

...furthermore, it doesn't matter what some peope "think", dead is dead.

thekai- I didn't say "driving buzzed"(which is still NOT ok), I was referring to REALLY drunk and going 20-30 or more over speed linit.

Well, firing two hand guns and a shotgun in the direction of other people is a LITTLE different than thinking that you're okay to drive, because you're just "buzzed," and I think that's a key factor to consider here.
°
Compare the amount of people who thinks its okay to drive buzzed with the amount of people who think its okay to shoot guns in the direction of homes when they're drunk, and I bet the latter is far less popular.

I just can't believe this. When someone does something so idiotic like this, that could have resulted in a death, or MANY deaths, there is always some mental midget that gets on here saying "everyone makes mistakes".
Give me an effin break!
I have made my share of mistakes, but I can GUARANTEE that NONE of them could have resulted in the death of someone!
I don't care if they are your friend or family member. Perhaps you should spend more time away from these newsgroups and more time hiring psychiatrists for your loved ones.

The accounts I've read of drunk/reckless driving combined with excessive speeding are of about equal danger to the public as what these guys did.....If someone would have been hurt or killed, I'm sure it would be dealt-with properly, unlike the former where it would be called an "accident" with the perp getting a slap.

THAT IS MESSED UP

Beloit is trying so hard and failing miserably. Janesville just sits back, and to be honest, isn't doing a bad job. Even with GM closing, it doesn't make Janesville a crappy place to live. It kills the job market, so it's a bad place to make a living, but it's not a bad place to live. Beloit, that's a bad place to live.

Sandman: What does this have to do with Beloit? This incident belongs 100 percent to Janesville.

Sandman......Please lose the condescending attitude towards Beloit. That city is making strides at becoming a more attractive place to live. Janesville, on the other hand, isn't........

thats funny how some people say 'weve all done something stupid'. as if thats justification for not roasting these two 'men' in a blog. if i got drunk and did this i would TOTALLY expect to be the town jester until the next story pops up to keep those of us with idle hands busy:) id probably even join in on bashing myself...once i sobered up:)

Nice pictures fellas. Your appearance says a lot about your intelligence and lack of.

Your correct (weeds) there is no justification for this extermely dangerous behavior. None! There is criminal intention in their minds and consumption of alcohal made them act on it.Do the crime do the time.

Kris & krisv617 - How can you even think that this was just a "mere" stupid act?? Reread this story! Bullets hit 2 homes. How many could they have hit? Better yet, how many people could they have hit with 40-50 shots?? Think about that for 5 seconds. And, by the way, I have never done "anything stupid" by any means that would compare to that. Neither one has any regard for anyone's life.

This blog has more Redneck in it than the Arkansas Times and these two get the 'Stupid of the year' trophy. Let's get drunk and shoot guns at someones house..C'mon, seriously?

What shocks me even more are the postings trying to justify these actions. Pathetic.

krisv617-Are you serious??? "and you've never drove drucnk or under the influance? more people are killed and hurt that way than what these 2 were doing". Of course more people drive drunk than randomly shoot out a window because even you average drunk has more sense than these two had!

"...drucnk or under the influance"? -- Ah, yeah.

Welcome to North Beloit.

jvldss-this is not how any responsable deer hunter gets ready for deer camp. this is how drunken,feeble minded,moronic,frustrated,out of work idoits bye their time.

Shooting once or twice out the window would have been a bad choice or mistake. Doing it close to 50 times is borderline retarded. At both of their ages, even under alchohol, something SHOULD have clicked that this was wrong, yet it didn't after the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th...(well you get the point) shot. I just don't see defending somebody who does this close to 50 times between them. How do you walk the earth for 52 years and not have some sense, even under the influence unless you have some rotton core issues? I just don't get it.

Italiajc....Why do some people always find a way to play the race card.... Geez! get a clue

italiajc,
Wisconsin, and especially Janesville, might not have a lot of minorities, and from my experience, that alone makes many people more racist than people from other parts of the country. Still, even though I myself am a minority, I can't help but to be offended by your comment. I think it would have been dealt with the exact same way, regardless of their race. The Janesville Police Department does a pretty good job, most of the time, of being professional. Stop accusing people of things they haven't even done.

No I never had the chance to do that lately krisv617. I don't think my friends would approve if I took such action. :)

it doesnt matter and shouldnt be minimized if you shot a gun in public you should go to prison period. i bet money these two white men will get probation or maybe some county jail time minimum. had they been minorities the police probably would of stormed the house and shot them. and if they were minorities they probably would get 10 years in prison.

The part that bothers me the most about this is the gazette coverage. Front page headlines, yet a 17 old recently gets gunned down in Beloit and it barely gets a small notation buried 5 pages deep. I guess if it doesn't happen right in Janesville it doesn't matter much to the Gazette anymore.

i agree whole heartedly that what they did was very stupid, but we've ALL DONE STUPID THINGS.

and you've never drove drucnk or under the influance? more people are killed and hurt that way than what these 2 were doing

kris: you call what they did a screw up? I was one of those bloggers your talking about and i stand behind everything I said. These two are about as dumb as a box of rocks, who with a brain cell would do something so stupid, no excuses here. pb3 says how that guy is someones father, son, husband and whatever else but he also could have killed someones son, father, husband or any nombur of people ... no excuses for adults that do something so stupid.

where were all of his good friends when he really needed them? most of them turned their back on him.

That wasn't meant to be derogatory in anyway. Paul does have good in him, and lot of good friends willing to help.

PB3 - Paul's giving it his best shot, and he has many good friends to help.

This was so stupid and so dangerous....Paul Botsford is my father and I am shocked and very dismayed by his behavior. As a mother of 3 small children myself I don't think a slap on the wrist will do this time. No one has had their heart broken by Paul as many times as I have. I am very sad for him, his wife and my Aunts and Uncles. I am truly sorry to the families who were affected by his childish acts......however Paul is a Botsford and the Botsford's are amazing people. I am embarrassed by his actions but I am and always will be proud to be a Botsford and even though I was not raised by Paul, no matter what, I will always love my father...
Please remember when posting comments, he is someone's father, son, husband, brother and Grandfather. Some of us have children who are very good with the internet and will see these statements someday. Please don't think I am not dismissing this in the least--I just want to express my feelings for him. I also want to let the people of Janesville know that yes this was stupid and yes he needs to pay the price whatever that might be, but he does have good in him. Please pray that he gets the help he needs and pray for his family to get trough this. It has been a tough year for our family. God Bless.

For all of you who were doing the blogging yesterday on this story( and you know who you are) most of you still can't focus on your selves and have to focus on other people and their problems. These 2 definately screwed up, but how many of you have never done anything stupid?

They look pretty normal to me.....not. They are damn lucky no one got hurt.

Paul used to work at the detention center, I can't believe he would do something so stupid.

Musta been gettin' ready for deer camp, hey.

52 and 35 years old, you'd think between the 2 of them 1 would have a brain. What rock did these two morons crawl out from under.

crazy drunk gun slingers.

Hopefully neither one of these perfect fits for Janesville is allowed to play the alcohol card and get a reduced sentence in this situation. People could have actually been killed. And when I hear 'daughter', I think child, and I can assure you that if I ever found bullets lodged in my house near either one of my children's rooms and I knew where they'd come from, I'd be taking a little stroll in that direction...

"Hold my beer and watch this..."

i would REALLY love to know how this convo even starts....

How dumb could you be?

LOSERS!

Idiots!