GUILTY AL - Summer Moody, 17, fatally shot in Gravine Island burglary attempt, 15 April 2013

[danzn16]

Warning- graphic questions about the gs wound.
Wow. Just wow. There are still a lot of questions I have. One, was summer actively participating in burglaries just that evening or on multiple occasions? Two, what does actively participating mean? Three, the coroner said the gunshot was to the side of the head at a down ward angle. Was she far enough away that the bullet was coming down from above the bush line or was she close enough that his shot was at angled below level and it hit her as going down? Four, I only know 'deals' with witnesses from tv but is it suspect that the only one who couldn't make bail is the one who described what happened and is now getting a possible lessor sentence?
I feel horrible for summer's family. If she was participating, if she wasn't participating and was just used to get a lessor sentence, it must hurt her parents deeply.

possibly ricocheted from off a nearby tree?

Why does one shoot a firearm horizontally into woods that you know to be occupied? With the intention of that bullet hitting someone, IMO. Can't think of any other reason.

And if Summer really was an 'active participant' that had run to her hiding spot after initial contact (as per some of the testimony), then it seems increasingly likely that the shooter knew she was there and aimed deliberately (which seems more likely than hitting her in the manner described by the Coroner through freak, random chance).

Something smells rotten. In these types of incidents, if there are contradictions between statements & evidence, the DA is supposed to leave it up to a jury to decide whether a shooting was justified or murder. The swift decision to stand firm on no charges, coupled with the lack of charges for the felons using firearms & their history with drugs, leads me to wonder if one (or more) of these guys has acted as an informant for LE & is now being protected. Wouldn't be the first time that's happened.

All JMO

good luck trying to hit anything you're aiming for if you're shooting from hip level like it was stated the fisherman did. add in darkness and then that makes it even harder. especially in the head. sounds like a serious accident. one that could have been avoided. rule #1 don't pull that trigger unless you're planning on shooting someone

 

[jjenny]

Anytime another burglar is killed during a robbery attempt, it is the other burglar's responsibility. They were committed a crime and therefore take on responsibility, therefore murder. I have read more on the case that the 2 men fired warning shots away from the boys and didn't know the girl was there. I do not know why you would fire into the dark like that. However, obviously the men were found within their rights so it is the boys responsibility and bad decisions.

Convicted felon, under federal law, shouldn't have guns. So I am trying really hard to understand as to how convicted felon is within his rights to shoot "warning" shots with the gun he isn't supposed to have under federal laws?

 

[danzn16]

Not to mention that when you track someone off of said property (which they've vacated it previous to your arrival), onto public land no less, and then initiate contact via pointing a gun at them...yeah, that's not defending anything, that's being a vigilante.

According to this DA's logic, if my upstairs neighbor steals my UPS deliveries yet again, I can go up there and confront him with a gun, and if I happen to fire off a shot that 'randomly' kills someone, it's all kosher, since, you know, he's accused of a crime and all. Yeah, that makes sense...

2 major differences here.
1. Summer was not an innocent neighbor, she was a participating burglar that happened to be killed in a robbery.
2. this is was in a deserted place that they believed no one else was around to be shot. But there were more burglars than they knew of. They thought it was safe to fire and not hit anyone because ordinarily no one is around hiding in the woods. Quite different than hitting a neighbor in an apartment building where you know it's a high likelihood of them being. Still I don't agree with the warning shot. However, these burglars had weapons themselves. That's frightening in itself. Why did they have them? Who knows how different this may have turned out if these fishermen didn't have guns.

 

[danzn16]

Convicted felon, under federal law, shouldn't have guns. So I am trying really hard to understand as to how convicted felon is within his rights to shoot "warning" shots with the gun he isn't supposed to have under federal laws?

There were 3 fisherman. Only 2 fired shots. Were one of the 2 the convicted felon?

 

[danzn16]

First off, even the camper's testimony shows that the boys were not armed...their boat was. Contrary to the implications made by the Sheriff, their (legal) weapons were stowed on the boat at the time of the shooting. As for the supposed illegal weapon, there has yet to be any indication of what its whereabouts were at the time of the shooting (or at any other time), but we know from the mouths of the campers themselves that it wasn't on the two fools they confronted.

Second - testimony indicates that the campers tracked the teens away from the campsites and onto public land. At the point of contact, all of them were there lawfully. Let me ask you this - what if the campers had tracked the wrong teens down (say, a group that really were just out having some fun), and events followed the same course? This is why LE aggressively clamps down on this type of behavior (when the legal system is working as it's supposed to).

Third - due process. We are all entitled to it. The Constitution guarantees that right to all of us, regardless of what we are accused of doing. It is there not just to protect the rights of criminals, but most especially to protect the rights of the innocent. Until you have seen your day in court, you are to be treated as if you are a likely innocent. At least, that's how it's supposed to work - this past decade hasn't been kind to the concept, I'm sad to say. Saying that homicide is okay, regardless of circumstance, because a person is accused of being a criminal...

Just to be clear, I'm not saying the teens are indeed innocent (I am in fact still PO'd that they weren't charged when that search warrant was executed & at least one of them was caught red handed) - but that is for the courts to decide, not individual citizens armed with guns & righteous indignation.

This is not like those cases of burglars being shot in the home they are invading. Those types of cases are ones where I (and more importantly, legal precedent) come down wholeheartedly on the side of defense of self & property. These types of cases, involving the tracking/chasing of suspected criminals down by private citizens - if enough of these incidents happen, we are going to see laws that will infringe upon the rights of those legitimately defending their homes, not to mention yet more limitations of the use of firearms. And that is why we need to be so careful not to just shrug our shoulders and say 'it's just a criminal, it's all good'.

All JMO

There was a link that stated the boys had a .32 handgun with them at the time of the robbery and they searched for it in the woods afterwards.

 

[Steely Dan]

"“But for the actions of these three young men, who were engaging in armed burglaries and who acted aggressively when caught, Summer Moody would be with us today,” said District Attorney Hallie Dixon.

http://www.local15tv.com/news/custo...-Island-Break-ins/8eOtHUnEeEqt51jksyJ60A.cspx

Burglarizing uninhabited homes isn't a death penalty crime, JMO

The fisherman will be legally responsible for this. You can not chase someone and then shoot them. You can not even shoot someone in the process of burglarizing your own home unless they are risking your life or harming you in some way. The only way these fishermen would be justified would be if the teens had weapons and they were in fear for their lives, which would still be unjustified if they chased them.

I am mega pro-gun and pro-self-defense but at least with the information I have read so far from the media this does not sound right and laws have been broken.

I believe in most states that if they are in your house you can shoot them. If the kids became aggressive with the fishermen then I'd more likely see letting them off. I don't understand how the boys are being charged for this.

"The Baldwin County Sheriff's Office said William "Nick" Hearn had a rifle and fired one of the warning shots that fateful night on the island. Hearn is a convicted felon and under federal law, it is illegal for him to have ammunition, much less a gun."

Very bizarre that the three boys are charged with murder, but the convicted felon who fired a shot isnt charged with anything. Jmo

http://www.fox10tv.com/dpp/news/local_news/mobile_county/teens-attorneys-remain-mum-on-charges

I hope the government steps in and jams the rifle up where the sun don't shine on this guy. JMO

Anytime another burglar is killed during a robbery attempt, it is the other burglar's responsibility. They were committed a crime and therefore take on responsibility, therefore murder. I have read more on the case that the 2 men fired warning shots away from the boys and didn't know the girl was there. I do not know why you would fire into the dark like that. However, obviously the men were found within their rights so it is the boys responsibility and bad decisions.

No, he was not within his federal rights. A convicted felon shouldn't be owning any guns, period. That's how I feel and that's how the feds feel too.

2 major differences here.
1. Summer was not an innocent neighbor, she was a participating burglar that happened to be killed in a robbery.
2. this is was in a deserted place that they believed no one else was around to be shot. But there were more burglars than they knew of. They thought it was safe to fire and not hit anyone because ordinarily no one is around hiding in the woods. Quite different than hitting a neighbor in an apartment building where you know it's a high likelihood of them being. Still I don't agree with the warning shot. However, these burglars had weapons themselves. That's frightening in itself. Why did they have them? Who knows how different this may have turned out if these fishermen didn't have guns.

I've never seen in print that the Burglars had a weapon. Somebody upthread said the cops looked for it, but it sounds like they never found it. I find it difficult to believe that there is no evidence of these kids having a gun, but the cops are buying the story from a convicted felon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but neither of shooters owned any land on the island.

If two guys go into a convenience store to rob it with a gun and the owner shoots both of them then I have no sympathy for the unarmed man. If two guys rob a convenience store and one of them kills the owner, then I think both should be charged with murder.

However, that's not we have here. We have two guys who have no property on the land, aren't paid watchmen and are shooting into the woods at nothing.

Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of the above please.

I hope the feds get heavily involved in this. The lawyer doesn't want the feds around because, IMO, something stinks here. It sounds like there is some sort of corruption going on.

"That's the night that the light went out in Georgia" keeps coming into my head.

 

[Snoopster]

Burglarizing uninhabited homes isn't a death penalty crime, JMO



I believe in most states that if they are in your house you can shoot them. If the kids became aggressive with the fishermen then I'd more likely see letting them off. I don't understand how the boys are being charged for this.



I hope the government steps in and jams the rifle up where the sun don't shine on this guy. JMO



No, he was not within his federal rights. A convicted felon shouldn't be owning any guns, period. That's how I feel and that's how the feds feel too.



I've never seen in print that the Burglars had a weapon. Somebody upthread said the cops looked for it, but it sounds like they never found it. I find it difficult to believe that there is no evidence of these kids having a gun, but the cops are buying the story from a convicted felon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but neither of shooters owned any land on the island.

If two guys go into a convenience store to rob it with a gun and the owner shoots both of them then I have no sympathy for the unarmed man. If two guys rob a convenience store and one of them kills the owner, then I think both should be charged with murder.

However, that's not we have here. We have two guys who have no property on the land, aren't paid watchmen and are shooting into the woods at nothing.

Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of the above please.

I hope the feds get heavily involved in this. The lawyer doesn't want the feds around because, IMO, something stinks here. It sounds like there is some sort of corruption going on.

"That's the night that the light went out in Georgia" keeps coming into my head.

:applause: :applause: :applause:


When did hunting down burglars become o.k. in America?? ...and then charging the hunted with murder??

Remind me to make wide berth around Alabama. Vigilantism run amok.
(I'm sure there are many wonderful people in Alabama, but I'd be afraid of running into those who would shoot first, ask later.)

:truce:

 

[jjenny]

And as far as I can tell, these teenagers weren't breaking into anyone's home when Summer was shot. They were all outside.
These men came over from another island, I believe, after they heard the teenagers roaming about.
I don't feel sympathy for someone breaking into a home and being shot by the home owner, but that is not what we got here.

 

[Hatfield]

Anytime another burglar is killed during a robbery attempt, it is the other burglar's responsibility. They were committed a crime and therefore take on responsibility, therefore murder. I have read more on the case that the 2 men fired warning shots away from the boys and didn't know the girl was there. I do not know why you would fire into the dark like that. However, obviously the men were found within their rights so it is the boys responsibility and bad decisions.

JMO
That is my understanding too. I still think if it is proven that they were burgalizing the places, then the girl should have been charged too with burglalry as sad as that is. If she was part of it, then she was part of it. If someone dies during the commission of the burgarly, then the burglars are responsible is my understanding as well.

Now, with that said. It will be up to a jury to decide if the other people committed some crime by trying to stop them and ending up shooting someone in the process. It seems unless the burglars had guns too, they could be responsible for something too.

It seems like this could be a case of 2 wrongs. The other people would have been better off just calling LE and hope they arrive in time to arrest the people.

 

[danzn16]

Burglarizing uninhabited homes isn't a death penalty crime, JMO



I believe in most states that if they are in your house you can shoot them. If the kids became aggressive with the fishermen then I'd more likely see letting them off. I don't understand how the boys are being charged for this.



I hope the government steps in and jams the rifle up where the sun don't shine on this guy. JMO



No, he was not within his federal rights. A convicted felon shouldn't be owning any guns, period. That's how I feel and that's how the feds feel too.



I've never seen in print that the Burglars had a weapon. Somebody upthread said the cops looked for it, but it sounds like they never found it. I find it difficult to believe that there is no evidence of these kids having a gun, but the cops are buying the story from a convicted felon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but neither of shooters owned any land on the island.

If two guys go into a convenience store to rob it with a gun and the owner shoots both of them then I have no sympathy for the unarmed man. If two guys rob a convenience store and one of them kills the owner, then I think both should be charged with murder.

However, that's not we have here. We have two guys who have no property on the land, aren't paid watchmen and are shooting into the woods at nothing.

Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of the above please.

I hope the feds get heavily involved in this. The lawyer doesn't want the feds around because, IMO, something stinks here. It sounds like there is some sort of corruption going on.

"That's the night that the light went out in Georgia" keeps coming into my head.

Addressing the bold - not in NC or VA - those are the only states I know of and apply to me. You can not shoot someone before, during, or after a burglary. You can only shoot someone if you believe your life is being threatened. You do not have the right to protect your property by taking someone's life, at least in these 2 states. I was surprised to hear while reading on this forum and about this case that apparently in Alabama you can shoot someone just to protect your property??

2nd bold - It also doesn't matter if the boys had a gun or not on them, how are you to know that doing a burglary? If I'm being robbed I assume my life is threatened until the robbers are running away and are gone. However, there have been discrepancies, I have read they chased them and then I read it happened right outside of the cabin they robbed. What is it?? However, the police said the boys did have a gun and other weapons during the burglary. The link I read previously said the boys admitted to having the .32 handgun, but I haven't seen confirmation that they found it. It seems these boys were well known in the area for robbing so many areas, that's how the fishermen assumed something bad was happening when they heard noises. They had already stole from many other people in that same area.

 

[Hatfield]

Addressing the bold - not in NC or VA - those are the only states I know of and apply to me. You can not shoot someone before, during, or after a burglary. You can only shoot someone if you believe your life is being threatened. You do not have the right to protect your property by taking someone's life, at least in these 2 states. I was surprised to hear while reading on this forum and about this case that apparently in Alabama you can shoot someone just to protect your property??

2nd bold - It also doesn't matter if the boys had a gun or not on them, how are you to know that doing a burglary? If I'm being robbed I assume my life is threatened until the robbers are running away and are gone. However, there have been discrepancies, I have read they chased them and then I read it happened right outside of the cabin they robbed. What is it?? However, the police said the boys did have a gun and other weapons during the burglary. The link I read previously said the boys admitted to having the .32 handgun, but I haven't seen confirmation that they found it. It seems these boys were well known in the area for robbing so many areas, that's how the fishermen assumed something bad was happening when they heard noises. They had already stole from many other people in that same area.

I really like this post because you bring up some very good points. It shows how difficult it is to fully understand the laws and what legal rights we have when protecting our property or our lives. I think all states are different, so it is important to fully understand our rights and our laws for our state.

For the 1st bolded part, I was surprised too that sure enough in at least 1 state it seems that is true. Cant remember where I read it, but it was on one of the threads.

For the 2nd bolded part, I so agree with you. Each person situation is different, but for me personally and if I had a burgler in the house, I sure would feel my life is thretened whether they were armed or not. Because they could easily kill me with their bare hands or by clubbing me to death with any household item. So, it is so difficult understanding and ensuring we abide by the laws we do have.

Obviously if the burglar is armed, it gives us much more rights to use lethal force to defend our lives. But I would never risk letting an intruder get close to me with just assuming he was not going to harm me. There is some saying I cant remember, but something like this......

"I would rather be tried by 6 than to be buried under 6."

 

[kentuckybound]

http://blog.al.com/live/2012/11/teens_charged_in_summer_moodys.html

The arrests of the young men in Moody's death have caused some controversy.

Byrd, Parnell and Tyree are charged under a law that allows people to be held responsible if they participate in an inherently dangerous felony and someone is killed.

"As recently as 2009, the Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama has reiterated tha t.. if an individual that is confronting criminals ends up killing the criminals unintentionally or intentionally the criminals that are perpetuating the felony.... are criminally liable," Dixon said.

 

[Sonya610]

Obviously if the burglar is armed, it gives us much more rights to use lethal force to defend our lives. But I would never risk letting an intruder get close to me with just assuming he was not going to harm me. There is some saying I cant remember, but something like this......

If someone breaks into your house kill them. When asked about it say "you were terrified and in fear for your life" and do not say another word without an attorney, seeing as how you were so shook up and such you need to call your good friend who happens to be an attorney.

In Georgia you can't shoot someone over "property" as in...you can't see someone breaking into your car and then go out and shoot them, if they try to enter your home it is okay, and if you confronted someone breaking into your car and were "in fear for your life" then it is also okay.

Plus in Georgia your dogs can eat as many trespassers as they like. : )

 

[danzn16]

Dang in NC your dogs will be put down if they bite a trespasser sometimes. Not okay.

 

[Sonya610]

Dang in NC your dogs will be put down if they bite a trespasser sometimes. Not okay.

Actually from what I have read NC's laws are even better for dog owners. Now most all states WILL force a quarantine on a dog that bit someone but is not vaccinated for rabies, which is why it is very important to keep up with rabies shots as the quarantine can be 6 months and very expensive (and if the owner won't pay to quarantine the dog is killed and decapitated for testing).

NC law regarding dogs that bite trespassers:

The provisions of this Article do not apply to:

(4) A dog where the injury inflicted by the dog was sustained by a person who, at the time of the injury, was committing a willful trespass or other tort, was tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the dog, had tormented, abused, or assaulted the dog, or was committing or attempting to commit a crime.

http://dogbitelaw.com/one-bite-state/north-carolina-dog-bite-law.html

 

[danzn16]

Actually from what I have read NC's laws are even better for dog owners. Now most all states WILL force a quarantine on a dog that bit someone but is not vaccinated for rabies, which is why it is very important to keep up with rabies shots as the quarantine can be 6 months and very expensive (and if the owner won't pay to quarantine the dog is killed and decapitated for testing).

NC law regarding dogs that bite trespassers:

Hmm this is good to hear. I see on the news all the time dogs being out done or shot from scratching or biting someone. There was even a case where teens went into a fences in yard (that wasn't there's) and tormented the dog and it scratched them and bit one and it was put down. Wonder how they got away with that with this law?

 

[mobeydick]

Burglarizing uninhabited homes isn't a death penalty crime, JMO



I believe in most states that if they are in your house you can shoot them. If the kids became aggressive with the fishermen then I'd more likely see letting them off. I don't understand how the boys are being charged for this.



I hope the government steps in and jams the rifle up where the sun don't shine on this guy. JMO



No, he was not within his federal rights. A convicted felon shouldn't be owning any guns, period. That's how I feel and that's how the feds feel too.



I've never seen in print that the Burglars had a weapon. Somebody upthread said the cops looked for it, but it sounds like they never found it. I find it difficult to believe that there is no evidence of these kids having a gun, but the cops are buying the story from a convicted felon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but neither of shooters owned any land on the island.

If two guys go into a convenience store to rob it with a gun and the owner shoots both of them then I have no sympathy for the unarmed man. If two guys rob a convenience store and one of them kills the owner, then I think both should be charged with murder.

However, that's not we have here. We have two guys who have no property on the land, aren't paid watchmen and are shooting into the woods at nothing.

Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of the above please.

I hope the feds get heavily involved in this. The lawyer doesn't want the feds around because, IMO, something stinks here. It sounds like there is some sort of corruption going on.

"That's the night that the light went out in Georgia" keeps coming into my head.

You are wrong, the Federal government and most state (all that I know of) will prosecute you for murder if you are committing a felony and anyone gets killed. It doesn’t matter what you were doing. One famous case is the guy in St Louis who was sitting in a car 300 feet from a sting where the suspect fired on a Federal undercover office and the another office killed the suspect. He was charged with Murder, convicted and is serving life today.

 

[Sonya610]

Hmm this is good to hear. I see on the news all the time dogs being out done or shot from scratching or biting someone. There was even a case where teens went into a fences in yard (that wasn't there's) and tormented the dog and it scratched them and bit one and it was put down. Wonder how they got away with that with this law?

If the bites involved trespassers it is because the owners are sleazebags that don't care enough to fight for their dogs. They also don't bother researching the law cause well....it's just a dog!

If the dog is NOT up to date on their rabies shots then any reported bite will result in a quarantine and the owner has to pay for it (even if they are current some states may quarantine the dog for a short period of time, but 10 days is nothing compared to 6 months). Rather than pay to quarantine they let animal control confiscate and destroy the animal as a way to fix the problem.

Keep the dog's rabies shots up to date and know the law.

 

[Luckyswife]

We are becoming a bleeding heart society and giving criminals more rights than they deserve. I, for one am sick and tired of criminals having more rights and more people fighting for them than the victims (and yes the convicted felon should not have had a gun and should go to prison for being in possesion of a fire arm.)

Why do I have to just let someone take the stuff I WORKED hard for? Or my nieghbors stuff? And let me tell you from experience that we have zero rights. We used to live in Stockton California (all my life). My husband had to start bringing his work truck home at night and it was full of tools (contruction). Everything was locked in a tool box or chained down because we had been burglarized before.

The very first night the truck was in the driveway I got up to feed my newborn twins and while making bottles at the kitchen sink saw a man going literally going through the back getting anything and everything that was loose ! So without thinking I just stared banging on the window and yelling "get out of there" and he ran. Woke my husband up and yes things were gone. Called 911 filed a report.
Two hours later, I woke up to a noise, woke my husband up who bolted outside and literally chased a guy off. Called 911 again, made a report. By this time all my kids were awake scared from all the commotion and we were tired, mad and beyond frusterated.
We all layed back down on pallets in the living room after talking my husband out of sleeping IN his truck for the rest of the night.

Not even an hour later as my husband is asleep and I'm still trying to comfort my kids (all 6 of them) and tell them they are safe and explain how they just wanted the tools Daddy has. But Daddy chased them off and they won't be back. Then, there it is again the sound of tools being banged around in the truck only this time about a half a second later someone trying the door nob... My husband is running for the door grabbing the baseball bat he laid next to us. My kids lost it..screaming bloody murder petrified someone is trying to get into the house. I'm already dialling 911 running to lock the door behind my husband to protect my children.

As I'm jumping up to lock it, I see my husband chasing two men down the street with a baseball bat. My husband is the most laid back, gental person I know. But knowing one of those guys were trying to come into our house ..I was scared to death for my husband. Thank God they jumped into a waiting car (with a third person driving) a few blocks away.

I called 911 again and told them to hurry this time(took over an hour each time before) because the guys tried to get into our house and my husband was chasing them with a bat and I can't see him anymore. I was told MY husband would go to jail if he harmed one hair on their heads and he should have stayed in the house and waited for police.
My husband comes home unhurt but madder than I'd ever seen him. What if they come back? Whats taking the police so long? I should take the kids and go but they are inconsolable and as I'm trying to carry them to the door they are flipping out thinking the men are outside still. They refuse to leave the safety of Daddy. I call family members who all come over within 5 minutes. After about 30 minutes my house is full and kids are calming down.
During this time we have all called 911 numerous times. They show up and threaten to take my husband to jail. We were told our "stuff" wasn't worth someones life and we should just let them take whatever they want while we wait for police. And, they told us not to bring the work truck home ever again because its the source of the problem.

So much truma these criminals caused still to this day. I should be able to have anything I want on my property without fear someone will steal it because they refuse to work for it like we did!
When did it become ok for people to take things that belong to other people? If we have the right to protect our entire property and everything on it regardless of its value people might think twice about victimizing innocents.

I don't take what doesn't belong to me, and I want the same in return. What little we have we worked hard for and earned honestly. Our weakness is making them stronger because they don't value human life or the laws we have set forth, but they know we do. I can kill a man if he enters my home..IF I feel threatened, yet that night I and my family were scared to death, but these guys kept coming back. I'm sure they have numerous vicims..but hey let them live right.....IMOO

 

[Sonya610]

I don't take what doesn't belong to me, and I want the same in return. What little we have we worked hard for and earned honestly. Our weakness is making them stronger because they don't value human life or the laws we have set forth, but they know we do. I can kill a man if he enters my home..IF I feel threatened, yet that night I and my family were scared to death, but these guys kept coming back. I'm sure they have numerous vicims..but hey let them live right.....IMOO

Well you live in Stockton California. I am not judging, I am a California native and still have to visit on occasion (job related). When I was living there 20 years ago Stockton was a cesspool and apparently it hasn't improved.

My suggestion would be find a way to get out. Yes I know money can be tight but find a way to leave the state.

Also last time I checked California still let folks buy/own guns for home protection so the safety of your children should not be a concern. There are jobs in other states and the standard of living costs are MUCH MUCH lower. Think about it.