Housing Policy

Home Bulldozer: Pro or Con?

|

Can you bulldoze a pool?

If Frustrated Owner Bulldozes Home Ahead Of Foreclosure: Man Says Actions Intended To Send Message To Banks make a catchy hed and deck, why not Frustrated Taxpayer Flies Plane Into IRS Building Ahead Of Tax Day: Man Says Actions Intended To Send Message To Capitalists, Insurance Companies, CPAs?

Terry Hoskins, the Ohio man who destroyed his own home in a squalid fight among himself, his brother, and the bank to which he owed money on the the house and two other properties, is getting a full American Homeowner treatment in the media. Here's a sympathetic clip from local news station WLWT:

 

But Hoskins is in no way representative of the "out-of-work homeowners" who in President Obama's words just need "help [to] find a way to pay their mortgages that works for both the borrowers and the lenders alike." He was well above water on the $350,000 home. He claims never to have missed a payment on the house: RiverHills Bank is foreclosing because somebody, presumably brain-sucking space aliens, used the house as collateral for loans on some commercial properties Hoskins bought. And Hoskins' defaults on his payments have little to do with the post-2006 real estate deflation. They spring from a 10-year legal battle that involved RiverHills Bank, the IRS, and Hoskins' brother, a former business partner.

So I'm inclined to agree with WLWT commenter madcastler, who writes, "[D]on't loan Hoskins any money. He will stiff you, destroy the collateral, and then go on the evening news and act like he's a hometown hero for not surrendering the collateral to you as he promised. Of course, in reality, he is an immoral person who has just raised the cost of doing business for other entrepreneurs. I'm just warning you in case you actually believe in this guy."

On the other hand, there is something to be said these days for just fucking shit up, and the destruction of housing stock will probably do more to get the real estate market back on its feet than Obama's decision to slather another $1.5 billion on housing finance agencies in California, Florida, Nevada, Arizona and Michigan (on top of the $75 billion already flushed down the HAMP). The interesting thing will be how much damage the bank can claim: Housing materials depreciate quickly, but it looks like it was a pretty nice house.

Actually, here's something more interesting to know: Where is that $1.5 billion coming from? Was it raised in a Treasury bill float? Was $1.5 billion eliminated from some other part of the budget?

Ah, who cares? It's time for Killdozer, the movie that guarantees quality right in the title:

 

NEXT: Dramatic Olbermann vs. Dramatic Chipmunk

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “[D]on’t loan Hoskins any money. He will stiff you, destroy the collateral, and then go on the evening news and act like he’s a hometown hero for not surrendering the collateral to you as he promised. Of course, in reality, he is an immoral person who has just raised the cost of doing business for other entrepreneurs. I’m just warning you in case you actually believe in this guy.”

    Two Olbermann threads in a row. Is this an MSNBC blog?

  2. Alt-text response: “Looks like someone’s gene pool needs bulldozing.”

  3. Question: is it illegal to destroy a house of which you are the titular owner, but also has a lien from a third party?

    I mean, a case like this REALLY should involve some sort of legal punishment beyond a bad mark on your credit report. But we should draw the line somewhere between this and, say, punching a hole in your roof trying to shovel snow off of it, when you still owe money on the house.

    1. More than likely what he did was totally legal.

      Hopefully not, but at the very least this should be such a spectacular act that the credit agencies will just mark him as permanently zero.

      1. Technically he’d need a demolition permit, although I’d bet that most of the folks commenting disagree that this ought to be a legal requirement.

      2. It may or may not be illegal, but it is a violation of the warranties Hoskins agreed to when he signed his mortgage or, in this case, his cross collateral pledge agreement.

        Standard language in every mortgage is that you promise to not fuck your shit up.

      3. What number would he have been if they took everything? Partial ZERO

      4. I don’t know about Ohio, but in Wis. what he did is a felony.

        943.26 Removing or damaging encumbered real property.
        (1) Any mortgagor of real property or vendee under a land contract who, without the consent of the mortgagee or vendor, intentionally removes or damages the real property so as to substantially impair the mortgagee’s or vendor’s security is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

        (2) If the security is impaired by more than $1,000, the mortgagor or vendee is guilty of a Class I felony.

    2. I think that that is a matter of contract.

      It wouldn’t surprise me if the mortgage required the home”owner” to do reasonable maintenance. And somehow don’t think that this qualifies.

      There is not, however, any such clause in the contract for our old property.

    3. I’m not a lawyer, but yes I would think this is illegal. If I hide my debts from debtors for the purpose of not paying them, that’s illegal. Destroying property to escape those debts would seem to be similar, but I have no clue what the statutes are.

      Though the only debts you can legally go to jail for are child support, taxes, and money owed through fraud.

      Maybe they could argue fraud? He contracted that he would use this property as collateral, and seemingly had no intentions to turn it over.

      1. I doubt anyone has the intention of turning their house over to the bank when they sign a mortgage or home equity loan — they probably aren’t thinking it’s going to come to that. So I don’t think you could plausibly argue he committed fraud when he signed the contract.

        When you decide later on not to honor a contract, that’s not fraud, it’s a civil matter of breach.

      2. If I hide my debts from debtors for the purpose of not paying them, that’s illegal.

        I assume you mean “hide my assets from creditors“. But that’s different from destroying assets to avoid handing them over to creditors. It’s not against the law to empty your bank accounts on a wild weekend in Vegas if you know Chase Bank is going to start emptying them to cover your credit card debt soon.

    4. Most mortgages and other collateral contracts have a “no wasting” clause of some sort in them, meaning you cannot wilfully destroy the value of the asset.

      Some jurisdictions do have criminal penalties as well.

      Also, if court proceedings in the foreclosure had commenced, he may be in contempt of court.

    5. Some jurisdictions (including mine) have a criminal offense of
      ‘impairing a security interest’

  4. Not to thread jack, but did anyone hear Mrs. Obama on the NPR talking about her plan to pay the big grocery stores to move into “under served” inner city communities. If you wanna hear a real lack of understanding of economics and the allocation of resources it is amazing. Sorry don’t have a link right now.

      1. My god! !he anon-bot is a cyborg! It actually got context and an attempt at humor!!!

        1. This is burned in by laser scan. Some of us were kept alive…to work…loading bodies into dumpsters and incinerators. The disposal units ran night and day. We were that close to going out forever. But there was one man who taught us to fight, to storm the wire of the camps, to smash those metal motherfuckers into junk. He turned it around. He brought us back from the brink. His name is Connor. John Connor. Your son, Sarah, your unborn son.

            1. Skynonbot is online.

    1. Yes. They want to spend $400M to help with the problem of “food deserts”. To jusge by the size of the backsides of many of the desert dwellers, there must be some mighty bodacious date trees.

      People who eat MackDonalds do so because they like it not because they have no access to apples.

  5. Don’t knock Killdozer, it’s pretty good for a 70’s made for TV movie.

    1. Knock it? Didn’t I say the quality’s guaranteed in the title. You see Killdozer, you can rest easy, because you’re gonna see a bulldozer that kills. Nobody ever watched Killdozer and then said, “The trailer made it look like there’d be more sex,” or “I expected the puppetry to be better.”

      1. I was disappointed by the lack of subtext, actually.

      2. Well, I DID expect the puppetry to be better. Just sayin

      3. I can remember seeing both Killdozer and Duel on ABC’s Action Movie of the Week or something such, when they were orginally aired.

        When you’re 9, both of those movies were pretty fucking awesome.

    2. Maybe, but that’s keeping the bar pretty low. I just watched 9 minutes and 52 seconds of nothing (acting was OK). At the very least I expected someone to get smooshed.

      1. Oh, everybody’s just spoiled, ITOW. Yes, these days there are 20 Killdozers every weekend on the Siffy Channel, so it might not seem special. But in those days you could still make a killer bulldozer movie with a cast of really ugly men, because back then cats hadn’t gotten the vote yet and they didn’t allow women in the National Football League.

        1. What if Killdozer could fly? How would that change things?

          1. What if Killdozer could fly?

            Pretty clear that Killdozer caused the destruction in Haiti. Oh, I know – we were TOLD it was an “earthquake”. That’s what they’d like us to think.

            David Aaronovitch was going to do a piece on this, but was stopped by the Mossad (in concert with the Masons – or so I was told at Lodge last week).

            So – I think we can see what would happen if when after Killdozer learnsed to fly.

            1. Masons is a false flag. It was the Shriners in their go-karts.

        2. That’s obviously false. There’s no hybrid Snake/Shark/Creature anywhere. Syfy wouldn’t touch this with a 20 ft pole. They’re too busy making those stupid night vision ghosty shows which are a little light on the “sy” for me.

          But yeah, glad to see that Ted Sturgeon got paid for that.

        3. That dude is Black, not ugly, Tim. And it is an All-Star cast, from Kolchak (The Night Stalker) to that dude from The Dirty Dozen to Dan Tanna of Vegas fame. Top that off with air-tight science-based-fiction and this move should have made ABC profitable right after its first airing.

          Still not quite Trilogy of Terror.

        4. Ah, but which would win in a fantasy fight between Killdozer and the truck from “Duel”? I’d toss in the demon-possessed “The Car” (I’d like to point out The Car was squishing bicyclists within the first few minutes) but it wasn’t made-for-tv. Although it sure felt like it.

          1. Still going with Killdozer even in a three-way fight. Scienceteriffically based on metal beefiness, torque and drive system.

      2. I bet the black guy gets killed first.

    3. Say, that’s what Herb did after Star Trek? Awesome.

  6. In another article I read on this is a paragraph that reads. “Hoskins said he’d gotten a $170,000 offer from someone to pay off the house, but the bank refused, saying they could get more from selling it in foreclosure.”

    If, and please underline and boldface this “if” but – IF this is true I must side with Hoskins. I do not know if he is telling the truth however. he may be a pathological liar for all I know. But IF this is true I might do the same thing.

    This is the article I am referencing:
    http://www.wlwt.com/news/22600154/detail.html

    1. I’m not sure how that makes his actions correct. He had put his home up as collateral on an obligation he could not met. From there, he doesn’t get to change the terms of the agreement. He couldn’t sell his property without the consent of the lien holder.

      1. If I borrow money from you and someone else offers me a way of paying you back, thus fulfilling my side of the agreement ? you have no right to sell my collateral ? so long as I am both able and willing to fulfill my side of the obligation.

        Of course, this is all predicated on Hoskins’s statement being true. I am skeptical about that ?.

        1. According to the letter of the law, not really. He wasn’t able to fulfill his side of the obligation. He would have to do something contrary to the agreement (sell the house without permission) first in order to pay the bank.

          Now, the bank was being dickish if what Hoskins says was true, but they were not violating the agreement.

        2. The bank is only entitled to their debt. They don’t get the whole house. If they had sold the house, they would have gotten their debt and had to give the balance back to him.

          So, the fact that the bank turned down the $170K means that didn’t cover their debt. No one would turn down $170 today to get $170 tommorow. The reason they could get more money from the house is because they were owed more than $170K. Bottomline is this guy couldn’t pay his debts and the bank was going to take his house as it had every right to do.

          1. True, but the bank can charge all sorts of service fees in the event of foreclosure, so they probably are going to get the full value of the house regardless.

          2. From my understanding, the house was collateral for loans other than the mortgage and note on the house itself. So the amount the house would have fetched in the short sale was still insufficient to cover the outstanding loans for which the house was collateral.

    2. That doesn’t make any sense. If he could pay off the loan by way of this other offer, the bank would have no say in the matter.

      1. “That doesn’t make any sense. If he could pay off the loan by way of this other offer, the bank would have no say in the matter.”

        This is why I am skeptical about his statement being true. But in this topsy tervy world we are living in many, many things make no sense …

    3. I might do the same thing too, but that don’t make it right. The bank’s claim on the house relates to its being used as collateral on other loans that Hoskins wasn’t paying.

      From the WLWT article, which more or less makes Hoskins’ case for him, I have a strong feeling this is a guy who likes to drag in a lot of unrelated strands to cloud your mind. This sounds like the real estate loan version of “You say it’s 2am and I smell like booze and perfume, but you don’t mention that I had to stop at 7/11 to get you a bottle of Motrin.”

      1. The same thing? I like the idea but something with a little more flavor, like using the place for a shooting range for a few weeks then honing my explosives techniques.

        1. In California, it is illegal to shoot at houses, even if you own it, and you know that there is nobody inside.

          1. Interesting that you know the law on that…

      2. It seems to be just another cultural phenomenon relating directly to our inability to recognize personal responsibility… IE – no matter what negative consequences stem from our actions… someone else can always be blamed.

    4. An offer is different than a final agreement. Would the prospective buyer have been able to secure a loan? How long would everything take before things were final? What if the buyer changed his mind at some point (like upon finding that the house would soon be up for auction)?

    5. In my understanding, that $170,000 would have paid off the mortgage on the house–but so what? He was current on his mortgage anyway. The problem is that he was in default on other loans that used that property as collateral.

      Paying off the house would remove the first lien, but not the other liens. So even if true, it’s irrelevant.

      Am I wrong?

    6. It doesn’t matter if he pays of the first lein. He’s still got a second lein on it. Which is the one they want to collect on.

  7. This guy is just a scumbag pure and simple. His word means NOTHING and he does not honor his obligations.

    If he was not incorporated then ALL his assests are up for grab. That is the reality.

    He sounds like a stupid businessman if he did not know that. Then again all his business properties are in default too, so I guess we already know the answer to that one.

    1. So the feds should bail him out like they bailed out so many other stupid businessmen?

    2. Even if he is incorporated there are still agreements that can make you personally liable for the money, I think. A friend went to all the trouble to incorporate and still had to do something like that, but I can’t remember the details. It still shields him from some things, but not like we thought it would.

      1. Banks generally will have the shareholders of S-corporations and small corpoprations sign as guarantors or sign personally, not just as an officer of the corporation. They’re not idiots.

        1. Yep, in the early parts of last decade, my business had a credit line that was backed by a lien on my condo.

  8. So could this schmo be facing felony charges now? After all, it wasn’t his house right?

    1. Not while the bank holds the deed. Your State may vary.

  9. Was the house too big to fly into the bank’s office?

    1. I don’t think the bulldozer motor is big enough to make a house fly.

      1. I dunno, Suki– house flies were pretty small the last time I checked. I think the bigger issue is that the bulldozer motor doesn’t provide a good place for the eggs to hatch.

  10. There is really nothing to be said for just fucking shit up Tim. The housing prices are artificially high. Had that house been forclosed on and put on the market, not only would the debt been paid, but also someone could have bought that house and had home. And the supply of homes on the market and the price of housing would have been that much better.

    He borrowed the money. Fuck him. Send him to jail and slap a fine for the value of the destroyed house on his ass. That way when he gets out he will spend the rest of his life paying for the house he destroyed. There is nothing funny or interesting about people who commit fraud and brazenly fuck shit up to keep from paying lawful debts.

    1. What law are you claiming he broke? As I mentioned up thread, I think this should somehow be illegal, but I’m dubious that’s the case.

      1. Fraud. He willfully destroyed those people’s calateral. They loaned him the money on the assurance that he would take care of the property and he destroyed it rather than letting them have it. That is no different than stealing.

        1. If anything, that’s breach of contract, not fraud. Fraud would require, at the very least, that he had the intention of breaking the contract at the time it was signed. And the obligation to maintain the property would have to be written into the contract for this action to even be breach.

  11. Who cares? Until you armor plate that bad boy and start wrecking OTHER people’s stuff, it’s strictly amateur hour…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer

  12. Where is that $1.5 billion coming from? Was it raised in a Treasury bill float? Was $1.5 billion eliminated from some other part of the budget?

    According to what I saw, it’s coming from the TARP SLUSH Fund.

    1. Ah yes, the Slimy Lying Underhanded Sh*tHeads fund.

  13. More than likely what he did was totally legal.

    That is extremely unlikely. Destroying the collateral is a major no-no.

  14. Oh, there is much to be said for fucking shit up.

    1. Oh, there is much to be said for fucking shit up.

      Fixed that for you.

      1. Oh, there is much to be said for fucking shit up.

    1. I knew you weren’t dead.

  15. And if he wasn’t such a whining pussy, he would have set fire to the place and stood on the roof as it burned, like the captain of a sinking ship.

    1. Your honor, he was renovating.

      1. Read that in Joe Peschi’s “My Cousin Vinnie” voice.

        1. I love that movie.

          1. I know twelve angry men who disagree. But they disagree on everything.

            1. Is this As Good As It Gets?

              1. The witness for the prosecution says no.

                1. It may be A Time to Kill

    2. But then how does he collect the insurance money? Your plan sucks.

    3. Last night I dreamt I went to Manderlay….

      1. …It seemed to me I stood by the iron gate leading to the drive and for a while I could not enter, for the way was barred to me

  16. Finally an American stands up for what’s wrong with this country, he’s my hero.

    1. lol – I’m hoping this is just a sarcastic troll response – but standing up for breaking your obligations isn’t something to be hailed as an accomplishment of anything other that being a worthless person.

  17. Yet another reason to separate business accounts from personal accounts by institution. Cross collateral can be a sneaky tactic. Ignorance of the ability of the bank to lump your collateral together from different loans isn’t really defensible, but the tactic can be underhanded with respect to separating business and personal debt. Without much to go on I’d say taking a man’s home based on cross colateralization of a mortgage with a business loan is pretty shifty if the agreement wasn’t in writing or explicitly stated.

    Destroying your house over it is just stupid and could have made what would have been a man fighting for his property rights into a moron with a dozer. And it wasn’t even an armored homemade kill dozer, what a lazy fuck. No wonder his businesses fail. He won’t even go the extra mile to make his dozer a killdozer.

  18. This guy is toast. He could have filed bankruptcy in Ohio, kept about $10,000 and all of his retirement accounts and started anew. Federal taxes can generally NOT be discharged. They can also audit you for the years before your filing.

    Intentional fraud is also not covered. Destroying your collateral is intentional fraud. Any bank lawyer worth his salt has put in a clause requiring the borrower to preserve the collateral. Attempting to discharge this debt would be bankruptcy fraud.

    It seems that this guy has never talked to or believed a lawyer. A friend of mine would not accept the thought of bankruptcy and tried to save everything. We could have saved most of his future by having his many friends buy the essential assets so that he could continue his business even though he would lose total control. When he refused and doubled down over and over, he lost everything, his business, his wife, his children, and he died six months later alone at 45. It was very sad.

    1. Just goes to show you it’s not a good idea to use your wife and children in a non-monarchical environment.

      1. wife and children as collateral

  19. Cross collateral is a good reason not to secure business loans where you secure your mortgage.

    1. It’s the anal log of “Don’t get your honey where you make your money”.

      1. anal log

        Consider that malapropism stolen.

      2. Is that like “Don’t dip your pen in company ink.”

  20. KILLDOZER DEMANDS MORE TRIBUTE!

  21. “Of course, in reality, he is an immoral person who has just raised the cost of doing business for other entrepreneurs. ”

    Gentlemen, I give you the KING of the Dorks! Welcome your Majesty!

    The level of sheer anal pussy-tude of a human being who can make such a comment in all seriousness makes my head spin…

    1. Go back to your government job, tool.

    2. When you’re surrounded by dead-beats, it’s hard to convince somebody to loan you something, even if you’re not one of the deadbeats.

      Go read Megan McArdle’s (lengthy) posts about the role of the ethic described by the commenter in our business environment, and how much less lending would occur if there were an ethic of just walking away from debts to take hold.

  22. Since this guy destroyed his house myriad people will be put to work cleaning it up and rebuilding. This is a great gain for society.

    After the multiplier kicks in the community will be revitalized.

    We need people like this.

    1. Yet another SRP brought to you by President Obama.

    2. And the history books recorded that from 2008-2012 the United States attempted to discover whether an economy really can be grown by breaking windows.

  23. His house, he can do what the hell he likes with it.

  24. I’m not sure I feel sorry for either party. No doubt this guy personally signed for his business loan.

    But the banks brought this on themselves, too. Why loan a carpet installer money for a quarter million dollar home?

    They both are getting their just desserts.

  25. The media in this country is a filthy diaper filled with shit. Journalism schools around the country should be burned to the ground, because they produce almost nothing but fucking leftist idiots who are so deprived of reasoning and thinking skills, it’s a wonder they don’t dine on their own turds.

    1. Case in point: my news staff recently met to plan a series of stories on my state’s high suicide rate. The reporter across from me put in her two-cent thought: “It’s our gun culture. Look how easy it is to get a gun.”
      Most on the left are utterly fucking INCAPABLE of firing synapses outside the well-worn network of their infantile brains.

    2. I don’t know about burning, but it’s pretty apparent we have someone who could bulldoze them. Too bad you didn’t get that idea to Hoskins before he dozed his crib – might have made enough money knocking over “journalizm” schools to pay off the house.

      Oh well…

    3. And it would be a great pleasure in life to just spit on and laugh at them like side-show freaks, except they helped get an ignorant, racist, inexperienced, narcissistic collectivist elected president.

      1. How is he racist?

        1. He contradicts himself and anybody who contradicts Obama is, by the only definition in over one year, a racist.

        2. See below – QED…

  26. …the destruction of housing stock will probably do more to get the real estate market back on its feet than Obama’s…

    Wooop! Wooop! Wooop!

    1. So, being in the auto bidness, I should want Hoskins to..start…running over people’s cars so we sell more! I get it! Brilliant!

      I’m bringing this to the operating committee next week…

      1. Broken-window economics. It’s always worked in my home. For instance, I’m going to beat my child tonight until he requires hospitalization. My goal is to retire at age 50.

        1. Fucking genius! Thanks for the tip! I don’t know how I’ve made it this far in life without more gummint help.

    2. I noticed that too, but the statement is technically true. At least it is if “get the real estate market back on its feet” means “increase home prices.” Obviously destroying a bunch of houses would be bad for the economy as a whole. But it would certainly drive up real estate prices, which would presumably be good for people who currently own real estate and real estate brokers.

  27. “Journalism schools around the country should be burned to the ground, because they produce almost nothing but fucking leftist idiots who are so deprived of reasoning and thinking skills, it’s a wonder they don’t dine on their own turds.”

  28. the destruction of housing stock will probably do more to get the real estate market back on its feet than Obama’s decision to slather another $1.5 billion on housing finance agencies in California, Florida, Nevada, Arizona and Michigan (on top of the $75 billion already flushed down the HAMP).

    Tim should probably not post for a couple months if he thinks reducing the housing stock is a good idea.

    Note: what ever Obama is doing is not a good idea either.

  29. the destruction of housing stock will probably do more to get the real estate market back on its feet than Obama’s decision to slather another $1.5 billion on housing finance agencies in California, Florida, Nevada, Arizona and Michigan (on top of the $75 billion already flushed down the HAMP).

    The administration has explicitly stated their desire to keep house prices high, despite a glut of houses on the market. Don’t blame Cavanaugh.

    1. They should just eminent domain a bunch of houses, demolish them, and replace them with spotted owl reserves or whatever.

      With the housing prices so low now, it wouldn’t even cost that much.

      1. Dont even need to use ED in Detroit.

  30. Just for the record, there’s some environmental concerns with a demo like that, but he may have just saved the bank some demo costs… They might write him a thank you note!

    The value of the property is mostly in the land, the infrastructure (sewer, storm drain, etc.) and the cost of fees associated with developing the property the first time (fees to the school district, fees to parks and recreation, etc.)

    In other words, there’s a reason why, when you insure your house against fire, for instance, that you only have to insure to cover a fraction of the value you paid for your house. The physical structure above ground is probably less than half the value…

    If he really wanted to burn the banks (or his brother, whatever), he should have done something to make it hard to redevelop. …like introduce some endangered fairy shrimp! If he’d done that, and sent samples in to his state Fish & Wildlife service, that might have done more damage than any tractor ever could!

    1. The house is worth a lot. The land may be worth a lot depending on where it is. May or may not be worth more than the land. But you are dead on to suggest letting an endangered rodent or bird onto the property would have been the best way to screw the bank and his brother.

      1. The house is on a lot. The land is the lot.

  31. Actually I believe it has a lot more to do with the Bank trying to steal this man’s property and what the IRS was doing to him for what purpose? My understanding was the woman was demoted after the facts came out about what she was doing, she could not be fired but it was proven to be reverse racial discrimination as I understood it- check the facts before to trash this man. I did and a lot of other local people did to. To date, most people in support of this man have pulled all of their money from this bank.

    1. a lot more to do with the Bank trying to steal this man’s property

      OK, from reading the article I got the impression that the man had used the property as collateral on a loan, and then failed to make payment on the loan. But if the bank was engaged in theft, that changes things.

  32. “It’s our gun culture. Look how easy it is to get a gun.”

    I’ve got a spiffy new Sig Sauer picked out; I’m just waiting for the weather to get a little warmer.

    1. +1

      Killdozer song to be used for future Radley Balko posts: The Pig Was Cool

      1. I was looking for a live performance of that one. I couldn’t find any vids from when they were active “hit-makers”.

  33. I’m reminded of the epilog to Little House on the Prairie of TV. I’m a sucker for gimmicks, and even though I hadn’t watched the series, when I heard they were writing a show around the blowing up of the back lot, I couldn’t resist. I love resourcefulness.

    It’s like in Whisper of Evil when the footage of a silo fire shot by whoever had the camera at the time he came across the scene got incorporated into the plot.

  34. I don’t understand any of this. What does he gain by destroying the house?

    1. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Ho…..42_Divorce Man Chops Home In Half&lpos=Home_0

  35. yeah those damn brain-sucking aliens got my house too!

  36. The United States is a democratic and strong economic country, he played the role of world policeman ,The Dalai Lama is a deserter, a beggar , an exile, what is meaning of Obama met with him ? this is not a bargaining chip in China-US relations, but a burden. let everyone wear the nike air max 90
    nike air max 95
    nike air max 97 shoes ,everyone can enjoy the leisure life ,let the American people get the real benefits.

  37. The United States is a democratic and strong economic country, he played the role of world policeman ,The Dalai Lama is a deserter, a beggar , an exile, what is meaning of Obama met with him ? this is not a bargaining chip in China-US relations, but a burden. let everyone wear the nike air max 90
    nike air max 95
    nike air max 97 shoes ,everyone can enjoy the leisure life ,let the American people get the real benefits.

  38. What if Killdozer was real? Oh wait, it is:

    http://www.badassoftheweek.com/heemeyer.html

  39. Wow, now that looks like a lot of fun dude.

    Jess
    http://www.anonymous-tools.se.tc

  40. And not one tasteless joke about me the entire thread

    You people are slipping.

  41. Dude is going to jail. He had no right morally or legally. He is symptomatic of what went wrong with this country. He thinks he shouldn’t assume any of the risks or responsibilities of his decisions. He can’t believe that in this nanny state mentality someone will actually send him to jail. Unless he can pay off the loan, he is going to jail. If he pays it off, he is still left with no house because he was a doofuss

  42. Looks like someone agrees with you –

    http://www.louisvillemojo.com/….._the_Story

  43. More than one person finds this story interesting: http://arizonarealestatehome.c…..your-house

  44. The guy took out a second lien on his house, and wants to use the fact that he’s current on the first lien to argue that the bank shouldn’t be able to claim it as collateral.

    We’ll, too fucking bad. If you don’t want the bank to come collect your first home, don’t put it up as collateral to buy a second home!!!

    Motherfucking asshole.

  45. the destruction of housing stock will probably do more to get the real estate market back on its feet than Obama’s decision to slather another $1.5 billion on housing finance agencies

    Broken window fallacy.

    How about letting housing prices fall until poor people can afford them?

    No, let’s DESTROY HOUSES, so that there will be more incentive to build new ones instead.

    WTF is wrong with you?

  46. When i first heard of this story, i thought that this must have been the most ignorant person alive. No wonder he was a failed business man with logic like this. Go back to business school and learn what collateral means dip-wad. This guy is typical as to what is wrong with America. Selfish and arrogant! He made me so angry, i wanted to get a plane and fly it into him! Bank and any other parties damaged by his actions need to take maximum legal action against this dip-wad and send a message to others. If you are on his side, then you should talk to someone professionally before you make some dip-wad mistake, or probably it is too late….

  47. People like this should be executed. Hopefully his gene pool has not and will not be reproduced. A small local bank with a few employees were the only one willing to help this guy out and this is the thanks they get because he is just a big time freeloader and terrible individual that only hurts the America taxpayers. There is also many things being left out of the story (bias)…but basically this is an evil and selfish person.

    Can you believe that there are still stupid and uneducated people that think the banks got “bailouts” because that is what the news reports. There were Government Loans that have to or already have been paid back.

  48. Obviously none of you that want to nail him to the wall have experienced anything close to this. Hope you never do.

  49. Thanks every for for the valuable contribution of such a good knowledge, really appreciate it, and also the videos were great……..
    Thanks again

  50. Hello,
    we glad to inform you that your writing is well. we got more good tips from here but video has been removed so post video soon. We are waiting.

  51. he put up the property up for collateral for a commercial loan. Not $160,000 but the property. So when he defaulted on the commmercial loan they wanted the property which is worth more hence the whole concept of collateral. I’d sue the crap out of him.

  52. Hi,
    Thanks for sharing this valuable information such as a good knowledge Video is also nice, I liked it.

    Patio Umbrella

  53. it’s really informative information, thanks for sharing….

  54. Another great read! Thanks! Im always looking out for your next blog, they seem to get better and better 🙂 thankyou!
    http://destinationsoftwareinc.com

  55. Great blog! I appreciate the hard work every body is putting in to maintain the website and all the visitors to it, the webmasters are doing great job, thanks again to all the good people.
    Natural Anxiety Remedy

  56. Great blog! I appreciate the hard work every body is putting in to maintain the website and all the visitors to it, the webmasters are doing great job, thanks again to all the good people.

  57. Great blog! I appreciate the hard work every body is putting in to maintain the website and all the visitors to it, the webmasters are doing great job, thanks again to all the good people.

  58. Great blog! I appreciate the hard work every body is putting in to maintain the website and all the visitors to it, the webmasters are doing great job, thanks again to all the good people.

  59. Great blog! I appreciate the hard work every body is putting in to maintain the website and all the visitors to it, the webmasters are doing great job, thanks again to all the good people.

  60. Nice video. Thanks for providing such important information.

  61. Thanks for sharing. To learn about reverse mortgage

    http://www.reversemortgagelend…..gage-work/
    http://www.reversemortgagelend…..-and-cons/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.