User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 6:52:10 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think it'll be argued whether or not green shirt was actually trying to act on the threat of taking the gun or was he just trying to get away from black shirt. Black shirt didn't seem to care about retaining his rifle when he went neck to nipples with green shirt. He didn't try to back away from green shirt. He even continued pressing forward on green shirt, firing at his feet, kept pressing forward and green shirt sling his ass out into the yard and turned to his whore ex wife then was shot Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Threats alone. They also added once there was physical act, those threats carried weight. Not verbatim but I think the basic gist. I think it'll be argued whether or not green shirt was actually trying to act on the threat of taking the gun or was he just trying to get away from black shirt. Black shirt didn't seem to care about retaining his rifle when he went neck to nipples with green shirt. He didn't try to back away from green shirt. He even continued pressing forward on green shirt, firing at his feet, kept pressing forward and green shirt sling his ass out into the yard and turned to his whore ex wife then was shot I must answer that with it is not a fact but your opinion. Fact is green shirt ran on to the porch, initiated physical contact, and used threatening language against black shirt. These are all facts represented within the video. ETA: Also, it is a fact green shirt grabbed the firearm, making true his threat to take it from black shirt and *bleeeeep*. Before all these these events took place, it is a fact green shirt was told to leave by black shirt. It is a fact green shirt ignored every command to leave. These are all facts, not opinions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 6:54:37 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is that No legally. Or no I dont think you should. No, legally. Like bigger hammer said, you can use “force” I.e. escorting somebody by their arm. But you can’t use deadly force just to remove somebody that isn’t leaving. We don’t allow people to just shoot people for no other reason than they stand on your property and won’t move. That’s when you call the cops. The moment he fired that warning shot/ND at his foot he no longer was just threatening deadly force but now using it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 6:55:40 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Meh. It's really got absolutely nothing to do with law enforcement. It's akin to them showing up to a construction site and forcing a contractor to use the right trim in a contract dispute. It's completely civil law in every state I'm aware of. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Wow baby momma really knows how to destroy lives. Not to mention that cops don't care about enforcing visitation for dad's. Bad shoot, bad escalation on all sides, and screw the family courts/law/LEO for destroying one kids life by eliminating the father here and broadly speaking society's fatherhood. Tragedy all around. Meh. It's really got absolutely nothing to do with law enforcement. It's akin to them showing up to a construction site and forcing a contractor to use the right trim in a contract dispute. It's completely civil law in every state I'm aware of. Not quite, Most states have interference-with-child-custody criminal statutes. Interference With Child Custody Apparently in Texas they don't like to enforce this particular law. Special Report: Interference with child custody not enforced in Texas A KFOX14 special assignment has discovered it is the unwritten policy of Texas law enforcement to not make arrests or charge persons with the crime of interference with child custody. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 6:57:34 PM EDT
[#4]
Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life.
He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 6:57:50 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, legally. Like bigger hammer said, you can use "force" I.e. escorting somebody by their arm. But you can't use deadly force just to remove somebody that isn't leaving. We don't allow people to just shoot people for no other reason than they stand on your property and won't move. That's when you call the cops. The moment he fired that warning shot/ND at his foot he no longer was just threatening deadly force but now using it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Is that No legally. Or no I dont think you should. No, legally. Like bigger hammer said, you can use "force" I.e. escorting somebody by their arm. But you can't use deadly force just to remove somebody that isn't leaving. We don't allow people to just shoot people for no other reason than they stand on your property and won't move. That's when you call the cops. The moment he fired that warning shot/ND at his foot he no longer was just threatening deadly force but now using it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 6:59:12 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life. He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. Bodily harm. Defense isn’t predicated on just something might be life threatening. It includes bodily harm of yourself or others. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:02:05 PM EDT
[#7]
I feel badly for the kid who has to deal with this . .
"My name is -insert name-. You killed my father. Prepare to die." |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:02:40 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bodily harm. Defense isn’t predicated on just something might be life threatening. It includes bodily harm of yourself or others. What bodily harm? There wasn't a fight till black shirt brought a gun out to prove how scared he was. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:03:00 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not quite, Most states have interference-with-child-custody criminal statutes. Interference With Child Custody Apparently in Texas they don't like to enforce this particular law. Special Report: Interference with child custody not enforced in Texas A KFOX14 special assignment has discovered it is the unwritten policy of Texas law enforcement to not make arrests or charge persons with the crime of interference with child custody. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wow baby momma really knows how to destroy lives. Not to mention that cops don't care about enforcing visitation for dad's. Bad shoot, bad escalation on all sides, and screw the family courts/law/LEO for destroying one kids life by eliminating the father here and broadly speaking society's fatherhood. Tragedy all around. Meh. It's really got absolutely nothing to do with law enforcement. It's akin to them showing up to a construction site and forcing a contractor to use the right trim in a contract dispute. It's completely civil law in every state I'm aware of. Not quite, Most states have interference-with-child-custody criminal statutes. Interference With Child Custody Apparently in Texas they don't like to enforce this particular law. Special Report: Interference with child custody not enforced in Texas A KFOX14 special assignment has discovered it is the unwritten policy of Texas law enforcement to not make arrests or charge persons with the crime of interference with child custody. It's a courts matter. The Cops don't want to be in the middle of He says - She says & not know WHO is right. If someone materially interferes with child custody enough, the Judge can (A) change parental rights - sorry Mom - Little Timmy & Tina are now Daddys Kids or (B) issue arrest warrant for the offender. If there IS an arrest warrant for the Offender, THEN the cops have no issue about taking them in to hold in Jail until time to "see the Judge"... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:05:51 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Looks like a good shoot. The shooter appeared to be in fear for his life and the "victim" stood in his path of retreat back into his residence. I don't see how this could have played out any differently. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:08:58 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What bodily harm? There wasn't a fight till black shirt brought a gun out to prove how scared he was. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Bodily harm. Defense isn’t predicated on just something might be life threatening. It includes bodily harm of yourself or others. What bodily harm? There wasn't a fight till black shirt brought a gun out to prove how scared he was. Reasonable fear of bodily harm. Green shirt refused to leave after being repeatedly told to, ran up onto the porch, made physical contact, made verbal threats, elevated voice. Green shirt’s directed his complete aggression towards black shirt. Green shirt (attempted) to follow through with his threat to take black shirt’s firearm. These things are indisputable. ETA: Black shirt had every right to demand green shirt leave and every right to arm himself. This isn’t like two guys fighting over a parking spot at some 7-Eleven. This is black shirt demanding green shirt remove himself from his property due to his to argumentative state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:09:37 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not quite, Most states have interference-with-child-custody criminal statutes. Interference With Child Custody Apparently in Texas they don't like to enforce this particular law. Special Report: Interference with child custody not enforced in Texas A KFOX14 special assignment has discovered it is the unwritten policy of Texas law enforcement to not make arrests or charge persons with the crime of interference with child custody. Texas Penal Code Sec. 25.03 Interference With Child Custody (c)It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(2) that the actor returned the child to the geographic area of the counties composing the judicial district if the court is a district court or the county if the court is a statutory county court, within three days after the date of the commission of the offense. (c-1)It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(3) that: (1)the taking or retention of the child was pursuant to a valid order providing for possession of or access to the child; or (2)notwithstanding any violation of a valid order providing for possession of or access to the child, the actor’s retention of the child was due only to circumstances beyond the actor’s control and the actor promptly provided notice or made reasonable attempts to provide notice of those circumstances to the other person entitled to possession of or access to the child. It's not as simple as the police just deal with it. If baby mama tells dad it'll be a while and claims it's beyond her control, police can't do anything. This is why they don't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:10:02 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I feel badly for the kid who has to deal with this . . "My name is -insert name-. You killed my father. Prepare to die." Inconceivable! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:11:07 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But not Deadly Force - the law makes clear distinctions that I can't pull out a pistol & say - "Get out of this nightclub or I'll blow your brains out with this .45" Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Oh hell yes you can threaten deadly force after repeatedly telling somebody to leave. When somebody tells you to get off, you better leave the property. If you don’t, you just opened all kinds of lawful use of force to remove you. Try getting into an argument on a bouncer when he demands you leave. You don’t? They can use all force up to but not including deadly to remove you. I worked as a Bouncer on one of the Busiest bar streets in Texas to pay for my higher education. You can Physically put hands on them to throw them out - but to use a baton, flashlight or other "weapon" and you'd go straight to jail & bar would get sued out of business. Use Deadly Force?  BIGGER_HAMMER  That’s my point. You can use force to remove them. But not Deadly Force - the law makes clear distinctions that I can't pull out a pistol & say - "Get out of this nightclub or I'll blow your brains out with this .45"  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:11:42 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It looked planned to me. For discussion let's just take that as a scenario. Would it be possible to prove? Either there would have to be some written/verbal trail or one of the people (if more than one) would have to confess to it. Black shirt guy sure did go into the house very casually. It is almost like he had made certain to tell green shirt to get off the property and that would be enough to justify coming out with the gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:12:22 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The black shirt guy fucked up going into the house to retrieve the firearm. I'd think he would have a better case if the gun was on him. I say black shirt is fucked. But it's "assholes collide" in Texas, so who knows. Personally, besides possible jail time, I see dollar signs. Last thing I want to do is shoot someone. I'm certainly not doing it in that situation. I'd get my skanky whore in the house and lock the door. Call the popo and sit on the couch with my NV donned. I definitely agree that going into the house and fetching the PCC to insert it into a verbal domestic where only threats of civil action are occuring is where he opened himself to the most legal hazard. Had he stayed inside and yelled through the window or door to GTFO and made sure the police were on the way to actually handle the trespassing he would have zero trouble justifying the shooting if either the father attacked the broad or stormed into the house. Not only did he put himself at greater legal risk, he also could easily have been killed. And then potentially everyone there he cares about could've been killed as well. If the father wanted to take the gun he could've easily done so after the warning shot. He then could've used the gun provided by Kyle to kill everyone on the scene. Everyone on scene is an asshole of one flavor or another except the person filming from inside who actually cared that someone was shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:12:23 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, legally. Like bigger hammer said, you can use “force” I.e. escorting somebody by their arm. But you can’t use deadly force just to remove somebody that isn’t leaving. We don’t allow people to just shoot people for no other reason than they stand on your property and won’t move. That’s when you call the cops. The moment he fired that warning shot/ND at his foot he no longer was just threatening deadly force but now using it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Is that No legally. Or no I dont think you should. No, legally. Like bigger hammer said, you can use “force” I.e. escorting somebody by their arm. But you can’t use deadly force just to remove somebody that isn’t leaving. We don’t allow people to just shoot people for no other reason than they stand on your property and won’t move. That’s when you call the cops. The moment he fired that warning shot/ND at his foot he no longer was just threatening deadly force but now using it. I'm not so sure about the legal question. Look up castle doctrine. Pretty sure they just messed up the kid for life, if that wasn't already a done deal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:12:53 PM EDT
[#18]
this is the judge/wife/gf
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:13:05 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Correct, I was also basing that on the guys attorney never mentioning that he wasn’t invited, which would seem like the first thing you would say if he wasn’t. But then again, it looks like the property is the shooters parents not his mistresses, so a good example of the reason not to jump to conclusions. Either way, that guy is real scumbag. EDIT: I would not want to be on the stand under cross and have to explain this picture. https://i.imgur.com/zQqYPJ1.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You're assuming things. obviously the kid was not there. So why would she tell him to come there to get him if he isn't there? Correct, I was also basing that on the guys attorney never mentioning that he wasn’t invited, which would seem like the first thing you would say if he wasn’t. But then again, it looks like the property is the shooters parents not his mistresses, so a good example of the reason not to jump to conclusions. Either way, that guy is real scumbag. EDIT: I would not want to be on the stand under cross and have to explain this picture. https://i.imgur.com/zQqYPJ1.jpg Or explain why your first words after making a body was "I told yall to leave" Shooting people for the crime of trespass is pretty frowned upon.. But thats just my read. ETA. Again. maybe its murder maybe it aint.. But id not want my states attorneys office looking at me with that video in hand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:13:16 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Shooter was at his home..Texas has a Castle Law.. It'll be interesting to see how this case goes. Regardless of the outcome the guy is dead when he could have just walked away & come back another time.. Theres something to learn from right there. Castle doctrine still requires eminent risk to use deadly force. Hard case to win when it was a simple dick measuring contest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:15:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Castle doctrine still requires eminent risk to use deadly force. Hard case to win when it was a simple dick measuring contest. Not sure if it's a clear case, if you consider the threat of being disarmed and having your weapon used against you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:16:29 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I must answer that with it is not a fact but your opinion. Fact is green shirt ran on to the porch, initiated physical contact, and used threatening language against black shirt. These are all facts represented within the video. ETA: Also, it is a fact green shirt grabbed the firearm, making true his threat to take it from black shirt and *bleeeeep*. Before all these these events took place, it is a fact green shirt was told to leave by black shirt. It is a fact green shirt ignored every command to leave. These are all facts, not opinions. I hope you are better on a jury. Green shirt did not grab the rifle until after black shirt fired towards his feet. At that point it was self-defense against a possibly deranged jealous fornicator of his ex-wife (Opinion). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:18:22 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I hope you are better on a jury. Green shirt did not grab the rifle until after black shirt fired towards his feet. At that point it was self-defense against a possibly deranged jealous fornicator of his ex-wife (Opinion). Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I must answer that with it is not a fact but your opinion. Fact is green shirt ran on to the porch, initiated physical contact, and used threatening language against black shirt. These are all facts represented within the video. ETA: Also, it is a fact green shirt grabbed the firearm, making true his threat to take it from black shirt and *bleeeeep*. Before all these these events took place, it is a fact green shirt was told to leave by black shirt. It is a fact green shirt ignored every command to leave. These are all facts, not opinions. I hope you are better on a jury. Green shirt did not grab the rifle until after black shirt fired towards his feet. At that point it was self-defense against a possibly deranged jealous fornicator of his ex-wife (Opinion). That’s not a complete truth. Green shirt’s hand did indeed make *forceful* contact with the firearm before that occurred. That can be seen plainly in the video. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:19:58 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life. He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. I agree there, clearly both guys really weren't even considering to de-escalate - the issue was about a child. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:20:50 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's not a complete truth. Green shirt's hand did indeed make *forceful* contact with the firearm before that occurred. That can be seen plainly in the video. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I must answer that with it is not a fact but your opinion. Fact is green shirt ran on to the porch, initiated physical contact, and used threatening language against black shirt. These are all facts represented within the video. ETA: Also, it is a fact green shirt grabbed the firearm, making true his threat to take it from black shirt and *bleeeeep*. Before all these these events took place, it is a fact green shirt was told to leave by black shirt. It is a fact green shirt ignored every command to leave. These are all facts, not opinions. I hope you are better on a jury. Green shirt did not grab the rifle until after black shirt fired towards his feet. At that point it was self-defense against a possibly deranged jealous fornicator of his ex-wife (Opinion). That's not a complete truth. Green shirt's hand did indeed make *forceful* contact with the firearm before that occurred. That can be seen plainly in the video. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:21:00 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That’s not a complete truth. Green shirt’s hand did indeed make *forceful* contact with the firearm before that occurred. That can be seen plainly in the video. That was not a grab. Green shirt just pushed up on it with the back of his hand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:22:57 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I agree there, clearly both guys really weren't even considering to de-escalate - the issue was about a child. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life. He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. I agree there, clearly both guys really weren't even considering to de-escalate - the issue was about a child. One mans issue was about his child, the other man was all about looking bad ass in front of his ''woman'' and getting some white knight pu--y that night. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:23:32 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was not a grab. Green shirt just pushed up on it with the back of his hand. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That’s not a complete truth. Green shirt’s hand did indeed make *forceful* contact with the firearm before that occurred. That can be seen plainly in the video. That was not a grab. Green shirt just pushed up on it with the back of his hand. I didn’t say it was a grab. I said it was forceful contact. To black shirt, who is looking directly at green shirt’s face, does it feel like a push or does it feel like a pull? ETA: Watch the video(s). Look at the facts which are presented. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:26:08 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You can't USE Deadly Force to remove a Trespasser. You clearly have "Drunk" level knowledge of use of force laws in Texas.  Did I throw you out? If so sorry & no hard feelz. I was just a guy making his way through school the best way he can  ...BIGGER_HAMMER You should re read what he said that you replied to. Slowly maybe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:28:12 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, legally. Like bigger hammer said, you can use “force” I.e. escorting somebody by their arm. But you can’t use deadly force just to remove somebody that isn’t leaving. We don’t allow people to just shoot people for no other reason than they stand on your property and won’t move. That’s when you call the cops. The moment he fired that warning shot/ND at his foot he no longer was just threatening deadly force but now using it. I think its an interesting case. I agree that the warning shot was a bad move. They’ll probably argue that was an attempt the use the gun without using deadly force. It will be a weird one. Their arguement will be that he wasnt using deadly force to remove the trespasser, until tresspasser closed the distance and put hands on. That seems to align with the statutes as I read it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:28:15 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was not a grab. Green shirt just pushed up on it with the back of his hand. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That's not a complete truth. Green shirt's hand did indeed make *forceful* contact with the firearm before that occurred. That can be seen plainly in the video. That was not a grab. Green shirt just pushed up on it with the back of his hand.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:32:18 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote History21 minutes: Hey, it's Joe! Joe: I'm gonna take off my Binger scarf now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:33:38 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 21 minutes: Hey, it's Joe! Joe: I'm gonna take off my Binger scarf now. Quote HistoryQuoted: 21 minutes: Hey, it's Joe! Joe: I'm gonna take off my Binger scarf now. Tag |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:34:24 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But not Deadly Force - the law makes clear distinctions that I can't pull out a pistol & say - "Get out of this nightclub or I'll blow your brains out with this .45" Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Oh hell yes you can threaten deadly force after repeatedly telling somebody to leave. When somebody tells you to get off, you better leave the property. If you don’t, you just opened all kinds of lawful use of force to remove you. Try getting into an argument on a bouncer when he demands you leave. You don’t? They can use all force up to but not including deadly to remove you. I worked as a Bouncer on one of the Busiest bar streets in Texas to pay for my higher education. You can Physically put hands on them to throw them out - but to use a baton, flashlight or other "weapon" and you'd go straight to jail & bar would get sued out of business. Use Deadly Force? BIGGER_HAMMER That’s my point. You can use force to remove them. But not Deadly Force - the law makes clear distinctions that I can't pull out a pistol & say - "Get out of this nightclub or I'll blow your brains out with this .45" And that’s what I said exactly. Deadly force was authorized when dead guy attempted to grab the gun and say I’m going to use it against you. That’s imminent, Immediate, capable, deadly threat on ones life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:34:41 PM EDT
[#35]
I’m starting to think the huge disparity in all our takes is the state laws we are used to because I’m shocked how some think its ok to be a accosted on your own porch.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:34:45 PM EDT
[#36]
Arguments, emotional events, justification aside this was cold blooded, premeditated murder. The shooter calmly goes into the house, gets and loads his rifle, comes back out onto the porch and then basically looks for "justification" to be able to shoot the gut and claim it was self defense. That said, I am not a lawyer, so I do not know if there is any legal means for the shooter to not to be convicted (SYG law, Castle, etc.) but the bottom line for me is this was not a "self defense" shooting. Kyle was self defense, this guy was "just give me a reason." I'm not saying Green shirt didn't give the shooter that reason or justification, but the shooter obviously waited until he had accumulated enough "reasons" and then acted deliberately. I would not be surprised if the shooter and the "ex" had not discussed this very outcome prior to the confrontation - as evidenced by the utter lack of surprise or concern on the part of either the EX or the shooter...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:35:09 PM EDT
[#37]
Tagging just to see how this plays out. To me it seems like a very bad shoot
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:36:41 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I agree there, clearly both guys really weren't even considering to de-escalate - the issue was about a child. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life. He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. I agree there, clearly both guys really weren't even considering to de-escalate - the issue was about a child. Not to differ, but the "Issue" was a Dick Measuring Contest to see who was "Baddest" ... All Testosterone & No Grey Matter involved between those mutual Dummies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:37:03 PM EDT
[#39]
This thread is a perfect example of why I don't push as close to the legal line as possible. I want to stay far away from any grey areas.
The first year I lived here I would come home to someone fishing from my side yard a few times a month. I never drew a pistol and came at them aggressively, I always kept it concealed. I always kept my distance and was as polite as possible telling them they gotta go, public access is a half mile down the road, etc. If they started getting defiant or argumentative I'd back off and go in the house to make the call to the Sheriff's Department. I want to make every attempt to avoid shooting someone, and if it escalates to that point I want there to be no confusion as to who escalated it. Stupid people often have hard lives, I try not to be stupid. These people are stupid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:37:31 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Oh hell yes you can threaten deadly force after repeatedly telling somebody to leave. When somebody tells you to get off, you better leave the property. If you don’t, you just opened all kinds of lawful use of force to remove you. Try getting into an argument on a bouncer when he demands you leave. You don’t? They can use all force up to but not including deadly to remove you. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Classic example of “you can’t provoke the situation and claim self defense” Nothing in that video warranted him to bring a gun out. You can’t use deadly force to threaten somebody who’s not been aggressive to leave your property. He showed utter disregard for human life by just bringing a gun into a verbal argument. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. He’s going to prison. Oh hell yes you can threaten deadly force after repeatedly telling somebody to leave. When somebody tells you to get off, you better leave the property. If you don’t, you just opened all kinds of lawful use of force to remove you. Try getting into an argument on a bouncer when he demands you leave. You don’t? They can use all force up to but not including deadly to remove you. Bullshit. You cannot shoot someone for refusing to leave. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:37:45 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: On the rekeita stream, they said if green shirt was standing on the porch during the shoot, it could be legally considered burguraly at that point but he wasn't on the porch when shot, he was stepped down off it, he fell backwards half onto the porch after being shot. How in the hell would that be a burglary? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:39:56 PM EDT
[#42]
Looks like murder to me
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:40:51 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life. He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. Threatening deadly force was purely lawfull after being reportedly demanded to leave. It’s when dead guy verbally said I’m going to use it against you and reached for gun = justifiable homocide It’s all caught on camera. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:41:36 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bullshit. You cannot shoot someone for refusing to leave. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Classic example of “you can’t provoke the situation and claim self defense” Nothing in that video warranted him to bring a gun out. You can’t use deadly force to threaten somebody who’s not been aggressive to leave your property. He showed utter disregard for human life by just bringing a gun into a verbal argument. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. He’s going to prison. Oh hell yes you can threaten deadly force after repeatedly telling somebody to leave. When somebody tells you to get off, you better leave the property. If you don’t, you just opened all kinds of lawful use of force to remove you. Try getting into an argument on a bouncer when he demands you leave. You don’t? They can use all force up to but not including deadly to remove you. Bullshit. You cannot shoot someone for refusing to leave. And that’s not what happened |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:42:22 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life. He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. Don't forget he thought the green shirt guy was so dangerous he left his lady friend outside by herself with him to get the gun  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:42:23 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How in the hell would that be a burglary? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: On the rekeita stream, they said if green shirt was standing on the porch during the shoot, it could be legally considered burguraly at that point but he wasn't on the porch when shot, he was stepped down off it, he fell backwards half onto the porch after being shot. How in the hell would that be a burglary? It’s just how the statute is written. It’s not the “burglary” in the sense we think of. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:42:29 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Tagging just to see how this plays out. To me it seems like a very bad shoot He will be indicted by the State of Texas (AG's office is handling this so it is high profile can not be swept under the rug as most likely would have happened locally - Plus all the Video) He'll go to trial. Hung Jury on Murder. They may get him on "Deadly Conduct" & "Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon" for the "warning shot". that would be a easier case to make due to him bringing the rifle outside - going nose to nose with Rage Dad & then firing that Angry Shot. Maybe a 2nd trial. I don't think they will find 12 jurors to convict him due to Rage Dad's over the top stupidity in continuing to play the idiot game all the way to 1st place dead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:43:10 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't forget he thought the green shirt guy was so dangerous he left his lady friend outside by herself with him to get the gun Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life. He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. Don't forget he thought the green shirt guy was so dangerous he left his lady friend outside by herself with him to get the gun That’s an illogical statement |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:45:07 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't forget he thought the green shirt guy was so dangerous he left his lady friend outside by herself with him to get the gun Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Hard to see where black shirt felt he was in danger of losing his life. He engaged green shirt and had to go chest match to show how scared he was. Then when green touches the weapon, black creates distance, then fires? He had a chance to de-escalate.. but why the hell would he even go outside with a gun? Chicken egg situation. Don't forget he thought the green shirt guy was so dangerous he left his lady friend outside by herself with him to get the gun Exactly what he did. Let me calmly WALK into the house, fetch a Semi-Auto Rifle with a High Capacity Magazine, and then resume nose to nose "Barking Contest" with Rage Dad... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2021 7:45:11 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And that’s not what happened Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Classic example of “you can’t provoke the situation and claim self defense” Nothing in that video warranted him to bring a gun out. You can’t use deadly force to threaten somebody who’s not been aggressive to leave your property. He showed utter disregard for human life by just bringing a gun into a verbal argument. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. He’s going to prison. Oh hell yes you can threaten deadly force after repeatedly telling somebody to leave. When somebody tells you to get off, you better leave the property. If you don’t, you just opened all kinds of lawful use of force to remove you. Try getting into an argument on a bouncer when he demands you leave. You don’t? They can use all force up to but not including deadly to remove you. Bullshit. You cannot shoot someone for refusing to leave. And that’s not what happened Kinda looked like Dad was cornered on the porch and no way out. We need a Grand Jury to decide really. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
