User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:22:34 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Welcome to page 1.  Thank you  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:23:28 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What did happen was Carruth shot at Read before Read had so much as cocked his fist. You cannot shoot someone over verbal provocation. And at no point was anything resembling a threat of imminent deadly force coming from Read until Carruth shot at him. You cannot respond to non-deadly force with deadly force. That's the whole concept of proportionality when it comes to the elements of self-defense. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: And again, green shirt was not shot for trespassing. He was shot because he became an active threat. And the only reason you could even claim he became an "active" threat is because he was shot at without lawful justification. You cannot provoke a person to attack you and then use their attack to justify your killing them, unless you have attempted to retreat and they continue to present a deadly threat. No he wasn't. He could've been shot the moment he rushed up onto the porch but was not. I am talking about what did happen, not what could've happened. You cannot respond to non-deadly force with deadly force. That's the whole concept of proportionality when it comes to the elements of self-defense. That didn’t happen either. Are we watching the same video(s)? Did you not see green shirt make contact with and forcefully move the muzzle away? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:24:03 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Chad (green shirt) was not a threat. Kyle was the only person who was a threat...and just for the record, shot and killed a man. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: And again, green shirt was not shot for trespassing. He was shot because he became an active threat. Chad (green shirt) was not a threat. Kyle was the only person who was a threat...and just for the record, shot and killed a man. Mind reader, huh? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:25:01 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The simple act of going to retrieve a firearm is unnecessary and is a clearly imminent threat to green shirt. You can't escalate/create a situation and then claim self defense. I'd make the argument that black shirt threatened green shirt by retrieving and introducing the firearm into a situation that he had no business being involved in. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I've already stated I believe it was reasonable for black shirt to believe himself in danger and facing an imminent threat. Every action taken by green shirt escalated into a higher threat level. What indicator(s) are there to allow black shirt green shirt isn't going to continue escalation? You can't escalate/create a situation and then claim self defense. I'd make the argument that black shirt threatened green shirt by retrieving and introducing the firearm into a situation that he had no business being involved in. And I argue you are wrong. As was green shirt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:26:38 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Kyle has just shot on the deck near Chad. Chad responded by grabbing the gun and swinging Kyle into the yard. Chad should have tackled or otherwise beat the hell out of Kyle and taken the rifle to end the threat. Green shirt was correct to close the distance and negate the threat the rifle presented. Throwing Black shirt away gave back the distance that ultimately led to his demise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:28:14 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Kyle had a legal right to have the firearm whether Chad was present or not. When Chad then rushed up to and chest bumped Kyle then Kyle had a legal self defense right to shoot Chad. The fact he fired into the deck, he missed the shot, is irrelevant. Anything Chad did after that short of retreating with his hands up could still be deemed as a further threat. It would be different if Black shirt was carrying the entire time.but he wasn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:28:23 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. Green shirt was correct to close the distance and negate the threat the rifle presented. Throwing Black shirt away gave back the distance that ultimately led to his demise. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Kyle has just shot on the deck near Chad. Chad responded by grabbing the gun and swinging Kyle into the yard. Chad should have tackled or otherwise beat the hell out of Kyle and taken the rifle to end the threat. Green shirt was correct to close the distance and negate the threat the rifle presented. Throwing Black shirt away gave back the distance that ultimately led to his demise. No, he wasn’t. His first mistake was not leaving when told to by the one person on that property who had the ability to do so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:29:15 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The ex-wife being on that property (with permission) could allow some sort of implied permission by the property owner but that order is predicated on the parties behaving in a civil manner. Once the arguing started and civility ended, the property owner (black shirt) should not be expected to endure any argumentative or uncivil behaviors. Did Black Shirt know that his paramour was telling her ex-husband that the child hand-off would take place there? Did black shirt know that his paramour intended to NOT hand over the child as agreed? To what extent was black shirt a co-conspirator in interfering with a court-ordered child custody arrangement, and how does that reflect on "creating your own exigency"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:29:27 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That didn't happen either. Are we watching the same video(s)? Did you not see green shirt make contact with and forcefully move the muzzle away? "You moved the barrel of this gun I had pressed against you! Ahhh, I'm in fear for my life, he's comin' right for me!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:29:42 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. Green shirt was correct to close the distance and negate the threat the rifle presented. Throwing Black shirt away gave back the distance that ultimately led to his demise. ALL of you are ignoring the fact Chad was at Kyle's HOUSE !!!! He had no right to be there, and if he would have handled the situation appropriately he would still be alive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:31:37 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Until the child isnt there. Its not a blanket warrant to be there at all hours day or night. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Wrong. If the arranged child hand-off was to be there, he has every right to be there. Until the child isnt there. Its not a blanket warrant to be there at all hours day or night. If his ex has the child and has arranged to hand over the child at 3:15 at that location, then he has every right to be in the presence of his ex until she delivers the child. Has it been established as FACT that the child was not there? Ex-wife was crawfishing on the handover from the start. If not, where was he? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:32:43 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ALL of you are ignoring the fact Chad was at Kyle's HOUSE !!!! He had no right to be there, and if he would have handled the situation appropriately he would still be alive. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This. Green shirt was correct to close the distance and negate the threat the rifle presented. Throwing Black shirt away gave back the distance that ultimately led to his demise. ALL of you are ignoring the fact Chad was at Kyle's HOUSE !!!! He had no right to be there, and if he would have handled the situation appropriately he would still be alive. You should probably catch up on the thread first. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:33:06 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The father's apparent wife sure didn't seem to care much that he was laying there dead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:33:13 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Black shirt demanded someone leave his property. Any child custody issues green shirt and the ex-wife is up the family courts, not to be settled on black shirt’s porch. Black shirt has every right to arm himself. Green shirt certainly did become an active threat the moment he rushed up into the porch, use verbally threatening language, making physical contact. Good luck with that in court.. I don't think it will go as you assert. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:36:45 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The simple act of going to retrieve a firearm is unnecessary and is a clearly imminent threat to green shirt. You can't escalate/create a situation and then claim self defense. I'd make the argument that black shirt threatened green shirt by retrieving and introducing the firearm into a situation that he had no business being involved in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:38:38 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ALL of you are ignoring the fact Chad was at Kyle's HOUSE !!!! He had no right to be there, and if he would have handled the situation appropriately he would still be alive. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This. Green shirt was correct to close the distance and negate the threat the rifle presented. Throwing Black shirt away gave back the distance that ultimately led to his demise. ALL of you are ignoring the fact Chad was at Kyle's HOUSE !!!! He had no right to be there, and if he would have handled the situation appropriately he would still be alive. He has every right to go to where the other parent is and retrieve the child. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:39:06 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The muzzle that was literally touching his arm? You think that fact is helpful to Carruth's self-defense claims? "You moved the barrel of this gun I had pressed against you! Ahhh, I'm in fear for my life, he's comin' right for me!" Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That didn't happen either. Are we watching the same video(s)? Did you not see green shirt make contact with and forcefully move the muzzle away? "You moved the barrel of this gun I had pressed against you! Ahhh, I'm in fear for my life, he's comin' right for me!" Yes that one. The muzzle which green shirt rushed up onto the porch to get closer to and where black shirt stood his ground. The one where green shirt came into physical contact with by making physical contact with black shirt. The same one green shirt threatened to take away and *bleeeeep*. These are all things which are fact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:39:32 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't care if his actions were within the boundaries of the law, I think the shooter's an idiot. Even if he is acquitted - even if he's not charged - this is gonna cost him. I simply can't imagine shooting someone over this. Next time you take a dump, reach back, grab a handful of shit and wipe it all over your face. No one's gonna stop you. It's perfectly legal. It's pretty dumb, IMO, but it's perfectly legal. I never said it wasn’t a monumental bad idea to introduce the firearm; because it was. The word is out and Kyle’s clients in the oil and gas industry are dropping him like a hot potato. He won’t work in the Texas South Plains again. If he escapes prosecution he will be bankrupt and without a friend in the region. The real point for people to get a grasp on is controlling your temper and keeping a cool head about yourself in dealing with child custody issues. Men get all worked up and start to act out; and this works against them in family court. Men need to learn the system and then work the system if they want to prevail. If Kyle had left the rifle inside and Green shirt guy pounded him, Green shirt guy would only have limited supervised visits and had to pay for the monitor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:40:21 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You should probably catch up on the thread first. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: This. Green shirt was correct to close the distance and negate the threat the rifle presented. Throwing Black shirt away gave back the distance that ultimately led to his demise. ALL of you are ignoring the fact Chad was at Kyle's HOUSE !!!! He had no right to be there, and if he would have handled the situation appropriately he would still be alive. You should probably catch up on the thread first. Maybe , or I could just pop in and give my .02 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:40:24 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That deserved to die for his ignorance , come to my house and try that bullshit. Especially if I lived in TX , except I would have had a TX legal suppressor on my 9mm carbine. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/D61E8EC4-94C3-4EA2-92B8-BB5D18E1D8C8-632.jpg Hmmm thats a hot take. Even for me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:42:06 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Someone chest bumping you is not an imminent threat of death/great bodily harm. Disparity of force and totality of events. Green shirt guy screwed himself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:42:10 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You need to check out Texas laws. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The simple act of going to retrieve a firearm is unnecessary and is a clearly imminent threat to green shirt. You can't escalate/create a situation and then claim self defense. I'd make the argument that black shirt threatened green shirt by retrieving and introducing the firearm into a situation that he had no business being involved in. Or show me where a person can escalate a situation, almost shoot the other party in the foot, then claim self defense. Just like in the Arbery case in Georgia, when presented with a lethal threat the other party is acting reasonably when they defend themselves against said threat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:42:13 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ALL of you are ignoring the fact Chad was at Kyle's HOUSE !!!! He had no right to be there, and if he would have handled the situation appropriately he would still be alive. Wrong. Kyle's lover was at the house and supposed to hand over the son. Has it been established where the handover was actually arranged, and at what time? The current wife filming the encounter kind of implies that the ex had previously been playing fuck-fuck games with the custody. To what extent the ex's current lover was aware and involved in such games bears on the "creating your own exigency" issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:42:47 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If his ex has the child and has arranged to hand over the child at 3:15 at that location, then he has every right to be in the presence of his ex until she delivers the child. Has it been established as FACT that the child was not there? Ex-wife was crawfishing on the handover from the start. If not, where was he? I get your point. Its all null and void once the property owner says gtfo though. If she was on a military base would the dad be able to say fuck you gate guards I have a court order? No there’s limits to it. Everyone involved was being stupid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:43:09 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hmmm thats a hot take. Even for me. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That deserved to die for his ignorance , come to my house and try that bullshit. Especially if I lived in TX , except I would have had a TX legal suppressor on my 9mm carbine. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/D61E8EC4-94C3-4EA2-92B8-BB5D18E1D8C8-632.jpg Hmmm thats a hot take. Even for me. I'm touching all the feels on here now that I have some time off work, people are so sensitive. Admittedly that was extreme
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:43:47 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I never said it wasn’t a monumental bad idea to introduce the firearm; because it was. The word is out and Kyle’s clients in the oil and gas industry are dropping him like a hot potato. He won’t work in the Texas South Plains again. If he escapes prosecution he will be bankrupt and without a friend in the region. The real point for people to get a grasp on is controlling your temper and keeping a cool head about yourself in dealing with child custody issues. Men get all worked up and start to act out; and this works against them in family court. Men need to learn the system and then work the system if they want to prevail. If Kyle had left the rifle inside and Green shirt guy pounded him, Green shirt guy would only have limited supervised visits and had to pay for the monitor. What did he do in o&g? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:43:59 AM EDT
[#27]
Has Black shirt actually seen any legal action? I haven't heard of any arrest leading to a trial.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:44:24 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just like you missed that Black shirt is getting a divorce from a judge you also apparently missed that there is court ordered visitation. He has every right to go to where the other parent is and retrieve the child. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: This. Green shirt was correct to close the distance and negate the threat the rifle presented. Throwing Black shirt away gave back the distance that ultimately led to his demise. ALL of you are ignoring the fact Chad was at Kyle's HOUSE !!!! He had no right to be there, and if he would have handled the situation appropriately he would still be alive. He has every right to go to where the other parent is and retrieve the child. It doesn’t give anyone the leeway to start arguing and continue arguing inside a restaurant over custody violations. The proprietor can still tell one or all involved to leave the property. It doesn’t give anyone the leeway to start arguing and continue arguing on your private property over custody violations. The owner/resident can still tell one or all involved to leave the property. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:44:29 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What did happen was Carruth shot at Read before Read had so much as cocked his fist. You cannot shoot someone over verbal provocation. And at no point was anything resembling a threat of imminent deadly force coming from Read until Carruth shot at him. You cannot respond to non-deadly force with deadly force. That's the whole concept of proportionality when it comes to the elements of self-defense. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: And again, green shirt was not shot for trespassing. He was shot because he became an active threat. And the only reason you could even claim he became an "active" threat is because he was shot at without lawful justification. You cannot provoke a person to attack you and then use their attack to justify your killing them, unless you have attempted to retreat and they continue to present a deadly threat. No he wasn't. He could've been shot the moment he rushed up onto the porch but was not. I am talking about what did happen, not what could've happened. You cannot respond to non-deadly force with deadly force. That's the whole concept of proportionality when it comes to the elements of self-defense.  Black shirt - Get off my property Green shirt - Indiscernible Black shirt - OK Green Shirt after following Black shirt - That's right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:44:43 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm touching all the feels on here now that I have some time off work, people are so sensitive. Admittedly that was extreme Time off? I’m getting paid to shitpost right now lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:45:36 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes that one. The muzzle which green shirt rushed up onto the porch to get closer to and where black shirt stood his ground. The one where green shirt came into physical contact with by making physical contact with black shirt. The same one green shirt threatened to take away and *bleeeeep*. These are all things which are fact. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: That didn't happen either. Are we watching the same video(s)? Did you not see green shirt make contact with and forcefully move the muzzle away? "You moved the barrel of this gun I had pressed against you! Ahhh, I'm in fear for my life, he's comin' right for me!" Yes that one. The muzzle which green shirt rushed up onto the porch to get closer to and where black shirt stood his ground. The one where green shirt came into physical contact with by making physical contact with black shirt. The same one green shirt threatened to take away and *bleeeeep*. These are all things which are fact. (b) The use of force against another is not justified: (1) in response to verbal provocation alone; (2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c); (3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or attempted by the other; (4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless: (A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and (B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor; or (5) if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person while the actor was: (A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02; or (B) possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section 46.05. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:46:04 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It doesn’t give anyone the leeway to start arguing and continue arguing inside a restaurant over custody violations. The proprietor can still tell one or all involved to leave the property. It doesn’t give anyone the leeway to start arguing and continue arguing on your private property over custody violations. The owner/resident can still tell one or all involved to leave the property. Exactly. He could’ve had the same conversation via phone. Or from the curb. The custody transfer does not give you a license to do whatever you want. Not to mention that the smart thing is to be calm, document, and take it up with the judge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:47:09 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: WTF are you talking about. LOL In Texas an individual has the RIGHT to protect their home & person by BRANDISHING a gun, OR USING IT. Did you even listen to what Read was saying ? None of those people had a right to be at Carruth's home. The kid they were looking for wasn't even there. Read fucked around and found out., nothing more. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/330CC6C3-704D-4020-B3D5-C91D11232EB1-475.gif Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That goes both ways in this case. Carruth could have called the police to have Read trespassed. There was never an imminent threat that prevented him from doing that. He chose to go get his gun because he wanted to show how tough he was by scaring off a bigger man. WTF are you talking about. LOL In Texas an individual has the RIGHT to protect their home & person by BRANDISHING a gun, OR USING IT. Did you even listen to what Read was saying ? None of those people had a right to be at Carruth's home. The kid they were looking for wasn't even there. Read fucked around and found out., nothing more. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/330CC6C3-704D-4020-B3D5-C91D11232EB1-475.gif The use of force still has to satisfy proportionate, reasonable, and imminent factors. In Texas, deadly force is only authorized to prevent bodily harm or death, or to prevent the commission of one of a set of enumerated crimes, or to prevent fleeing from the scene of one of a set of enumerated crimes. Brandishing a firearm when it’s not needed will likely result in you catching a disorderly conduct charge, a deadly conduct charge, or an assault with a deadly weapon charge. You have the right to protect yourself and property from imminent harm. You don’t have the right to wave a gun around and threaten people with it, even if you’re on your own property. “Get off my lawn,” isn’t a set of magic words that nullify use of force laws. Green shirt fucked up by approaching black shirt and becoming an aggressor. If green shirt had looked at black shirt, told him to stick the gun up his ass, and gone back to standing there and yelling that he wasn’t leaving until his ex wife produced his son, then black shirt would have had to either try to muscle green shirt off the property or waited for the cops to show up and trespass him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:47:25 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Moving the muzzle of the gun away from your body is not an imminent deadly force threat. Which means that the shot Carruth then fired at Read's feet was not a justified use of force and would thus be further provocation of Read. Per Texas' self-defense statute, you cannot claim self-defense if you provoked the attack against which you're claiming self-defense. (b) The use of force against another is not justified: (1) in response to verbal provocation alone; (2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c); (3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or attempted by the other; (4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless: (A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and (B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor; or (5) if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person while the actor was: (A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02; or (B) possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section 46.05. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: That didn't happen either. Are we watching the same video(s)? Did you not see green shirt make contact with and forcefully move the muzzle away? "You moved the barrel of this gun I had pressed against you! Ahhh, I'm in fear for my life, he's comin' right for me!" Yes that one. The muzzle which green shirt rushed up onto the porch to get closer to and where black shirt stood his ground. The one where green shirt came into physical contact with by making physical contact with black shirt. The same one green shirt threatened to take away and *bleeeeep*. These are all things which are fact. (b) The use of force against another is not justified: (1) in response to verbal provocation alone; (2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c); (3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or attempted by the other; (4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless: (A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and (B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor; or (5) if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person while the actor was: (A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02; or (B) possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section 46.05. Did green shirt just threaten to take away (with force) the firearm and *bleeeep*? ETA: I mean did he JUST threaten black shirt in such manner? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:47:31 AM EDT
[#35]
What happened during the missing hour and a half from the alleged child pick up time to the point where green shirt was deaded? Supposedly 3:00 was the alloted time for pick up and the police were notified at 4:20.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:48:59 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Black shirt shouldve told ex-bitch to get in the house. Black shirt and ex-bitch shouldve gone inside and called the cops. If green shirt blocked their movements, shoot him. Even though my heart goes out for green shirt, at “get off my property” he shouldve about faced. He stayed, he confronted. He got shot for his efforts. In my book black shirt shouldnt even be questioned after seeing the events on film. If i was green shirt, id have left and then hired the gambino law firm to deal with ex-bitch Feeling helpless and being fearful of being denied access to your children, particularly if the ex is willfully using the family courts to make your life (and finances) a hellscape, over the course of many years, causes this type of thing. It really sucks, but you’ve got to swallow your pride. As many have said, this is a tragic and avoidable situation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:49:49 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Time off? I’m getting paid to shitpost right now lol Walked out on my job after 7 years of incompetence from management. I walked out on Monday 22nd, by Wednesday afternoon I had 3 interviews with all 3 paying almost double. Life is too short to be in a shitty job and it takes a toll on home life too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:50:21 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Disparity of force and totality of events. Green shirt guy screwed himself. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Someone chest bumping you is not an imminent threat of death/great bodily harm. Disparity of force and totality of events. Green shirt guy screwed himself. Michael Drejka tried arguing that too. He's now serving 20 years in Florida. A shove during an argument does not justify deadly force. I don't care which state you're in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:50:58 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Please cite with video time stamp when Chad was told specifically the child wasn’t on the premises. You can go back and review it for yourself. Green shirt guy clearly stated he thought the kid was at Baby Mama’s parent’s house. A reasonable person would conclude that Green shirt guy didn’t believe the child was there. Green Shirt guy believing that, then decided to go on a threatening rampage to establish dominance over Baby Mama and Black shirt guy on the property of their residence. That is a monumentally bad idea in Texas. Some will ask why are property right so strong in Texas. It is a factor of Reconstruction in post war Texas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:51:54 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Disparity of force and totality of events. Green shirt guy screwed himself. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Someone chest bumping you is not an imminent threat of death/great bodily harm. Disparity of force and totality of events. Green shirt guy screwed himself. And the "totality of events" is that a guy got involved in a verbal altercation, left to go retrieve a gun to resolve it, fired a shot at the guy's feet and then finally another 2 fatally after making a bunch of distance and not being faced with any imminent attack. When this whole thing is viewed in total, it looks terrible for claiming self-defense. It's only when people here start breaking things down atom by atom that they can try to fish for some justification. Yes, it's legal to be armed on your property. But it casts things in an entirely different light when you leave a confrontation for the purposes of coming back armed to achieve with deadly force what you couldn't with words. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:52:58 AM EDT
[#41]
Don't bring a Chad to a Kyle fight?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:53:10 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think they get it .... No point in wasting your time. Did anyone else see that Kyle Carruth is in the process of divorcing a state judge. Don't know him , but I'd say he's not worried about charges. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Black shirt demanded someone leave his property. Any child custody issues green shirt and the ex-wife is up the family courts, not to be settled on black shirt’s porch. Black shirt has every right to arm himself. Green shirt certainly did become an active threat the moment he rushed up into the porch, use verbally threatening language, making physical contact. I don't think they get it .... No point in wasting your time. Did anyone else see that Kyle Carruth is in the process of divorcing a state judge. Don't know him , but I'd say he's not worried about charges. He should be, since that divorce caused Lubbock PD to turn over the case to the state. If they venue change to some place with a bunch of liberals as possible jurors, his situation gets a lot worse. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:54:27 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Doesn’t matter if it was an ND or a warning shot. Dead guy was justified in believing it was a warning shot/shot at situation. Immediately prior to the ND/Warning shot, the trespassing Read threatened to take the gun away from Carruth and kill him with it, battered Carruth (the chest bump), and went for the gun. So tell us all about how Read was “justified”. . .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:54:31 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't bring a Chad to a Kyle fight? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:55:46 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He should be, since that divorce caused Lubbock PD to turn over the case to the state. If they venue change to some place with a bunch of liberals as possible jurors, his situation gets a lot worse. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Black shirt demanded someone leave his property. Any child custody issues green shirt and the ex-wife is up the family courts, not to be settled on black shirt’s porch. Black shirt has every right to arm himself. Green shirt certainly did become an active threat the moment he rushed up into the porch, use verbally threatening language, making physical contact. I don't think they get it .... No point in wasting your time. Did anyone else see that Kyle Carruth is in the process of divorcing a state judge. Don't know him , but I'd say he's not worried about charges. He should be, since that divorce caused Lubbock PD to turn over the case to the state. If they venue change to some place with a bunch of liberals as possible jurors, his situation gets a lot worse. Honestly, I would be surprised if charges were brought up. You never know but I’d be surprised (and disappointed). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:55:51 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Immediately prior to the ND/Warning shot, the trespassing Read threatened to take the gun away from Carruth and kill him with it, battered Carruth (the chest bump), and went for the gun. So tell us all about how Read was “justified”. . . Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Doesn’t matter if it was an ND or a warning shot. Dead guy was justified in believing it was a warning shot/shot at situation. Immediately prior to the ND/Warning shot, the trespassing Read threatened to take the gun away from Carruth and kill him with it, battered Carruth (the chest bump), and went for the gun. So tell us all about how Read was “justified”. . . 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:56:44 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You can’t shoot trespassers, even in Texas. If green shirt had sat in the yard and said fuck you. Black shirt couldn’t have done anything about it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: He wasn't trespassing, so all the positioning has nothing to do with it at all. He murdered a man who was legally there to pick up his kid. He's going to jail. Yes he was. When you are told to leave private property by the owner and you remain, you are trespassing. Doesn't matter why you were there. Your welcome is officially worn out. You can’t shoot trespassers, even in Texas. If green shirt had sat in the yard and said fuck you. Black shirt couldn’t have done anything about it. Yep. Trespasser has to be committing a crime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:57:39 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Chad (green shirt) was not a threat. Kyle was the only person who was a threat...and just for the record,shot and killed a man. Your opinion dude. The test is a reasonable person standard. In rural Texas it is my opinion that a reasonable person would conclude that Green Shirt guy was a threat to Black shirt guy. My opinion is based on 45 years residency in rural Texas. BTW, I have been held at gun point several times by property owners. One was even dressed like the Marlboro Man complete with a lever action 30-30. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 11:58:07 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I never said that. If dead guy was at the court appointed location at the court appointed time, how are you gonna argue that in court? When you were in law school, were you taught that a custody agreement somehow grants trespass rights? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:02:44 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yep. Trespasser has to be committing a crime. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: He wasn't trespassing, so all the positioning has nothing to do with it at all. He murdered a man who was legally there to pick up his kid. He's going to jail. Yes he was. When you are told to leave private property by the owner and you remain, you are trespassing. Doesn't matter why you were there. Your welcome is officially worn out. You can’t shoot trespassers, even in Texas. If green shirt had sat in the yard and said fuck you. Black shirt couldn’t have done anything about it. Yep. Trespasser has to be committing a crime. Like assault? I wish ole chad had stayed in the yard and yelled fuck you. Itd have made for a more interesting video and he’d probably be alive. |
|
|
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.
