User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:03:40 PM EDT
[#1]
 Green shirt should have fired his hands up & retreated to his truck when he saw the rifle. He literally asked for & then received a killing. Seems like, timely customer service to me. Black shirt has no duty to retreat & can defend his home with whatever force he deems necessary. Green shirts legal duty, was to evacuate the property- the FIRST time he was told. Every moment he stayed, was an escalation- defying black shirts authority, his autonomy. Bet he had a real satisfying shag, that evening. He just needs to knock-up green shirts current (former) wife & his knighthood will be complete. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:03:44 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What did he do in o&g? Leases |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:05:43 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You said it yourself he was assaulted after it was produced do you honestly believe that dead guy was going to kill someone he was angry about his son We don’t know what he would have done. However, it’s perfectly reasonable to expect that a raging trespasser might turn violent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:06:37 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The disparity of force tips in favor of the guy with a gun in this 1 on 1 situation. 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. That is only after the gun goes bang and the bullet goes thud. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:09:10 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Green shirt should have fired his hands up & retreated to his truck when he saw the rifle. He literally asked for & then received a killing. Seems like, timely customer service to me. Black shirt has no duty to retreat & can defend his home with whatever force he deems necessary. Green shirts legal duty, was to evacuate the property- the FIRST time he was told. Every moment he stayed, was an escalation- defying black shirts authority, his autonomy. Bet he had a real satisfying shag, that evening. He just needs to knock-up green shirts current (former) wife & his knighthood will be complete. lol...good luck with that. I really hope this goes to a grand jury and ya'll tune in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:09:50 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The only other thing is that the dead guy didn't touch the gun until the after the warning shot, which I think you have backwards. If he had a right to be there (and I'm not sure he necessarily does), and someone shoots at him, wouldn't grabbing the gun be self defense? Nope. He went for the gun BOTH before and after the warning shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:11:32 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yep. Trespasser has to be committing a crime. Green shirt guy made a play for the rifle that Black shirt guy had. That will get you shot almost every time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:11:41 PM EDT
[#8]
Lol at all the experts here. A recognized expert in the field of self defense and self defense laws has weighed in with the caveat it is based upon the two available videos.
The same two videos all the arm chair commandos here have access to. At some point one can agree to disagree and wait for the real verdict OR continue to act like Chad and Kyle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:12:18 PM EDT
[#9]
Shit I love Texas. If it weren’t for my job y’all would have 5 new Texans.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:13:26 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It gives him permission to meet up with Mom to pick up his Son.  So if Mom was there, then yes. Courts don't usually specify location, just meet with Mom. Wrong. They specify a location. Typically they specify the residence of either parent, depending on who’s doing the picking up. If there’s written evidence (email/text/coparenting app) of an agreed upon location, that holds water as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:13:26 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Green shirt should have fired his hands up & retreated to his truck when he saw the rifle. He literally asked for & then received a killing. Seems like, timely customer service to me. Black shirt has no duty to retreat & can defend his home with whatever force he deems necessary. Green shirts legal duty, was to evacuate the property- the FIRST time he was told. Every moment he stayed, was an escalation- defying black shirts authority, his autonomy. Bet he had a real satisfying shag, that evening. He just needs to knock-up green shirts current (former) wife & his knighthood will be complete. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:14:26 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nope. He went for the gun BOTH before and after the warning shot. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The only other thing is that the dead guy didn't touch the gun until the after the warning shot, which I think you have backwards. If he had a right to be there (and I'm not sure he necessarily does), and someone shoots at him, wouldn't grabbing the gun be self defense? Nope. He went for the gun BOTH before and after the warning shot. If Read had wanted to grab for the barrel, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to do. That's how you know Carruth wasn't afraid of him actually taking the gun because no person with working brain cells would put the barrel in such close proximity to someone they actually felt threatened by. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:14:53 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol at all the experts here. A recognized expert in the field of self defense and self defense laws has weighed in with the caveat it is based upon the two available videos. The same two videos all the arm chair commandos here have access to. At some point one can agree to disagree and wait for the real verdict OR continue to act like Chad and Kyle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:17:47 PM EDT
[#14]
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. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:20:40 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Read the statute. Â You can shoot to stop a burglary. Â Some guy in your yard you can use force but not deadly force. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Green shirt should have fired his hands up & retreated to his truck when he saw the rifle. He literally asked for & then received a killing. Seems like, timely customer service to me. Black shirt has no duty to retreat & can defend his home with whatever force he deems necessary. Green shirts legal duty, was to evacuate the property- the FIRST time he was told. Every moment he stayed, was an escalation- defying black shirts authority, his autonomy. Bet he had a real satisfying shag, that evening. He just needs to knock-up green shirts current (former) wife & his knighthood will be complete. You can shoot a guy in your yard, but he better be holding a Molotov cocktail or a projectile weapon. ETA: or be killing, raping, or robbing someone else in your front yard, or be fleeing with your property at night. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:20:54 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He did not go for the gun before the first shot. He slightly moved his arm which the barrel as pressed against. If Read had wanted to grab for the barrel, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to do. That's how you know Carruth wasn't afraid of him actually taking the gun because no person with working brain cells would put the barrel in such close proximity to someone they actually felt threatened by. Black shirt guy was looking into the eyes of Green shirt guy who was nipple rubbing black shirt guy. All black shirt guy knew was that Green shirt guy had used force to move Black shirt guy’s rifle. Dude, your application of the concept of working brain cells to either of these people is not a reasonable conclusion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:21:10 PM EDT
[#17]
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.  If the ex was in the house instead of on the front lawn, would Read have “every right to be in the presence of his ex”? What is with you people that believe that a custody order grants trespass rights? SMDH |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:21:35 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol at all the experts here. A recognized expert in the field of self defense and self defense laws has weighed in with the caveat it is based upon the two available videos. The same two videos all the arm chair commandos here have access to. At some point one can agree to disagree and wait for the real verdict OR continue to act like Chad and Kyle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:24:11 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Green shirt guy made a play for the rifle that Black shirt guy had. That will get you shot almost every time. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Yep. Trespasser has to be committing a crime. Green shirt guy made a play for the rifle that Black shirt guy had. That will get you shot almost every time. Honest question; if someone just shot at you and then gets within arms reach, would you make a play for the gun? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:26:03 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Read the statute.  You can shoot to stop a burglary.  Some guy in your yard you can use force but not deadly force. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Green shirt should have fired his hands up & retreated to his truck when he saw the rifle. He literally asked for & then received a killing. Seems like, timely customer service to me. Black shirt has no duty to retreat & can defend his home with whatever force he deems necessary. Green shirts legal duty, was to evacuate the property- the FIRST time he was told. Every moment he stayed, was an escalation- defying black shirts authority, his autonomy. Bet he had a real satisfying shag, that evening. He just needs to knock-up green shirts current (former) wife & his knighthood will be complete. Facts don’t appear to matter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:27:10 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What is with you people that believe that a custody order grants trespass rights? SMDH It's the judge's signature telling Dad to go get his kid every weekend that's gonna make the trespassing charge weak. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:28:34 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He did not go for the gun before the first shot. He slightly moved his arm which the barrel as pressed against. If Read had wanted to grab for the barrel, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to do. That's how you know Carruth wasn't afraid of him actually taking the gun because no person with working brain cells would put the barrel in such close proximity to someone they actually felt threatened by. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The only other thing is that the dead guy didn't touch the gun until the after the warning shot, which I think you have backwards. If he had a right to be there (and I'm not sure he necessarily does), and someone shoots at him, wouldn't grabbing the gun be self defense? Nope. Â He went for the gun BOTH before and after the warning shot. If Read had wanted to grab for the barrel, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to do. That's how you know Carruth wasn't afraid of him actually taking the gun because no person with working brain cells would put the barrel in such close proximity to someone they actually felt threatened by. There are some people intentionally misrepresenting the video to try to promote this as a good shoot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:30:03 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OK. What does that have to do with black shirt? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Denying visitation in Texas is a criminal offense. Â Jailable criminal offense. Not civil. I was replying to the comments saying that denying visitation is a civil offense. Which was in the first sentence of the comment I was responding to. Which was also in my post. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:31:03 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But the owner/proprietor can't go and get a gun and act like he's going to shoot people. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. Well, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about a person’s legal standing to arm themselves. I don’t believe black shirt behaved (acted) like he was going to “shoot people”. He did retrieve it, it was readily apparent he retrieved a firearm, and there was no attempt to hide he retrieved a firearm but he did not present it with any sort of verbally spoken threat (that I heard) or menacing act against green shirt. When I say “menacing”, he did not point or wave or display it in a direct manner towards green shirt. Basically, it was now present in black shirt’s possession. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:32:20 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Leases Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What did he do in o&g? Leases That’s going to be the most expensive piece of pussy black shirt ever stuck his dick in even if he dodges being charged by the Texas AG. The judge wife is going to crush him in divorce court, and his clients abandoning him will leave him bankrupt. He’s still going to have to come up with her split of marital assets. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:32:31 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Interesting. I still would pursue other remedies than going hands-on with an armed man, which as we can see may turn out poorly. As much as I fall into the avoid inviting the man into your life camp, I think I would have invited him if I were on either side at various points, and avoided any physical confrontation. Black shirt? Call and report trespassing, stay inside and cover girlfriend in case he attacks. Green shirt? Walk back to the truck when black shirt brings out the blaster and report an armed fellow interfering in your custody issue. Instead you have two morons that just kept ramping it up. Rutting bucks for all the does on hand, as evidenced by the chest bumping and black shirt trying to look taller. I'm not sure criminal charges will help things, but I hope black shirt realizes how badly he fucked up and won't do something so stupid in the future presented the opportunity. Obviously green shirt won't go hands on with an armed man again.  Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: De-escalating and avoiding someone getting killed is the prudent course of action in a civil dispute like this with known parties. Even if you're 100% right and justified in your position it would be smart to walk off, let things cool down, and sort it out later. No sense in shooting someone, or getting shot, when you can avoid it easily. The dude coming out with the PCC in that context was a fucking moron. The father getting in his face and turning it physical was equally stupid and he got himself killed. Even if you're right and the other person is wrong, attacking an armed dude isn't likely going to turn out well. Denying visitation in Texas is a criminal offense.  Jailable criminal offense. Not civil. Interesting. I still would pursue other remedies than going hands-on with an armed man, which as we can see may turn out poorly. As much as I fall into the avoid inviting the man into your life camp, I think I would have invited him if I were on either side at various points, and avoided any physical confrontation. Black shirt? Call and report trespassing, stay inside and cover girlfriend in case he attacks. Green shirt? Walk back to the truck when black shirt brings out the blaster and report an armed fellow interfering in your custody issue. Instead you have two morons that just kept ramping it up. Rutting bucks for all the does on hand, as evidenced by the chest bumping and black shirt trying to look taller. I'm not sure criminal charges will help things, but I hope black shirt realizes how badly he fucked up and won't do something so stupid in the future presented the opportunity. Obviously green shirt won't go hands on with an armed man again. Couldn’t agree more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:32:54 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Who's that? I must have missed it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Lol at all the experts here. A recognized expert in the field of self defense and self defense laws has weighed in with the caveat it is based upon the two available videos. The same two videos all the arm chair commandos here have access to. At some point one can agree to disagree and wait for the real verdict OR continue to act like Chad and Kyle.  Chad Read Shooting: Evidence Supports Manslaughter, Not Justification |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:34:52 PM EDT
[#28]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:35:18 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about a person’s legal standing to arm themselves. I don’t believe black shirt behaved (acted) like he was going to “shoot people”. He did retrieve it, it was readily apparent he retrieved a firearm, and there was no attempt to hide he retrieved a firearm but he did not present it with any sort of verbally spoken threat (that I heard) or menacing act against green shirt. When I say “menacing”, he did not point or wave or display it in a direct manner towards green shirt. Basically, it was now present in black shirt’s possession. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. Well, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about a person’s legal standing to arm themselves. I don’t believe black shirt behaved (acted) like he was going to “shoot people”. He did retrieve it, it was readily apparent he retrieved a firearm, and there was no attempt to hide he retrieved a firearm but he did not present it with any sort of verbally spoken threat (that I heard) or menacing act against green shirt. When I say “menacing”, he did not point or wave or display it in a direct manner towards green shirt. Basically, it was now present in black shirt’s possession. Force has to be proportionate. I own a bar. I have loud drunk patrons refusing to leave. My bouncers can drag their asses to the door and throw them out. My bouncers pulling firearms and ordering loud drunk patrons to leave will result in loud drunk patrons owning my bar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:35:35 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was replying to the comments saying that denying visitation is a civil offense. Which was in the first sentence of the comment I was responding to. Which was also in my post. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Denying visitation in Texas is a criminal offense. Jailable criminal offense. Not civil. I was replying to the comments saying that denying visitation is a civil offense. Which was in the first sentence of the comment I was responding to. Which was also in my post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:36:40 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Force has to be proportionate.  I own a bar.  I have loud drunk patrons refusing to leave.  My bouncers can drag their asses to the door and throw them out.  My bouncers pulling firearms and ordering loud drunk patrons to leave will result in loud drunk patrons owning my bar. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. Well, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about a person’s legal standing to arm themselves. I don’t believe black shirt behaved (acted) like he was going to “shoot people”. He did retrieve it, it was readily apparent he retrieved a firearm, and there was no attempt to hide he retrieved a firearm but he did not present it with any sort of verbally spoken threat (that I heard) or menacing act against green shirt. When I say “menacing”, he did not point or wave or display it in a direct manner towards green shirt. Basically, it was now present in black shirt’s possession. Force has to be proportionate.  I own a bar.  I have loud drunk patrons refusing to leave.  My bouncers can drag their asses to the door and throw them out.  My bouncers pulling firearms and ordering loud drunk patrons to leave will result in loud drunk patrons owning my bar. Bouncers are not there to defend themselves |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:36:58 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Black shirt guy was looking into the eyes of Green shirt guy who was nipple rubbing black shirt guy. All black shirt guy knew was that Green shirt guy had used force to move Black shirt guy's rifle. Dude, your application of the concept of working brain cells to either of these people is not a reasonable conclusion. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: He did not go for the gun before the first shot. He slightly moved his arm which the barrel as pressed against. If Read had wanted to grab for the barrel, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to do. That's how you know Carruth wasn't afraid of him actually taking the gun because no person with working brain cells would put the barrel in such close proximity to someone they actually felt threatened by. Black shirt guy was looking into the eyes of Green shirt guy who was nipple rubbing black shirt guy. All black shirt guy knew was that Green shirt guy had used force to move Black shirt guy's rifle. Dude, your application of the concept of working brain cells to either of these people is not a reasonable conclusion. Black shirt is responsible for most of the escalation at of this confrontation at each stage, from bringing a gun to solve a verbal dispute, to firing at the guy's feet when he didn't comply to killing him from a completely safe distance while facing no imminent threat. You can't do that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:37:06 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He did not go for the gun before the first shot. He slightly moved his arm which the barrel as pressed against. If Read had wanted to grab for the barrel, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to do. That's how you know Carruth wasn't afraid of him actually taking the gun because no person with working brain cells would put the barrel in such close proximity to someone they actually felt threatened by. LOL! Carruth didn’t “put the gun in close proximity” to Read. Read pressed himself against it when he went on the porch and battered Carruth. He didn’t “slightly move his arm” unless that’s what you call reaching for the magazine area of the rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:37:34 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's going to be the most expensive piece of pussy black shirt ever stuck his dick in even if he dodges being charged by the Texas AG. The judge wife is going to crush him in divorce court, and his clients abandoning him will leave him bankrupt. He's still going to have to come up with her split of marital assets. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: What did he do in o&g? Leases That's going to be the most expensive piece of pussy black shirt ever stuck his dick in even if he dodges being charged by the Texas AG. The judge wife is going to crush him in divorce court, and his clients abandoning him will leave him bankrupt. He's still going to have to come up with her split of marital assets. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:38:00 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But the owner/proprietor can't go and get a gun and act like he's going to shoot people. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:39:15 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Honest question; if someone just shot at you and then gets within arms reach, would you make a play for the gun? That’s clearly not what happened. You need to watch the video again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:39:26 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Black shirt had plenty of time to process what happened, take 1.5 steps back, re-orient the barrel to point at green's feet, look down to make sure the shot wasn't actually going to hit flesh and fire. Black shirt is responsible for most of the escalation at of this confrontation at each stage, from bringing a gun to solve a verbal dispute, to firing at the guy's feet when he didn't comply to killing him from a completely safe distance while facing no imminent threat. You can't do that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: He did not go for the gun before the first shot. He slightly moved his arm which the barrel as pressed against. If Read had wanted to grab for the barrel, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to do. That's how you know Carruth wasn't afraid of him actually taking the gun because no person with working brain cells would put the barrel in such close proximity to someone they actually felt threatened by. Black shirt guy was looking into the eyes of Green shirt guy who was nipple rubbing black shirt guy. All black shirt guy knew was that Green shirt guy had used force to move Black shirt guy's rifle. Dude, your application of the concept of working brain cells to either of these people is not a reasonable conclusion. Black shirt is responsible for most of the escalation at of this confrontation at each stage, from bringing a gun to solve a verbal dispute, to firing at the guy's feet when he didn't comply to killing him from a completely safe distance while facing no imminent threat. You can't do that. “Black shirt had plenty of time…” says you looking in from the outside. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:40:13 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's the judge's signature telling Dad to go get his kid every weekend that's gonna make the trespassing charge weak. It is Dad telling Baby Mama that he believed the child was at Baby Mama’s parent’s house and not there that makes his temper fueled rampage justification right to be there weak. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:40:23 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not until a Judge Rules on it.  That happens in...    ...    ...  Civil (Family) Court.  If a parent is violating the Court Custody Orders - the other party needs to go before the Judge in Court to present the facts (Documented) & then the Judge CAN rule to punish the offender in several different ways.  Fines are typical, Arrest if it continues or fines are not paid. If other party refuses to show to present their case (misses hearings) or continues to violate the Custody Order, the Judge can issue a Arrest Warrant. However, until their IS a Arrest Warrant, no cop or deputy is going to play Perry Mason and insert himself in the matter unless the life or physical welfare of the child are at imminent risk. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: De-escalating and avoiding someone getting killed is the prudent course of action in a civil dispute like this with known parties. Even if you're 100% right and justified in your position it would be smart to walk off, let things cool down, and sort it out later. No sense in shooting someone, or getting shot, when you can avoid it easily. The dude coming out with the PCC in that context was a fucking moron. The father getting in his face and turning it physical was equally stupid and he got himself killed. Even if you're right and the other person is wrong, attacking an armed dude isn't likely going to turn out well. Denying visitation in Texas is a criminal offense.  Jailable criminal offense. Not civil. Not until a Judge Rules on it.  That happens in...    ...    ...  Civil (Family) Court.  If a parent is violating the Court Custody Orders - the other party needs to go before the Judge in Court to present the facts (Documented) & then the Judge CAN rule to punish the offender in several different ways.  Fines are typical, Arrest if it continues or fines are not paid. If other party refuses to show to present their case (misses hearings) or continues to violate the Custody Order, the Judge can issue a Arrest Warrant. However, until their IS a Arrest Warrant, no cop or deputy is going to play Perry Mason and insert himself in the matter unless the life or physical welfare of the child are at imminent risk. Wrong. I have personal experience with this. In Texas. If the child is not where they are supposed to be when they are supposed to be there, the cops will most definitely come and intervene. I won’t deny that there is a process that needs to be followed and that the cops are going to respond and arrest someone denying visitation. But they most certainly will come to investigate the situation and resolve it if possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:41:44 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're not using the relevant legal term for legitimate self-defense: Imminent threat.  Do you believe that Black shirt was under an imminent threat from Green shirt at the moment that he used deadly force? I can't see the imminent threat.  Black had time to turn, see Green, properly aim, and fire.  It wasn't a lot of time, and yet it is.  He could see Green was at a considerable distance.  And, in my observation, literally standing on a porch. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There’s maybe 15 or so feet between the two when the shots centered on green shirt occurred.  That can be covered in maybe a second from a stand still. Again, watch 00:11 to 00:12 seconds of the inside video. We can't argue what "might have" happened.  We can only analyze what did happen. Green shirt, unarmed, had just been shot at.  He flung the threat to a distance.  No evidence of any pursuit by green shirt.  If he had pursued, it's a completely different story.  Right now, bad shoot. At what point in those last moments can anyone say black shirt could definitively say to himself green shirt decided to halt his attack? You're not using the relevant legal term for legitimate self-defense: Imminent threat.  Do you believe that Black shirt was under an imminent threat from Green shirt at the moment that he used deadly force? I can't see the imminent threat.  Black had time to turn, see Green, properly aim, and fire.  It wasn't a lot of time, and yet it is.  He could see Green was at a considerable distance.  And, in my observation, literally standing on a porch. And black shirt was still moving away when he shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:41:45 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bouncers are not there to defend themselves Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. Well, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about a person’s legal standing to arm themselves. I don’t believe black shirt behaved (acted) like he was going to “shoot people”. He did retrieve it, it was readily apparent he retrieved a firearm, and there was no attempt to hide he retrieved a firearm but he did not present it with any sort of verbally spoken threat (that I heard) or menacing act against green shirt. When I say “menacing”, he did not point or wave or display it in a direct manner towards green shirt. Basically, it was now present in black shirt’s possession. Force has to be proportionate.  I own a bar.  I have loud drunk patrons refusing to leave.  My bouncers can drag their asses to the door and throw them out.  My bouncers pulling firearms and ordering loud drunk patrons to leave will result in loud drunk patrons owning my bar. Bouncers are not there to defend themselves  A bouncer (just like every other person in this country) has every right to defend themself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:43:04 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That’s clearly not what happened.  You need to watch the video again. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Honest question; if someone just shot at you and then gets within arms reach, would you make a play for the gun? That’s clearly not what happened.  You need to watch the video again. I've watched it several times. Both angles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:43:06 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's the judge's signature telling Dad to go get his kid every weekend that's gonna make the trespassing charge weak. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What is with you people that believe that a custody order grants trespass rights? SMDH It's the judge's signature telling Dad to go get his kid every weekend that's gonna make the trespassing charge weak. Nope. Custody orders don’t grant trespass rights. Not even a little bit. Dad can wait at the street, he has no “right” to remain on the property after being told to leave. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:43:11 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: lol...good luck with that. Â I really hope this goes to a grand jury and ya'll tune in. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Green shirt should have fired his hands up & retreated to his truck when he saw the rifle. He literally asked for & then received a killing. Seems like, timely customer service to me. Black shirt has no duty to retreat & can defend his home with whatever force he deems necessary. Green shirts legal duty, was to evacuate the property- the FIRST time he was told. Every moment he stayed, was an escalation- defying black shirts authority, his autonomy. Bet he had a real satisfying shag, that evening. He just needs to knock-up green shirts current (former) wife & his knighthood will be complete. lol...good luck with that. Â I really hope this goes to a grand jury and ya'll tune in. geezus...troll much there new guy? what shit hole lib city do you hail from? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:43:15 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bouncers are not there to defend themselves Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. Well, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about a person’s legal standing to arm themselves. I don’t believe black shirt behaved (acted) like he was going to “shoot people”. He did retrieve it, it was readily apparent he retrieved a firearm, and there was no attempt to hide he retrieved a firearm but he did not present it with any sort of verbally spoken threat (that I heard) or menacing act against green shirt. When I say “menacing”, he did not point or wave or display it in a direct manner towards green shirt. Basically, it was now present in black shirt’s possession. Force has to be proportionate.  I own a bar.  I have loud drunk patrons refusing to leave.  My bouncers can drag their asses to the door and throw them out.  My bouncers pulling firearms and ordering loud drunk patrons to leave will result in loud drunk patrons owning my bar. Bouncers are not there to defend themselves Neither is the proprietor of the establishment. Neither was black shirt until green shirt ran up on him. Trespassing is not a deadly force situation, even in Texas. You can go get a gun and tell someone to get off your lawn. You can’t point that gun at them and tell the person you will kill them if they don’t get off your lawn when they sit down and tell you to go fuck yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:45:13 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/Wat_JPG-318.jpg A bouncer (just like every other person in this country) has every right to defend themself. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. Well, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about a person’s legal standing to arm themselves. I don’t believe black shirt behaved (acted) like he was going to “shoot people”. He did retrieve it, it was readily apparent he retrieved a firearm, and there was no attempt to hide he retrieved a firearm but he did not present it with any sort of verbally spoken threat (that I heard) or menacing act against green shirt. When I say “menacing”, he did not point or wave or display it in a direct manner towards green shirt. Basically, it was now present in black shirt’s possession. Force has to be proportionate.  I own a bar.  I have loud drunk patrons refusing to leave.  My bouncers can drag their asses to the door and throw them out.  My bouncers pulling firearms and ordering loud drunk patrons to leave will result in loud drunk patrons owning my bar. Bouncers are not there to defend themselves /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/Wat_JPG-318.jpg A bouncer (just like every other person in this country) has every right to defend themself. (My apologies) - That’s not what I said. They are not there to protect themselves. They are there to protect/enforce the rules of the establishment. It does not mean they cannot defend themselves when necessary. Their main purpose for being there is to protect/enforce the rules of the establishment. ETA: Now, that’s all within reason and define by law. ETAx2: It’s a totally different scenario. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:46:39 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Last night I was thinking, girlfriend will turn on him in court to get brownie points with kid. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What did he do in o&g? Leases That's going to be the most expensive piece of pussy black shirt ever stuck his dick in even if he dodges being charged by the Texas AG. The judge wife is going to crush him in divorce court, and his clients abandoning him will leave him bankrupt. Â He's still going to have to come up with her split of marital assets. You know that shit is coming like the dawn. Black shirt loses everything, and she was always going to put the kids first. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:49:19 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Texas penal code 9.04.  THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE.  The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter.  For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: But the owner/proprietor can't go and get a gun and act like he's going to shoot people. Tell them to leave, sure. Call the cops, sure. Grab your rifle and make people think they will get shot for not listening to younot so much. 9.04.  THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE.  The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter.  For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force. Your use of force still has to be justified, which for deadly force means it has to meet all the criteria for justified use of deadly force before you can threaten to use deadly force. 9.04 isn’t a get out of jail free card for assault with a deadly weapon or deadly conduct charge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:49:22 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've watched it several times. Both angles. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Honest question; if someone just shot at you and then gets within arms reach, would you make a play for the gun? That’s clearly not what happened.  You need to watch the video again. I've watched it several times. Both angles. Carruth didn’t “get within arms reach,” Read moved on Carruth and battered him as Carruth was standing on his porch. But maybe I’m missing something, so tell us all about how Carruth moved on Read, and not the other way around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 12:51:02 PM EDT
[#50]
It’s been 19 days and yet no charges. If they decide not to file charges will they announce it or just leave GD in suspense?
|
|
|
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.
Â
