User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:10:01 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fuck no. He wasn’t supposed to be there & was told to leave. He should thrown his hands up & walked to his truck, when he saw that rifle. They weren’t on equal ground, this wasn’t public. He was in the wrong & throttled down on that- to his death. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If green shirt was carrying, would he be justified in drawing and firing once the long gun was produced and warning/ND/ whatever shot was fired? Fuck no. He wasn’t supposed to be there & was told to leave. He should thrown his hands up & walked to his truck, when he saw that rifle. They weren’t on equal ground, this wasn’t public. He was in the wrong & throttled down on that- to his death. Context matters. There are scenarios where you legally get shot on your own property. A person trespassing doesn’t nullify the requirements for the use of deadly force. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:11:06 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The majority of the arguments here are made by individuals who would require a lawyer to argue legalities in court on their behalf. In addition to this…we will soon enough determine who is right and who is wrong in the last 48 pages of pre-law doctrine….should probably consider that as there will be plenty of folks eating crow in this thread. I no longer have time for this, I’m heading over to the Covid Forum. Meet me there? Naw man, COVID is boring. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:12:41 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Branca actually does mention how the retrieval of the gun escalated things. But he doesn't go into it in detail. You can't escalate a situation, make the other party feel threatened, and then claim self defense when they try to defend themselves from your actions. Even in Texas. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Please show me where in Texas law you can retrieve a firearm in the middle of a verbal dispute and not have it be deemed a threat by the other party. 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. Carruth entered his home and emerged a moment later back onto the front porch carrying a carbine (a pistol-caliber long gun), presumably to attempt to compel Read to comply with his command to leave the property. The appearance of the carbine instead escalated the confrontation, with Read jumping up onto the front porch, leading to the two men chest-bumping each other. Read then reached for the carbine, and appears to have used the leverage of the long gun to sling Carruth several feet off his own front porch. You can't escalate a situation, make the other party feel threatened, and then claim self defense when they try to defend themselves from your actions. Even in Texas. This is just like what Binger and Crouse said about Rittenhouse. He escalated the situation by having an AR-15 and PUTTING OUT FIRES! He can't claim self defense because the presence of his gun elevated the situation. It was, and should be, clear to any non-governmental employee that that is a crock of crap. You should spend your retirement from LE being a Binger in Wisconsin! You have the same mentality they do. ETA: That mentality LOST at trial in a royal blue city with protestors literally standing out on the courthouse square trying to intimidate jurors. Even MSNBC was trying to intimidate. And yet, the jurors in a BLUE city with all of the threats and concerns, still didn't agree with you. WOW. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:21:00 PM EDT
[#4]
All of the speculation so far has not delved into their arrest records.
Kyle shows arrests for unauthorized use of a vehicle, evasion and furnishing alcohol to minors twenty years ago. He might even be a felon as far as I can tell. The first two are generally felonies now but evading was not twenty years ago. At least that’s how I understand it. Chad shows arrests for assault, domestic assault DWI and P.I. in the more recent past. Last arrest 2017. Thread needs a do over reflecting how these factors may change things. Go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:22:23 PM EDT
[#5]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:25:10 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Branca actually does mention how the retrieval of the gun escalated things. But he doesn't go into it in detail. You can't escalate a situation, make the other party feel threatened, and then claim self defense when they try to defend themselves from your actions. Even in Texas. Have you ever once been right about a use of force incident? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:27:35 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All of the speculation so far has not delved into their arrest records. Kyle shows arrests for unauthorized use of a vehicle, evasion and furnishing alcohol to minors twenty years ago. He might even be a felon as far as I can tell. The first two are generally felonies now but evading was not twenty years ago. At least that’s how I understand it. Chad shows arrests for assault, domestic assault DWI and P.I. in the more recent past. Last arrest 2017. Thread needs a do over reflecting how these factors may change things. Go. Lulz, you’re a spoon stirring the pot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:30:23 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is just like what Binger and Crouse said about Rittenhouse. He escalated the situation by having an AR-15 and PUTTING OUT FIRES! He can't claim self defense because the presence of his gun elevated the situation. It was, and should be, clear to any non-governmental employee that that is a crock of crap. You should spend your retirement from LE being a Binger in Wisconsin! You have the same mentality they do. ETA: That mentality LOST at trial in a royal blue city with protestors literally standing out on the courthouse square trying to intimidate jurors. Even MSNBC was trying to intimidate. And yet, the jurors in a BLUE city with all of the threats and concerns, still didn't agree with you. WOW. You should work on your critical thinking skills as they appear to be lacking. The two situations are like comparing apples and dump trucks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:35:16 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Have you ever once been right about a use of force incident? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Branca actually does mention how the retrieval of the gun escalated things. But he doesn't go into it in detail. You can't escalate a situation, make the other party feel threatened, and then claim self defense when they try to defend themselves from your actions. Even in Texas. Have you ever once been right about a use of force incident? Most times.  I'm right about this one too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:38:14 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Most times. I'm right about this one too. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Branca actually does mention how the retrieval of the gun escalated things. But he doesn't go into it in detail. You can't escalate a situation, make the other party feel threatened, and then claim self defense when they try to defend themselves from your actions. Even in Texas. Have you ever once been right about a use of force incident? Most times. I'm right about this one too. About as right as you were about the soccer mom that took a PIT from Sgt. Respectmahauthority. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:40:01 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But just so we are clear, you don't get to claim trespassing while your committing the crime of custodial interference. And not just claim trespassing, but also be threatening deadly physical force against a man who is only there to try and take custody of his son in the exact way the courts say he is allowed. And when that same man shoves you, presenting no deadly threat, you don't get to shoot him and claim self defense. Well when im tried in the court of babaghanoush I will keep those laws in mind. I agree it was a bad move. We’ll see what the court says. I fully support your right to peacefully protest and burn down an Oriellys if he walks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:41:27 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But what is his screen name here? Resisting the urge to tag short people I know with short tempers here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:42:29 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's not at all trespassing if he has a court order granting the right to be there to pick up his child. And you don't get to threaten someone with a firearm when the only thing they want is their child. The Millers have a much better claim of self defense than this douche. You sure that was the only thing chad wanted. You sure he didn’t want to kick kyles scrawny ass or take his gun away. You know. Like he said? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:44:12 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You said "The cops talk to the offender and she either produces the kids or the cops make her." He said "They will not force Mommy to produce Little Timmy & Tina" Did you honestly forget what you wrote, are you incapable of reading what you wrote, or are you being purposely ignorant? ¿Porque no los tres? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:46:53 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If green shirt was carrying, would he be justified in drawing and firing once the long gun was produced and warning/ND/ whatever shot was fired? Maybe. But he’d still get deaded. Drawing on a presented long gun wont go well even up close like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 6:48:31 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Resisting the urge to tag short people I know with short tempers here. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: But what is his screen name here? Resisting the urge to tag short people I know with short tempers here. He has to be a member here. But since he isn’t wearing XXXXL carhartts it should narrow down the list quite a bit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:06:16 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe. But he’d still get deaded. Drawing on a presented long gun wont go well even up close like that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If green shirt was carrying, would he be justified in drawing and firing once the long gun was produced and warning/ND/ whatever shot was fired? Maybe. But he’d still get deaded. Drawing on a presented long gun wont go well even up close like that. He needs to get off the X first! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:09:14 PM EDT
[#18]
If the mother is a resident of the property and has agreed to have green shirt come to the residence to pick up the child them hasn't she invited him to be there? And by extension has to be the one that tells him to leave? That's how it works in NC
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:14:12 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The first crime committed here was custodial interference. When your the one breaking the law, you've lost the moral high ground. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: He doesn’t have a court order granting him the right to trespass, notwithstanding your vociferous protestations to the contrary. Jesus, there’s some first class fuckery going on in this thread… The first crime committed here was custodial interference. When your the one breaking the law, you've lost the moral high ground. Nice that you've changed what you want to argue, because you were 100% wrong on the trespassing issue. Now I'll wait for you to provide evidence that Carruth engaged in any custodial interference, rather than his new girlfriend (Read's ex wife). Based on the publically available information, Read's kids weren't at Carruth's house. So, tell us all about his custodial interference. I'll wait. . . |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:25:43 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the mother is a resident of the property and has agreed to have green shirt come to the residence to pick up the child them hasn't she invited him to be there? And by extension has to be the one that tells him to leave? That's how it works in NC Trespassing isn’t the issue here. It’s would a reasonable person fear great bodily harm or death at the time the shots were fired? Maybe, maybe not? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:30:18 PM EDT
[#21]
“The green reed which bends in the wind is stronger than the mighty oak which breaks in a storm.”
No charges will be filled. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:33:50 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: “The green reed which bends in the wind is stronger than the mighty oak which breaks in a storm.” No charges will be filled. he who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions Jail |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:36:47 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: he who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions Jail Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: “The green reed which bends in the wind is stronger than the mighty oak which breaks in a storm.” No charges will be filled. he who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions Jail Get off muh lawn. GD |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:43:03 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Trespassing isn’t the issue here? Of course it’s an issue since it ties in with people are saying it’s legal to arm yourself to remove a trespasser. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:45:35 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Of course it’s an issue since it ties in with people are saying it’s legal to arm yourself to remove a trespasser. Its legal to arm yourself at any time on your property. You dont need a reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:48:27 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Its legal to arm yourself at any time on your property. You dont need a reason. Especially if your goal is to escalate the situation |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:48:32 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Of course it’s an issue since it ties in with people are saying it’s legal to arm yourself to remove a trespasser. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Trespassing isn’t the issue here? Of course it’s an issue since it ties in with people are saying it’s legal to arm yourself to remove a trespasser. It’s legal for black shirt to arm himself regardless of green shirt’s status of trespasser or not. It’s not legal for black shirt to threaten green shirt with the firearm until green shirt runs up on him. It’s debatable if green shirt felt threatened, and green shirt didn’t seem threatened, much to black shirt’s chagrin. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 7:49:32 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Especially if your goal is to escalate the situation Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Its legal to arm yourself at any time on your property. You dont need a reason. Especially if your goal is to escalate the situation Escalate isn’t in the statute. That a separate issue from, “is it going to piss green shirt off.” |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:00:00 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It’s legal for black shirt to arm himself regardless of green shirt’s status of trespasser or not. It’s not legal for black shirt to threaten green shirt with the firearm until green shirt runs up on him. It’s debatable if green shirt felt threatened, and green shirt didn’t seem threatened, much to black shirt’s chagrin. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Trespassing isn’t the issue here? Of course it’s an issue since it ties in with people are saying it’s legal to arm yourself to remove a trespasser. It’s legal for black shirt to arm himself regardless of green shirt’s status of trespasser or not. It’s not legal for black shirt to threaten green shirt with the firearm until green shirt runs up on him. It’s debatable if green shirt felt threatened, and green shirt didn’t seem threatened, much to black shirt’s chagrin. If black shirts goal wasnt the threat of deadly force to stop the trespass then why did he arm himself? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:02:30 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Escalate isn’t in the statute. That a separate issue from, “is it going to piss green shirt off.” No one cares if it is in the statute or not since it is obvious the situation escalated, aka became more intense, once he stepped outside with the gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:04:53 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Trespassing isn’t the issue here. It’s would a reasonable person fear great bodily harm or death at the time the shots were fired? Maybe, maybe not? "This individual was on my property without my permission. He told me he would forcibly disarm me and kill me. When he grabbed my gun I felt that my life was in danger." Case over, imo. People arguing that black shirt guy had no reason to feel threatened might want to take a look at what happened the last time an unarmed attacker threatened a legally-armed Kyle and grabbed his gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:05:38 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is just like what Binger and Crouse said about Rittenhouse. He escalated the situation by having an AR-15 and PUTTING OUT FIRES! He can't claim self defense because the presence of his gun elevated the situation. It was, and should be, clear to any non-governmental employee that that is a crock of crap. You should spend your retirement from LE being a Binger in Wisconsin! You have the same mentality they do. ETA: That mentality LOST at trial in a royal blue city with protestors literally standing out on the courthouse square trying to intimidate jurors. Even MSNBC was trying to intimidate. And yet, the jurors in a BLUE city with all of the threats and concerns, still didn't agree with you. WOW. KR situation is a red herring. That situation is nothing like this. KR is not even in the same universe and should not be mentioned in this thread. The carbine dude was not under an imminent threat, the victim was not armed in any way and did not constitute an imminent and clear and present danger. He had neither the means no the desire (but no means for sure) to do harm to the owner. How would he do any harm to him? With that? Bare fists versus a gun? The only thing he could do was run his mouth, which he did. Still does not rise to the level of a credible threat. And that is the bottom line. If they can't prove imminent danger, the attackers position is not going to stand up in court. You don't just deploy weapons on people that won't leave your porch. The jury won't like it. He is on very thin ice here. If he pulls it off, I will be surprised. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:06:43 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Get off muh lawn. GD Never argue with a raging asshole, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. -Abe Lincoln |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:07:42 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is just like what Binger and Crouse said about Rittenhouse. He escalated the situation by having an AR-15 and PUTTING OUT FIRES! He can't claim self defense because the presence of his gun elevated the situation. It was, and should be, clear to any non-governmental employee that that is a crock of crap. You should spend your retirement from LE being a Binger in Wisconsin! You have the same mentality they do. ETA: That mentality LOST at trial in a royal blue city with protestors literally standing out on the courthouse square trying to intimidate jurors. Even MSNBC was trying to intimidate. And yet, the jurors in a BLUE city with all of the threats and concerns, still didn't agree with you. WOW. There is some serious mental gymnastics going on here! The 2 situations had nothing in common. I wonder if the Whore was still listed as beneficiary on green shirts life insurance? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:11:38 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No one cares if it is in the statute or not since it is obvious the situation escalated, aka became more intense, once he stepped outside with the gun. Right, the situation became more intense when the guy who was trespassing advanced on the guy who was legally armed. Since Mr. Blackshirt is a free man in a free country and doesn't need to justify carrying his (presumably) legally-owned firearm on his own private property, clearly the responsibility falls on Mr. Greenshirt who thought he could get away with assaulting another human being because "muh court order". I think a lot of you Murdergate guys will be surprised to find out that you don't have any duty to retreat or even de-escalate when you are legally carrying on your own property. Just like a lot of crazies were surprised to learn that Kenosha Kyle was legally allowed to defend himself against an unarmed attacker. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:17:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nice that you've changed what you want to argue, because you were 100% wrong on the trespassing issue. Now I'll wait for you to provide evidence that Carruth engaged in any custodial interference, rather than his new girlfriend (Read's ex wife). Based on the publically available information, Read's kids weren't at Carruth's house. So, tell us all about his custodial interference. I'll wait. . . Haven't changed a thing, I still say black shirt is going to be doing time in a PMITA penitentiary when this is over. If you kid is at my house, and I have no right to keep him from you, does my right to trespass you trump your right to your child? I don't think you'll find a reasonable person anywhere that says sorry, you'll get your kid some other time. Also show me where there is a definitive answer that the child isn't there. Let's face it, ex wife and black shirt don't seem like the most reliable people and very well could be lying about it as part of their fuck fuck games. I'm not saying black shirt is interfering in the custody, but ex wife certainly is. And just from judging what I can in the video it certainly seems like a strong possibility that ex wife lives there, or at the very least spends a great deal of time there. Either way, if ex wife is there and refusing to turn over the kid,a crime has already been committed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:18:11 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Never argue with a raging asshole, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. -Abe Lincoln When logical discussions with a raging asshole makes the raging asshole even more raging of an asshole, then search your inner self to find if you too may also be a raging asshole. - Socrates |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:18:41 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If black shirts goal wasnt the threat of deadly force to stop the trespass then why did he arm himself? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Trespassing isn’t the issue here? Of course it’s an issue since it ties in with people are saying it’s legal to arm yourself to remove a trespasser. It’s legal for black shirt to arm himself regardless of green shirt’s status of trespasser or not. It’s not legal for black shirt to threaten green shirt with the firearm until green shirt runs up on him. It’s debatable if green shirt felt threatened, and green shirt didn’t seem threatened, much to black shirt’s chagrin. If black shirts goal wasnt the threat of deadly force to stop the trespass then why did he arm himself? Good question. I personally think he armed himself because he was trying to demonstrate to his side piece that he has a huge dick, and he doesn’t take shit from anybody. I’m sure his lawyer will argue that green shirt had a history of threats, and black shirt was taking prudent action prior to trespassing green shirt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:20:07 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lulz, you’re a spoon stirring the pot. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: All of the speculation so far has not delved into their arrest records. Kyle shows arrests for unauthorized use of a vehicle, evasion and furnishing alcohol to minors twenty years ago. He might even be a felon as far as I can tell. The first two are generally felonies now but evading was not twenty years ago. At least that’s how I understand it. Chad shows arrests for assault, domestic assault DWI and P.I. in the more recent past. Last arrest 2017. Thread needs a do over reflecting how these factors may change things. Go. Lulz, you’re a spoon stirring the pot. Looks like it didn’t take.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:23:41 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "This individual was on my property without my permission. He told me he would forcibly disarm me and kill me. When he grabbed my gun I felt that my life was in danger." Case over, imo. People arguing that black shirt guy had no reason to feel threatened might want to take a look at what happened the last time an unarmed attacker threatened a legally-armed Kyle and grabbed his gun. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Trespassing isn’t the issue here. It’s would a reasonable person fear great bodily harm or death at the time the shots were fired? Maybe, maybe not? "This individual was on my property without my permission. He told me he would forcibly disarm me and kill me. When he grabbed my gun I felt that my life was in danger." Case over, imo. People arguing that black shirt guy had no reason to feel threatened might want to take a look at what happened the last time an unarmed attacker threatened a legally-armed Kyle and grabbed his gun. The difference being that KR put rounds on target when his gun was grabbed vs waiting until he was at a safe distance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:25:28 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Right, the situation became more intense when the guy who was trespassing advanced on the guy who was legally armed. Since Mr. Blackshirt is a free man in a free country and doesn't need to justify carrying his (presumably) legally-owned firearm on his own private property, clearly the responsibility falls on Mr. Greenshirt who thought he could get away with assaulting another human being because "muh court order". I think a lot of you Murdergate guys will be surprised to find out that you don't have any duty to retreat or even de-escalate when you are legally carrying on your own property. Just like a lot of crazies were surprised to learn that Kenosha Kyle was legally allowed to defend himself against an unarmed attacker. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: No one cares if it is in the statute or not since it is obvious the situation escalated, aka became more intense, once he stepped outside with the gun. Right, the situation became more intense when the guy who was trespassing advanced on the guy who was legally armed. Since Mr. Blackshirt is a free man in a free country and doesn't need to justify carrying his (presumably) legally-owned firearm on his own private property, clearly the responsibility falls on Mr. Greenshirt who thought he could get away with assaulting another human being because "muh court order". I think a lot of you Murdergate guys will be surprised to find out that you don't have any duty to retreat or even de-escalate when you are legally carrying on your own property. Just like a lot of crazies were surprised to learn that Kenosha Kyle was legally allowed to defend himself against an unarmed attacker. You can't whip out your gun and start squeezing off rounds because someone is refusing to leave your unfenced yard while he's talking to the mother of his child, especially if you have the choice to lock the door and avoid the dick measuring contest. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:25:29 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Right, the situation became more intense when the guy who was trespassing advanced on the guy who was legally armed. So you agree the actions of black shirt escalated the situation. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:25:38 PM EDT
[#43]
Whatever else is true, I bet shooter-dude is wishing he'd have just kept with sticking his dick in his wife....you know, the judge! LOL
Can we all agree on that, at least? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:26:36 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No one cares if it is in the statute or not since it is obvious the situation escalated, aka became more intense, once he stepped outside with the gun. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Escalate isn’t in the statute. That a separate issue from, “is it going to piss green shirt off.” No one cares if it is in the statute or not since it is obvious the situation escalated, aka became more intense, once he stepped outside with the gun. The court cares if it’s in the statute. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:27:53 PM EDT
[#45]
EDIT.. NM.. Missread the comment
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:27:57 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When logical discussions with a raging asshole makes the raging asshole even more raging of an asshole, then search your inner self to find if you too may also be a raging asshole. - Socrates Child custody transfers should always take place at a neutral location, such as the police station or Walmart. -Aristotle |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:29:29 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good question. I personally think he armed himself because he was trying to demonstrate to his side piece that he has a huge dick, and he doesn’t take shit from anybody. I’m sure his lawyer will argue that green shirt had a history of threats, and black shirt was taking prudent action prior to trespassing green shirt. Then why was his statements post shooting along the lines of "I told him to leave". Which all ties back to my question about the mother being a resident and having to be the one to tell green shirt to leave in order for there to be an actual trespass happening |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:29:35 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Whatever else is true, I bet shooter-dude is wishing he'd have just kept with sticking his dick in his wife....you know, the judge! LOL Can we all agree on that, at least? Doubtful that black shirt would agree. He filed for divorce.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:30:36 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ... or for a chest bump in an argument. In no world does that justify use of deadly force. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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. Do you mean like the crime that the trespasser committed when he ran up on homeowner's porch, threatened to shoot said homeowner with his own gun, and then physically tossed said homeowner off of his own porch? Jojo Rosenbaum also thought he was in the right when he decided to disarm another Kyle who was legally armed as I recall. I’m not denying that. I was just responding to the comment that you can’t use deadly force on someone simply because they are trespassing. ... or for a chest bump in an argument. In no world does that justify use of deadly force. I agree, but combined with the death threats and physical confrontation once he told him he was planning on taking the gun and using it on him, do you feel that changes things? What green shirt did can certainly be considered assault, giving the shooter legal justification for using deadly force on a trespassing person. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2021 8:32:33 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Whatever else is true, I bet shooter-dude is wishing he'd have just kept with sticking his dick in his wife....you know, the judge! LOL Can we all agree on that, at least? Id bet big money he wishes he didnt make a body.. Making a body is a huge ass hassle.. Id like to never produce a body and have to explain it. |
|
|
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.
