Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:22 AM Jul 2012

UPDATE: Texas EZ Trip Shooting Of Drunk

Update of this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/117248035

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Convenience-Store-Customer-Kills-Man-161549915.html

The second customer also retreated from the store while the man continued striking him, police said.

Once in the parking lot, the second customer pulled out a handgun and shot the man, Mitchell told NBC 5.


So the shooter was struck by the drunk. The shooter retreated. (SYG law not invoked as he DID retreat.) The drunk followed him, continuing to hit him. Shooter then defended himself.

How much of a beating is a person supposed to take before they can shoot? Do our resident antigunners require that a person be dying from the beating first?
312 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
UPDATE: Texas EZ Trip Shooting Of Drunk (Original Post) GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 OP
Kung Fu classes might be cheaper DocMac Jul 2012 #1
Have you compared prices? GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #3
No. But it's good excercise too. nt DocMac Jul 2012 #7
I see you have one of those famous goalposts with wheels. cherokeeprogressive Jul 2012 #190
A silly reply deserves a silly response. DocMac Jul 2012 #192
She had it coming, it was only "simple assault" anyway! Tejas Jul 2012 #199
I have to kill anyone that assaults me! DocMac Jul 2012 #201
Or your loved ones. Tejas Jul 2012 #240
Simple assault ends when the first blow rains down on someone. cherokeeprogressive Jul 2012 #202
Do what you want! DocMac Jul 2012 #206
I don't carry a gun. Never have. cherokeeprogressive Jul 2012 #211
How bout this: DocMac Jul 2012 #218
No surprise that you would turn to outright lying to support your anti-gun agenda... cherokeeprogressive Jul 2012 #220
Lying??? DocMac Jul 2012 #225
Yes, lying. Walking away IS defusing the situation. cherokeeprogressive Jul 2012 #226
People walk away every day. DocMac Jul 2012 #228
And this: Oneka Jul 2012 #232
Well, if I follow your logic, DocMac Jul 2012 #234
Stand your ground laws Oneka Jul 2012 #243
As a jury member, at the end of the day... HALO141 Jul 2012 #304
based on what evidence? gejohnston Jul 2012 #222
Take off your shoe? You have obviously never dealt with real street violence. N/T GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #237
I'm addding that one to the beans, staff, bicycle tire and benjamins. n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #241
Don't forget; "Firm voice commands to stop and firmer if needed" N/T DonP Jul 2012 #244
Dont forget the "firm voice". N/T GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #306
You are a great example of why SYG laws are needed. aikoaiko Jul 2012 #300
I think this guy needs a psychiatrist more than anything else. DanTex Jul 2012 #5
You'll get no argument from me on that. nt DocMac Jul 2012 #8
There were TWO parties, what about the POS that chased him? Tejas Jul 2012 #9
Anyone who thinks that a drunk can't seriously injure of kill someone permatex Jul 2012 #10
ibtBDSM's Tejas Jul 2012 #14
Ain't it something? permatex Jul 2012 #18
"If he didn't have a gun............." Tejas Jul 2012 #23
Oh, but of course. permatex Jul 2012 #24
I'd rather see someone who is able handle these things without a gun. Just because you choose Hoyt Jul 2012 #152
A drunk who can be handled without killing them. Gee Hoyt, I didn't know you shadowrider Jul 2012 #155
Were you there? No. You just assume some guy with a gun is honest when he says "I was afraid." Hoyt Jul 2012 #156
You're putting words in my mouth. Nowhere on this thread have I opined on this shadowrider Jul 2012 #159
"I wasn't there, it's why I'll leave it up to the cops to decide." Wise words your interlocutor... friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #177
"If, after the investigation the shooter is arrested, there must be cause." HALO141 Jul 2012 #279
What color is the sky in your world?!? HALO141 Jul 2012 #277
I once asked him what color the sky was, as usual, no answer shadowrider Jul 2012 #282
No surprise there. HALO141 Jul 2012 #293
If the shooter tried to retreat, and it appears he did. Good on him......... wandy Jul 2012 #161
Your honest opinion without throwing insults is truly appreciated. n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #162
I had no intent to insult...... wandy Jul 2012 #164
You may have misunderstood. Peruse this thread to see insults thrown shadowrider Jul 2012 #166
continued beating is merely a rowdy drunk to you? aikoaiko Jul 2012 #17
rowdy drunk my ass gejohnston Jul 2012 #25
Yes, rowdy drunk, trying to pick fights. DanTex Jul 2012 #44
Crickets. DocMac Jul 2012 #47
After your statement of conceal carriers permatex Jul 2012 #48
You don't have to be Republican, you don't have to Tejas Jul 2012 #56
Gun ownership has nothing to do with it. DanTex Jul 2012 #59
You're not a noob so you know accusations of masturbation over guns Tejas Jul 2012 #72
Not all gunowners. Just you and the other crazies. DanTex Jul 2012 #77
This might be news to you, but Tejas Jul 2012 #80
Apparently, accusations of mental illness are acceptable now... PavePusher Jul 2012 #292
Amazing, idin't it? shadowrider Jul 2012 #296
I just like to occasionaly confirm that the limits here are different than the limits elsewhere.... PavePusher Jul 2012 #302
I rather suspect the post would have been yanked... Lizzie Poppet Jul 2012 #303
YES, the JURY SYSTEM HERE IS BROKEN. Tejas Jul 2012 #308
So, I'm one of the "crazies"? Tejas Jul 2012 #307
I'm finding that out permatex Jul 2012 #63
You should just put me on ignore. DanTex Jul 2012 #67
Naw permatex Jul 2012 #73
Lacking logical dialogue, I predict the personal attacks will start in Tejas Jul 2012 #74
I feel so.......... permatex Jul 2012 #81
grasping for straws already? Tejas Jul 2012 #52
LOL. Lust for bloodshed? From a guy who is celebrating this execution? DanTex Jul 2012 #55
Your solution only allows arresting the drunk after he injures innocents. Tejas Jul 2012 #66
Actually, what the progressives in this thread are saying is that... DanTex Jul 2012 #70
By your logic, LEO's are executing people in the streets. Tejas Jul 2012 #75
Hey Karnak Oneka Jul 2012 #230
You are defending the drunk guy. GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #106
In the other thread, I pointed out that the referenced article was lying about that. PavePusher Jul 2012 #53
And you were wrong, like usual. DanTex Jul 2012 #61
No. I wasn't. PavePusher Jul 2012 #76
Yes. You were. DanTex Jul 2012 #83
I'm having fun permatex Jul 2012 #86
So am I! Yay us! DanTex Jul 2012 #93
Yep permatex Jul 2012 #99
You are wrong. Here, I'll lay it out for you again.... PavePusher Jul 2012 #104
Here: DanTex Jul 2012 #105
Which is not at all equal to the other statement, which was a pure invention. n/t PavePusher Jul 2012 #110
LOL. So you really can't read after all! DanTex Jul 2012 #115
I can read just fine. You are promoting lies and distortions. PavePusher Jul 2012 #129
Anyone claiming any sort of "academic credentials" HALO141 Jul 2012 #278
your reading skills suck gejohnston Jul 2012 #71
They won't be happy until Tejas Jul 2012 #78
Witnesses: DanTex Jul 2012 #89
and this witness is? gejohnston Jul 2012 #94
LOL. You guys are so desperate to vindicate the gun hero. DanTex Jul 2012 #101
Better than convicting solely because he CCW's. Tejas Jul 2012 #107
no, just seeing your bullshit for what it is gejohnston Jul 2012 #116
"William Powell" wasn't the one getting his head stomped. Tejas Jul 2012 #95
That's right. Attack that witness! Maybe he's an evil gun-grabber! DanTex Jul 2012 #102
My bad, you're right, guilty until proven innocent is much easier. Tejas Jul 2012 #112
So, have you abandoned your defense of the lie in the jpak cite? PavePusher Jul 2012 #265
yeah and sometimes drunk men beat their wives arely staircase Jul 2012 #96
The guy did leave - just like the first guy hack89 Jul 2012 #194
He wasn't trying to pick a fight, he WAS fighting. He WAS assaulting someone. aikoaiko Jul 2012 #301
Not a rowdy drunk that was singing loudly out of tune or pissing on mailboxes 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #36
When I was a rowdy drunk... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2012 #49
How many assaults did you commit? bluedigger Jul 2012 #92
I don't know. discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2012 #120
i knew a woman who killed her "rowdy dunk" husband arely staircase Jul 2012 #88
when I was a kid gejohnston Jul 2012 #204
Offering $100 not to beat you to death is even cheaper. Tejas Jul 2012 #12
+100000000 permatex Jul 2012 #15
I'll ask again. DocMac Jul 2012 #26
Good Question: Why a hand gun, why not pepper spray?? DanTex Jul 2012 #28
Now I know that your just another typical permatex Jul 2012 #31
When you insult someone, you should really try to get your grammar right. DanTex Jul 2012 #62
I rest my case. nt permatex Jul 2012 #64
YUP, ask LEO's about pepper spray vs drugged-up perps. Tejas Jul 2012 #35
because that is what he had gejohnston Jul 2012 #37
They should carry both if anything. DocMac Jul 2012 #41
I agree permatex Jul 2012 #42
I believe you are a good person. DocMac Jul 2012 #50
Thank you permatex Jul 2012 #58
I don't support the bloodthirsty bragging language. DocMac Jul 2012 #69
I agree, but neither of us were there permatex Jul 2012 #79
I don't have any answers, permatex. DocMac Jul 2012 #97
Now here's where you lose the argument permatex Jul 2012 #103
He stood his ground at some point. DocMac Jul 2012 #109
He may very well have been still trying to get away but was unable to at that time permatex Jul 2012 #113
We'll see. HALO141 Jul 2012 #310
When he takes it before a Grand Jury, as required by Texas law, oneshooter Jul 2012 #311
When he does he will almost certainly recommend charges. HALO141 Jul 2012 #312
Why should lawful persons EVER be required to retreat in the face of criminal action? PavePusher Jul 2012 #127
correction gejohnston Jul 2012 #119
I stand corrected permatex Jul 2012 #126
Wow. Just... wow. PavePusher Jul 2012 #117
I'm having a Beavis moment. Tejas Jul 2012 #125
Republicans build prisons with glee. DocMac Jul 2012 #145
Jack Brooks built ours. Tejas Jul 2012 #147
Why would a reasonable person listen to anything you have to say... Marengo Jul 2012 #297
Onset of sudden attack is a legal qualifer for self-defense. GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #133
I guess this will last forever, since you don't get it. DocMac Jul 2012 #209
Congratulations, you won the Valarie Hodges award gejohnston Jul 2012 #207
Forget the dumbass remarks! DocMac Jul 2012 #210
That would be just about all of your posts... ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #213
Ok. DocMac Jul 2012 #219
the dead person brought it on himself gejohnston Jul 2012 #223
If you are referring to the events in my life, I am satisfied with the results ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #224
Good for you. Try to keep up! DocMac Jul 2012 #227
Complex issues deserve more than sound bite answers ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #236
Can you, with 100% accuracy, and a guarantee of compensation for failure.... PavePusher Jul 2012 #246
based on the information, gejohnston Jul 2012 #216
A person used force to end a violent, potentially lethal attack on themself. PavePusher Jul 2012 #245
Oh, forgot to ask...Do you include yourself in this analysis? Marengo Jul 2012 #299
No it wouldn't. Clames Jul 2012 #68
Texas does. GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #114
The drunk has all the options. PavePusher Jul 2012 #60
Use a firm voice Common Sense Party Jul 2012 #29
And if that doesn't work, show him/her you're armed with a can of beans shadowrider Jul 2012 #82
What part of "use $100 bills instead of a gun" do you not comprehend? Tejas Jul 2012 #32
Do you know how ridiculus those answers are? Very! DocMac Jul 2012 #45
About as ridiculous as Tejas Jul 2012 #84
He'll get a chance to test his fighting skills DocMac Jul 2012 #150
People die or are seriously injured by getting punched hack89 Jul 2012 #198
A single punch can end a life... Marengo Jul 2012 #298
You do know that the great majority of gunshot wounds do not result in death, yes? PavePusher Jul 2012 #57
It's called problem solving, Texas style. Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #146
you did not read the article gejohnston Jul 2012 #148
I read the article and other articles. I'll go with the witnesses. Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #151
I read it, and I read the original article. gejohnston Jul 2012 #157
WTF does retreating to the parking lot have to do with anything? Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #170
he could not escape with out being more exposed gejohnston Jul 2012 #180
And you know that because... DanTex Jul 2012 #182
and you know he could leave the scene because gejohnston Jul 2012 #184
YUP, witnesses do disagree, just ask Sharpton or Nifong or...oh wait. Tejas Jul 2012 #193
Uh, because it was stated in the article that he retreated? Tejas Jul 2012 #195
I don't care what the eyewitnesses said, or didn't say. MicaelS Jul 2012 #196
And you know that how? Clames Jul 2012 #231
How do you know he had a car? Sirveri Jul 2012 #233
The witness statement, "...not worth a life..." is his judgement and would not be allowed in court. GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #238
You can see the flak i'm getting. DocMac Jul 2012 #149
Aren't stun-guns lethal weapons? 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #153
I'm told they are "less lethal." DocMac Jul 2012 #165
Ah, so *you are a big guy* 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #168
Now you're writing all my thoughts for me? DocMac Jul 2012 #173
I used what you wrote 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #175
I will acknowledge that. DocMac Jul 2012 #178
Alright, fair enough 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #179
I get what you are saying. DocMac Jul 2012 #181
I don't think we're really in disagreement here 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #185
No need to apologize. DocMac Jul 2012 #186
You seem to have written plenty of thoughts for others. PavePusher Jul 2012 #263
I don't have your options. At 58 with health problems, the last thing I'm going to shadowrider Jul 2012 #169
Yell for help. I would help. DocMac Jul 2012 #174
Good to know. I'll let you know my daily schedule and you can always shadowrider Jul 2012 #187
Silly replies are not helping you. DocMac Jul 2012 #188
I have very limited faith in my fellow man. No one wants to get involved shadowrider Jul 2012 #189
I'm sorry you feel that way. DocMac Jul 2012 #191
If you try your method of self-defense in a real street fight you will get your ass whipped... GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #239
Yelling for help doesn't always work either... PavePusher Jul 2012 #264
You could use Diamond Daves patented NINJA CHOP! Tejas Jul 2012 #200
It is sad, but you have to develop a thick skin around here. Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #254
Have to honestly disagree gejohnston Jul 2012 #256
I wasn't referring specifically to this thread. And I don't have a side. Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #271
Loud minority? Clames Jul 2012 #257
Loud minority of DUers, not Gungeoneers. Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #270
how many of those DUers actually understand what SYG is? gejohnston Jul 2012 #273
Well, this is a subject where you and I have opposing takes on SYG. Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #274
not clear at all gejohnston Jul 2012 #275
I don't give a rat's ass about ALEC's well being, or the NRA's, or any other right wing org. Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #281
they basically are. gejohnston Jul 2012 #283
I didn't see where this was about robbery at all. Starboard Tack Jul 2012 #284
I can think of worse feelings gejohnston Jul 2012 #285
That is very good advice. DocMac Jul 2012 #272
"Are you suggesting that all citizens carry...?" No-one is suggesting any such thing, of course. PavePusher Jul 2012 #266
Showing a belligerent individual who isn't thinking clearly that you have lot's of cash on hand 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #39
Lion vs CCW wrapped in bacon. Tejas Jul 2012 #43
Nah... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2012 #122
Unlikely...and in any case probably far less effective. Lizzie Poppet Jul 2012 #98
Well, if you can't use your hands, DocMac Jul 2012 #118
I know. Every parking lot I go to is chock full of rocks and sticks. n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #123
perhaps for a couple of reasons gejohnston Jul 2012 #128
I actually DO consider non-lethals a viable option. Lizzie Poppet Jul 2012 #139
from what I gather gejohnston Jul 2012 #2
What would the victim do if DocMac Jul 2012 #4
Run faster. Tejas Jul 2012 #6
That's one. DocMac Jul 2012 #11
I'm 64 yo permatex Jul 2012 #13
Pepper spray. nt DocMac Jul 2012 #27
Pepper spray doesn't always work permatex Jul 2012 #30
Will you agree to carry both? DocMac Jul 2012 #33
I already carry a small container of pepper spray permatex Jul 2012 #38
Victim gettin his a*s whipped (conversation) shadowrider Jul 2012 #85
On TV, the wind always blows in the right direction. Tejas Jul 2012 #87
Is that part of your comedy routine? nt DocMac Jul 2012 #100
Better than the foolish fantasies. Tejas Jul 2012 #111
Will you never give any ground on this issue? DocMac Jul 2012 #140
Won't you? shadowrider Jul 2012 #141
Maybe it's because I don't watch television so Tejas Jul 2012 #142
You forgot to tell him to have plenty of Benjamins to hand out in case shadowrider Jul 2012 #143
Throw a few on the ground and make like Forrest Gump! Tejas Jul 2012 #144
Lol! Now that isn't a bad option. DocMac Jul 2012 #158
Not to be a PITA sarisataka Jul 2012 #163
Probably. But if a gun is all you have, DocMac Jul 2012 #167
True if your only tool is a hammer sarisataka Jul 2012 #172
If a guy jumps in front of you with a knife, DocMac Jul 2012 #176
Effective your view of what is appropriate is very dependent on the victim ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #212
"...a fist fight doesn't deserve deadly force." PavePusher Jul 2012 #248
"But if a gun is all you have, lethal force is all you have." PavePusher Jul 2012 #247
depending on size an muscular strength gejohnston Jul 2012 #16
I'm sorry GE permatex Jul 2012 #19
I think some here actually want a CCP to get his skull cracked open Tejas Jul 2012 #21
That's my take on it also permatex Jul 2012 #22
You're relatively new to this forum but I must admit shadowrider Jul 2012 #90
It isn't our (CCWers) fault if you choose to limit your options. GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #136
Good shoot Tejas Jul 2012 #20
And yet, somehow, the first attacked customer survived his or her brutal beating... enki23 Jul 2012 #34
"excessively gun-loving sorts" - Diane, is that you? Tejas Jul 2012 #40
did you read the article? gejohnston Jul 2012 #46
I can't possibly take anyone seriously when they write something like what you did. enki23 Jul 2012 #217
the fact remains gejohnston Jul 2012 #221
1. What evidence do you have that the attacks were of the same level and ferocity? PavePusher Jul 2012 #65
Screw this topic. dtom67 Jul 2012 #51
as long as Threads like this one: Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2012 #54
So you don't think that gun control or abortion rights are worth fighting for? DanTex Jul 2012 #108
WTF? Are you that ignorant? RW masturbates to gun control. Tejas Jul 2012 #121
After reading his posts on this thread, you actually thought that? n/t shadowrider Jul 2012 #124
I was trying to give the poster SOME benefit of the doubt. Tejas Jul 2012 #131
I think he's losing it permatex Jul 2012 #132
Apparently he's never heard of Ronald Reagan. Tejas Jul 2012 #135
LOL. Yes, gun control is so very popular with right-wingers! DanTex Jul 2012 #130
Ronald Reagan>Mulford Act (FYI - Reagan was RW) Tejas Jul 2012 #134
Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, in 2012... DanTex Jul 2012 #137
The NRA that endorses Democratic candidates? Tejas Jul 2012 #138
Then, why is NRA out to defeat Obama? Hoyt Jul 2012 #154
Why do you let the NRA scare you so much? Tejas Jul 2012 #197
Gun control? Of course not ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #214
Maybe a law against public intoxication would prevent........ Tejas Jul 2012 #91
And a law against punching people, while we're at it. jeepnstein Jul 2012 #160
This is why SYG is spreading sarisataka Jul 2012 #171
YUP, violent drunks need to take notice. Tejas Jul 2012 #203
This thread needs some Canadian love. ileus Jul 2012 #183
She just LOVES Texas law (Hale v Tavai) Tejas Jul 2012 #205
*snork* ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #242
When I was a young man Meiko Jul 2012 #208
When I was younger I followed much the same course ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #215
Maybe I Could Dance With Them Until They Drop AndyTiedye Jul 2012 #309
"the attacker made a bad life decision and will suffer the consequences of his actions." geckosfeet Jul 2012 #251
I understand that Meiko Jul 2012 #261
self defense backwoodsbob Jul 2012 #229
Yep Meiko Jul 2012 #235
Hey, that's a point that was overlooked all through this thread.... PavePusher Jul 2012 #249
At least 5 or 6 Meiko Jul 2012 #250
I would have had the clerk call a cop. orpupilofnature57 Jul 2012 #252
That makes sense Meiko Jul 2012 #253
Yes ,that would be the sane way to curb violence. orpupilofnature57 Jul 2012 #259
And the guy gets to beat on you for five minutes until the cops get there. GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #255
I don't that's why I'd have him Legally orpupilofnature57 Jul 2012 #258
and if the beating victim dies or requires a long stay in the hospital, gejohnston Jul 2012 #260
No shoot anyone for anything orpupilofnature57 Jul 2012 #286
Wow! Meiko Jul 2012 #262
Is there anyway of defending your-self and my raped wife orpupilofnature57 Jul 2012 #287
You didn't answer my question but that's OK Meiko Jul 2012 #294
As long as that is YOUR choice, MicaelS Jul 2012 #267
Not at all ,My opinion ,or you choice orpupilofnature57 Jul 2012 #288
That's your choice. Lizzie Poppet Jul 2012 #268
Would never presume to mke that choice for orpupilofnature57 Jul 2012 #289
Not me. I will defend myself. GreenStormCloud Jul 2012 #305
Please Mr. Drunk Asshole, Spoonman Jul 2012 #269
Post removed Post removed Jul 2012 #290
Shares? Is that you? We missed you, man! n/t PavePusher Jul 2012 #291
Naah, that gem was sub-Shares... friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #295
If there was no stand your ground law what would have happened? Does having a gun present upaloopa Jul 2012 #276
Real Life(tm) is not that binary. PavePusher Jul 2012 #280

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
3. Have you compared prices?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:37 AM
Jul 2012

I just googled a dojo in Dallas. $180 per quarter. $720 per year. You can get a good handgun for cheaper than that.

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
190. I see you have one of those famous goalposts with wheels.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 07:57 PM
Jul 2012

As soon as you were called on your earlier statement, the argument changed to one of being in shape.

Nicely done.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
192. A silly reply deserves a silly response.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:15 PM
Jul 2012

Being able to defend yourself against bullies is something everyone should consider. Am I right?

Are you going to walk this Earth and dish out justice that takes life, simply because that is the only choice you have? We are talking simple assault here!

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
201. I have to kill anyone that assaults me!
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:57 PM
Jul 2012

Did you read that? Does that seem right to you?

You have no shame! Now you relaced the man in the story with a woman. There is no low for you and that makes you a dangerous person. Welcome to my ignore list. Enjoy your life in fear or prison.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
240. Or your loved ones.
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 11:12 AM
Jul 2012

Of course, if you choose to simply tell them to run then that is your perogative.

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
202. Simple assault ends when the first blow rains down on someone.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:06 PM
Jul 2012

You know that, right? At that point it becomes battery.

So I'm expected to cover up a la Muhammed Ali, rope-a-dope it, and hope one well placed blow doesn't make me a victim of manslaughter at the hands of a drunk? How long am I expected to do that? Until the police get there?

Have you ever been drunk? Seriously. I have. I've been snot-slingin' drunk. Guess what? I've never battered anyone. NEVER. That this guy would not only batter one but TWO people he'd never met before says something about him in the larger picture, agreed? To me it says he probably knows how to fight. What does it say that he actually pursued someone out the door to continue the ass-whoopin'? To me it says he's a dangerous person with no regard for others. Since bullies like that never pick on anyone their own size, I'd bet the shooter wasn't near the same size as the dead bully.

It seems to me as though the shooter DID consider being able to defend himself against bullies.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
206. Do what you want!
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:31 PM
Jul 2012

Just pray i'm not on the jury. When you leave the house in the morning with one option, there is only one result.

You're prepared for a host of horrendous things. Simple assault? Not so much!

Can't you take your shoe off and beat that asshole with it?

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
211. I don't carry a gun. Never have.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:55 PM
Jul 2012

I have guns though; possibly more than most. I have my Grandpa's guns, which were passed to me when he died, I have my Dad's guns, which he gave me a few years ago when he decided he was too old to shoot them and wasn't interested in caring for them, and I have two guns that I bought. All are in a locked gun case and most are used at the gun range on a semi-regular basis.

Truth is, the dead guy probably wouldn't fuck with me because it's more than likely I'm his size or bigger. Bullies look for easy marks. I ain't one of those. But that's not the point.

The point is that life is fleeting, and frail. People have assumed room temperature after simply slipping in the bathtub or on their frozen driveway. The shooter retreated. He left the store. He did his part to defuse the situation. Obviously that didn't work. The bully thought he had free reign, as he'd probably had countless times before. He chased the shooter outside and continued kicking his ass. Well guess what? He fucked with the wrong guy. He took a trip on the karma highway and his exit came earlier than he expected it to. No sympathy here.

I carry a first-aid kit in my boat. Do I do that out of fear? Ditto my motorhome. Fear? Is it fear that causes me to put highway flares in my trunk? No to all of those questions. So if isn't fear that motivates me to do those things, why would fear cause me to carry a gun? I do those things because I can, and because if the need arises, I'll calmly handle the situation because I am prepared. Oh, and I don't think my first aid kits are qualified to handle "horrendous things". They're just standard off-the-shelf first aid kits albeit not purchased with savings in mind.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
218. How bout this:
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:37 PM
Jul 2012

You support the shooter, as described in the article, and i'll support the jury's decision. If he walks, you're free to follow his lead. If he goes to prison, you may suffer the same fate, should you choose to emulate him.

According to you, people don't get a second chance. If you have a gun, shoot em..am I right? No ability to fight, no screaming for help, no mace...no plan B...just gun.

Let's be clear. The shooter made no attempt to diffuse the situation, other than shooting him.

Well, I won't live like that...and damn the torpedoes.

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
220. No surprise that you would turn to outright lying to support your anti-gun agenda...
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:58 PM
Jul 2012

"When the man returned to the store, he apparently slapped a second customer, according to Sgt. Warren Mitchell, with the Dallas Police Department.
The second customer also retreated from the store while the man continued striking him, police said.
Once in the parking lot, the second customer pulled out a handgun and shot the man, Mitchell told NBC 5.


Your statement: The shooter made no attempt to diffuse the situation, other than shooting him.

Who are you to say that the bully never got a second chance? Who's to say this wasn't his FIFTH chance...? Sometimes we brush death without even knowing it. For instance, I used to ride a Kawasaki 750 Ninja. It was scary fast. Once, I was riding down a main thoroughfare going the speed limit, and a man was about to turn left in front of me. I looked at him. HE looked at me. Our eyes actually met. At the last moment, he decided he could get onto the street I was on before I got to where he was. I passed within an inch of his back bumper with my back brake locked and was hard on the front. It was so close I had to pull over and sit on the curb for a few minutes just to catch my breath. I knew he was going to do it, and at the time was sitting straight up on the bike, and prepared.

It would be interesting to know what your bully's criminal record was. I bet he had one.

Fighting back, screaming for help (yeah... try THAT one and expect more than one person in a THOUSAND to come to your aid) mace... those things buy you moments at best. If that one person in a thousand isn't within earshot, you're going to be getting your ass kicked for MINUTES.

I'm not going to suffer the same fate. I thought I made that clear. I don't carry. I have the luxury of being as big or bigger than your average thug.

You made the comment earlier that I should hope you weren't on my jury. Man oh man did you just out yourself as someone who should NEVER serve on a jury. I hope you haven't, because if you have, I would bet money you made a decision based on your biases rather than the facts.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
225. Lying???
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 12:37 AM
Jul 2012

Walking away is diffusing the situation?? Is that all you need to kill a man??

You're setting the bar very low.

What are the facts about this case? What injuries did he receive? Did this person have no choice but to draw his weapon and shoot him dead? So yes, I would find him guilty if he had options and failed to use them.

I guess I need a CCW to protect myself from other people who carry. Consider this:

A person attacks me and I reverse that and start beating this guy back. A guy walks around the corner and just sees me beating this guy. He pulls his weapon and shoots me, simply because he has the right to protect any other citizen as well.

Is this who we are? Is this the society you want?

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
226. Yes, lying. Walking away IS defusing the situation.
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 12:52 AM
Jul 2012

If WALKING away from a situation isn't defusing it, is RUNNING?

In my not so humble opinion, you lied to support your point, KNOWING the shooter left the store in order to stop the beating. Your only defense to that is to say you didn't read the whole article, in which case your entire opinion and argument isn't worth a warm bucket of spit.

Is this who we are? Do bullies get the benefit of the doubt? Tell that to Matthew Shepard's parents. Or James Byrd Jr's. Could, in your opinion, James Bird Jr. been justified in shooting his attackers simply because they wrapped a chain around his neck? If he had, I bet you'd be arguing "damn, if he had only maced them..."

So you "reverse that and start beating this guy back". Well you're a tough guy. Most people aren't.

"just sees me beating this guy..." If he shoots you without any other knowledge of what's going on, he deserves whatever punishment the justice system gives him.

That's not what happened though, is it?

Does your goalpost need gas yet? How many MPG does it get? I bet it's got a Holley 650 sitting on top of it doesn't it? Hooker headers? Traction bars to keep the front wheels on the ground?

You're a piece o' work Bro. A WORM couldn't crawl under the bar YOU set.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
228. People walk away every day.
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 01:33 AM
Jul 2012

I guess we should accept that and just blow the hell out of people who follow?

I mentioned a few tools for this kind of thing that are less deadly. I guess they are not good enough?

You can arm yourself and you can shoot a drunk too. At the end of the day, i'm going to ask you why you used deadly force. I want to know why you had no other option. I want to know why you killed an unarmed man. If your answer is that you tried to walk away...that won't fly with me.

If you think you need a hand gun for deadly situations, shouldn't you be prepared for the situations that aren't?

I don't think you will answer without more drivel, but do try.

Oneka

(653 posts)
232. And this:
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 02:11 AM
Jul 2012
At the end of the day, i'm going to ask you why you used deadly force. I want to know why you had no other option. I want to know why you killed an unarmed man. If your answer is that you tried to walk away...that won't fly with me.


is exactly why, stand your ground laws are becoming more and more prevalent in the USA. People who use deadly force to defend themselves, really don't need some random asshole, sitting in the safety of a jury box, deciding that he should/could have done something different, to extricate himself from a fast moving, dangerous situation.

Keep up the good work, if we can get enough jurors in my state with your kind of thinking, maybe we can turn the tide and get SYG here in my state too.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
234. Well, if I follow your logic,
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 02:41 AM
Jul 2012

there is no need for a jury. You think you're in danger...you have gun...threat dead. What could go wrong?

Oneka

(653 posts)
243. Stand your ground laws
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 02:18 PM
Jul 2012

codify what is, and what is not, a justifiable use of force. Rather than using a jury who
is not in harms way, the reasonable man doctrine, or the discretion of law enforcement, and a DA, to determine what is, or is not justifiable.
By my logic a person who uses force can still be prosecuted , if his actions fall outside the boundaries of the applicable SYG law. With a good SYG law, he at least has an opportunity , to know what those boundaries are before
he is attacked, and prepare accordingly.
With duty to retreat laws in place A jury an determine that for him at a later time.

HALO141

(911 posts)
304. As a jury member, at the end of the day...
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:07 PM
Jul 2012

you don't get to say whether or not what someone did was "right" in your opinion. You get to get a vote as to whether or not it was legal or not. In the State of Texas it is an affirmative defense that the actor used deadly force to stop an attack on himself or another in order to prevent "serious bodily injury or death." In truth, we do not have enough information to say whether or not the threat of serious injury or death was credible. If, for instance, the attacker was 70 years old and using a walker while the victim was a healthy 32 year old, 6'4" and 300 lbs. I would agree that the threat of serious injury was not credible. If, on the other hand, the attacker was the healthy 30-something and the victim was 70, well then the threat is imminently credible. The truth, here, is most likely somewhere in the middle.

Texas law, however, does not (nor should it) establish any sort of threshold for determining the level of injury one must endure before the threat of serious injury or death is established. In fact, all that's really required is some sort of demonstration of intent and a reasonable expectation of ability to inflict such injury. It is dishonest to say that an unarmed man presents no real threat. People are killed with bare hands EVERY SINGLE DAY. The attacker demonstrated his intent and ability by the battery of not one but TWO people. In both cases, when those individuals retreated, he followed, continuing to press his attack. He made a bad choice.

I'm a fan of the force continuum. Pepper spray, tasers, etc... They do have their place. They also have severe limitations. Under many circumstances they are simply impractical. On top of that, how many such devices would you expect people to carry around? Non-LEO's simply cannot shoe horn a sam browne belt or cavernous man-purse into their lives. Before armed citizens embrace more less-lethal options there are going to have to be a lot of social changes. Primarily, they will have to be almost universal acceptance of their choice to arm themselves because I guarantee you that carrying all that crap around with them will be just like a huge sign that reads, "yeah, I have a gun."

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
222. based on what evidence?
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 12:01 AM
Jul 2012

The shooter retreated, that is evidence of trying to defuse the situation. You are speculating.

aikoaiko

(34,127 posts)
300. You are a great example of why SYG laws are needed.
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 09:16 AM
Jul 2012

If the evidence supports that the shooter reasonable believed he was in grave danger, then it will never get to criminal court. Nor will you have a chance as a biased juror to enact civil penalties because SYG laws protect legitimate self-defense shooters from civil liability.

Thank you for posting your bias and, therefore, justifying SYG laws.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
5. I think this guy needs a psychiatrist more than anything else.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:42 AM
Jul 2012

Anyone who thinks the way to deal with a rowdy drunks is to kill them has much bigger problems than self-defense.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
10. Anyone who thinks that a drunk can't seriously injure of kill someone
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:53 AM
Jul 2012

is in need of psychiatrist.

The shooter tried to retreat and finally had to defend himself.
I'm curious, were you there? Do you know the circumstances of what happened, how badly injured the shooter might have been at the moment he drew and fired? How much of a beating are you required to endure before defending yourself?
Or would you rather prefer that the victim be beaten senseless or killed rather than use a gun to end the beating?

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
14. ibtBDSM's
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:01 AM
Jul 2012

In before the Sado-Masochists tell you how much of a beating they want to see. Weird how that works around here, as long as it happens to someone else they could care less what injuries the aggressor inflicts on someone, but whatever you do DON'T SHOOT THE AGGRESSOR!

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
18. Ain't it something?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:04 AM
Jul 2012

They are so anti gun that they would rather see someone injured or killed rather than use a gun to defend themselves, not all of them, but a few very vocal ones here.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
23. "If he didn't have a gun............."
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:18 AM
Jul 2012
If he didn't have a gun, he would not have had the nerve to irritate the drunk enough to make the drunk hit him. But he did have a gun and the evil gun emboldened him so he hurt the drunk's feelings which caused the drunk to assault him continuously. AMIRITE?
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
152. I'd rather see someone who is able handle these things without a gun. Just because you choose
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:21 PM
Jul 2012

to walk around with a gun out of some fear of your fellow man, doesn't mean you have to use it with a drunk who can be handled without killing them. Quit acting like you are prey and unable to extricate yourself from a minor incident without resorting to lethal weapons.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
155. A drunk who can be handled without killing them. Gee Hoyt, I didn't know you
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:28 PM
Jul 2012

were there and saw the whole thing! What, you mean you weren't? You have no idea how violent this guy got? Maybe he was a lot bigger than the guy he was hitting, maybe he wasn't. Who knows.

If, after the investigation the shooter is arrested, there must be cause. If he isn't, he successfully defended himself.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
159. You're putting words in my mouth. Nowhere on this thread have I opined on this
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:41 PM
Jul 2012

incident.

I wasn't there, it's why I'll leave it up to the cops to decide.

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
177. "I wasn't there, it's why I'll leave it up to the cops to decide." Wise words your interlocutor...
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 05:31 PM
Jul 2012

...should take to heart.

HALO141

(911 posts)
279. "If, after the investigation the shooter is arrested, there must be cause."
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 03:50 PM
Jul 2012

Maybe not. The Dallas Co. DA's office has a reputation for pushing every defensive shooting to trial regardless of the circumstances. Same can be said for Austin Co.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
282. I once asked him what color the sky was, as usual, no answer
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:23 PM
Jul 2012

so don't hold your hopes up for a response.

HALO141

(911 posts)
293. No surprise there.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 11:18 PM
Jul 2012

I suppose you (or I) might have gotten a response if he could figure out a way to slip in an insult or construct a straw man. *shrug*

wandy

(3,539 posts)
161. If the shooter tried to retreat, and it appears he did. Good on him.........
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:51 PM
Jul 2012

For trying to retreat, that is.
If the drunk continued to follow him and beat on him; sooner or later you have to do something.
Now I'm tempted to say, couldn't he have shot the drunk in the ass or something?
We all know it don't work that way.
When highly intoxicated, pain doesn't have the 'stopping' effect it has when sober.
This could have still gone on until the person being attacked got seriously injured.
At the very best, the drunk would have sobered up, got himself a lawyer and the person defending themselves would never have owned anything again. And possably spend some time in jail.
If this is the way it really went down I would say the shooter had no other choice.

By the by; did I mention I'm not exactly a gun person?

wandy

(3,539 posts)
164. I had no intent to insult......
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:05 PM
Jul 2012

I may not be a gun owner, however if the drunk pursued me all the way to my car.
I am a tire iron owner.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
166. You may have misunderstood. Peruse this thread to see insults thrown
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:14 PM
Jul 2012

by anti-gun people toward those pro-gun and you'll understand why I appreciated your comment.

No one here will try and force you to buy a gun, carry a gun, hold a gun or consider the purchase of a gun.

I, personally, respect peoples opinions. If you choose not to carry, good for you. It's those that hurl insults towards those that do I have a hard time tolerating.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
25. rowdy drunk my ass
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:24 AM
Jul 2012
When the man returned to the store, he apparently slapped a second customer, according to Sgt. Warren Mitchell, with the Dallas Police Department.
The second customer also retreated from the store while the man continued striking him, police said.
Once in the parking lot, the second customer pulled out a handgun and shot the man,
Mitchell told NBC 5.

Rowdy is loud and annoying but they don't chase you in parking lots throwing punches. This is violent. I have to question the judgement of someone who can't tell the difference.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
44. Yes, rowdy drunk, trying to pick fights.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:06 AM
Jul 2012

Do y'all really live in such a bubble that you aren't aware that drunk people sometimes get rowdy and try to pick fights? Do you ever wonder how the rest of us manage to live perfectly safe lives without killing anybody? It's because intelligence is much more important than a gun when it comes to personal safety.

Even in this story, the first guy who the drunk guy went after had the good sense to just leave. The toter could have done the same, and called the police, but instead he decided he wanted to be a gun hero. According to the other story, other witnesses said the shooting was unnecessary. It's funny how the whole NRA crew wants to wait for all the evidence before deciding about Zimmerman, but they have no problem trusting any old gun nut to execute a drunk guy without any kind of due process or trial of any kind.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
48. After your statement of conceal carriers
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:10 AM
Jul 2012

You've pretty much ruined any credibility here.
The shooter did try to get away and was followed out the door where the drunk continued to beat on him. But to you, thats not enough to trigger, pun intended, self defense.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
56. You don't have to be Republican, you don't have to
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:31 AM
Jul 2012

be Right Wing, you don't even have to be an NRA member, you only need to be a gunowner (50% of DU respondents to the gun poll) to be hated.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
59. Gun ownership has nothing to do with it.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:36 AM
Jul 2012

Most gun owners don't go around trying to play gun hero and executing people. You're trying to pretend that all gun owners are extremists like you.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
72. You're not a noob so you know accusations of masturbation over guns
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:51 AM
Jul 2012

by candlelight are thrown about here in the Gungeon occasionally. You're not a noob so you also know how the closet fascists drop in with snarks that gunowners want blood to run in the streets. Please don't act clueless.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
77. Not all gunowners. Just you and the other crazies.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:58 AM
Jul 2012

What kind of person responds to a killing like this by saying "good shot"? Only a gun-crazed extremist.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
80. This might be news to you, but
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:01 PM
Jul 2012

it's either a good shoot or a bad shoot, there is no in between. It will also be ruled as such by a jury. Welcome to the real world.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
292. Apparently, accusations of mental illness are acceptable now...
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 10:31 PM
Jul 2012
At Sun Jul 8, 2012, 07:31 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

"Not all gunowners. Just you and the other crazies."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=48545

The reason for the alert was:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

You added the following comments:

Clear accusation of mental illness.

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this post at Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:40 AM, and voted 1-5 to keep it.

Thank you.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
296. Amazing, idin't it?
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 05:05 AM
Jul 2012

They can say anything they want and it stands. Mention regional bigotry however, and it's hidden in a heartbeat.

The jury system is a joke. I quit alerting.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
302. I just like to occasionaly confirm that the limits here are different than the limits elsewhere....
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 09:26 AM
Jul 2012

on DU.

I get a perverse sense of satisfaction from the publicly acknowledged hypocrisy.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
303. I rather suspect the post would have been yanked...
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 10:33 AM
Jul 2012

...if the accusation of mental illness had been made in the other direction.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
308. YES, the JURY SYSTEM HERE IS BROKEN.
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 08:17 PM
Jul 2012

If someone has already alerted on a post, your alert will have no effect. It will not be judged.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
307. So, I'm one of the "crazies"?
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 07:58 PM
Jul 2012

DanTex

77. Not all gunowners. Just you and the other crazies.

What kind of person responds to a killing like this by saying "good shot"? Only a gun-crazed extremist.







I think it was a "good shoot" and say it was a "good shoot" so I'm instantly called a "gun-crazed extremist"?
 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
63. I'm finding that out
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:39 AM
Jul 2012

The only reason he hasn't gone on ignore is because I want to see what other far out statements he makes.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
67. You should just put me on ignore.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:45 AM
Jul 2012

Better yet, you can just post over at FreeRepublic, where whenever a gun hero executes a rowdy drunk guy, or shoots a fleeing teenager in the back, there won't be any pesky liberals to ruin the party by pointing out that a person actually lost their life here, which could have been avoided if the gun hero had decided to just leave and call the cops instead of "Standing His Ground".

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
73. Naw
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:53 AM
Jul 2012

your views on legal conceal carriers are so far in left field that I get a good chuckle at your posts. It reassures me that the gun control movement is pretty much kaput.

Nice reference to FreeRepublic although I have never been there.
The violent drunk that lost his life, while tragic, is wholly responsible, not the person who tried to get away.

You really are losing this round with your on the moon comments.
Just keep being yourself.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
74. Lacking logical dialogue, I predict the personal attacks will start in
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:54 AM
Jul 2012

oh wait, now you're a right-winger that does circle-jerks over at Free Republic. Wow, guess he told you!

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
52. grasping for straws already?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:24 AM
Jul 2012

If one owns a gun then one is automatically an NRA plant? Comparing the Zimmerman case to this? I read your post several times and seem to have missed where you faulted the drunk whatsoever, accepting that drunken assault is normal is odd to me. Maybe I'm not understanding your personal culture/upbringing/sense of decency, is drunken assault a common everyday thing in your family? If so, then I'll work with that so as to better understand the lust you seem to exude for bloodshed.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
55. LOL. Lust for bloodshed? From a guy who is celebrating this execution?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:30 AM
Jul 2012

Yes, the drunk was wrong to be drunk and picking fights. He should be arrested and tried, and if found guilty, he should go to jail. This is obvious.

The gun hero who executed the drunk guy was wrong also. The difference is that nobody is defending the drunk guy, or even celebrating his actions. Killing a person is much more severe than getting drunk and picking fights.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
66. Your solution only allows arresting the drunk after he injures innocents.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:43 AM
Jul 2012

"Yes, the drunk was wrong to be drunk and picking fights. He should be arrested and tried, and if found guilty, he should go to jail. This is obvious.

The gun hero who executed the drunk guy was wrong also. The difference is that nobody is defending the drunk guy, or even celebrating his actions. Killing a person is much more severe than getting drunk and picking fights."


Well, so far the basis for the antis in this thread is "Oh the poor defenseless drunk".

Your scenario in this post seems to deal with the problem only after the drunk has put someone in the hospital. Tell you what, while you are waiting for the cops to show up, you are more than welcome to hug the drunk in order to encourage him to stop rubbing your face into the asphalt. If you don't mind, post a link to the Youtube vid when your brain stops bleeding and you're released from the hospital.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
70. Actually, what the progressives in this thread are saying is that...
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:50 AM
Jul 2012

...a person actually lost their life here. No trial, no due process. Yes, he was doing something wrong, but getting drunk and picking fights shouldn't be punished by death.

I really don't understand how difficult it is for you to grasp this. Who said anything about waiting for the drunk to put someone in the hospital? All the gun hero had to get in his car, drive away, and call the police.

Oneka

(653 posts)
230. Hey Karnak
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 01:55 AM
Jul 2012

How can you possibly assume that the "gun hero" in this case was physically able to just, get in his car, and drive away, did he even drive to the store? Do you in fact know anything about his physical abilities? or if he even owns a car?

Getting drunk and picking fights, is not at all consistent with the actions of the dead guy.
Assault and battery, is =/= getting drunk and picking fights.

This mans death was not a punishment, it was a repercussion, "I really don't understand how difficult it is for you to grasp this."

This would have ended so much better if the drunk had simply gotten in his car, and driven away, assuming he had a car, of course.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
106. You are defending the drunk guy.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:53 PM
Jul 2012

You keep downgrading his actions from "assault and battery" to merely "rowdy and picking fights". There is a huge difference between those two. That is defending the attacker.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
53. In the other thread, I pointed out that the referenced article was lying about that.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:29 AM
Jul 2012

Perhaps you should have clicked through to the original news story linked in that threads OP article.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=48112



 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
76. No. I wasn't.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:56 AM
Jul 2012

Link through to the original news report that the previous threads' OP was referencing.

Due diligence: I'm sure someone with your claimed academic credentials is familiar with the term, even if you don't seem to approve of it.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
86. I'm having fun
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:14 PM
Jul 2012

watching you getting your derriere handed to you and so far I haven't seen anyone agree with your comment about gun owners.
Gee, I wonder why that is?

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
93. So am I! Yay us!
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:23 PM
Jul 2012

Plus, you learned about apostrophes today. What a great day for you: learning and having fun at the same time!

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
104. You are wrong. Here, I'll lay it out for you again....
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:46 PM
Jul 2012

The OP:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117248035

The article the OP linked to:
http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2012/07/man_kills_attacker_at_northeas.php

The line in that article, with the imbedded link to the original news report:

Witness told the DMN that the shooting was uncalled for, though it's a safe guess the shooter, who has a concealed handgun license, will walk.


The news report at the imbedded link:
http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2012/07/man-dead-in-far-northeast-dallas-shooting.html/


Now, feel free to cite where the original news report states what is claimed in the Dallas Observer article.

Or, feel free to retract your absurd statements.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
105. Here:
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:50 PM
Jul 2012
Witnesses stayed at the scene for hours after the shooting. One man called the shooting, “people being crazy.”

“It wasn’t worth the loss of life,” said William Powell, who witnessed the fight.

HALO141

(911 posts)
278. Anyone claiming any sort of "academic credentials"
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 03:28 PM
Jul 2012

should really display a greater command of grammar and punctuation. *shrug*


And what's this "gun hero" nonsense??? I really am perplexed at the tendency of rabid anti's to continuously invent new pejoratives to spit at their opponents. They should really just save themselves the effort and stick with the original, "poopie-head."

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
71. your reading skills suck
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:50 AM
Jul 2012

the shooter did try to get away. The article said so.

The second customer also retreated from the store while the man continued striking him, police said.

Once in the parking lot, the second customer pulled out a handgun and shot the man, Mitchell told NBC 5.
He had the sense to try, just did not succeed for whatever reason. Talk about judge, jury, and executioner with no facts.
Your critical thinking skills suck even more. Who are these other witnesses and what did they base their opinions on?
Friends of the dead guy?
Bigoted towards what group the shooter happened to be a member of?
Philosophically opposed to someone defending themselves?
Or just thought shooting is too unmanly?
 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
78. They won't be happy until
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:59 AM
Jul 2012

the shooter calls 'timeout' and puts his CCW in his vehicle, guzzles a fifth of tequila, then goes toe to toe with the perp.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
89. Witnesses:
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:18 PM
Jul 2012
Witnesses stayed at the scene for hours after the shooting. One man called the shooting, “people being crazy.”

“It wasn’t worth the loss of life,” said William Powell, who witnessed the fight.


There's no evidence at all that the gun hero was ever in any real danger. It's really very hard to get away from a drunk guy trying to pick a fight. A normal person would just get in his car, drive away, call the cops. You know, like the first customer did.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
94. and this witness is?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:28 PM
Jul 2012

and you assume he was picking a fight, you assume the second person had the same ability to get away as the first person, you assume the second person was not targeted for some specific reason.

There is no evidence to back up your assumptions from the article other than one witness who may or may not be credible. As Oliver W. Holmes put it
"detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife".

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
101. LOL. You guys are so desperate to vindicate the gun hero.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:42 PM
Jul 2012

Yes, I'm sure the witnesses were lying. And I'm sure the drunk guy was specifically targeting the second person, because that's so characteristic of drunk people.

I guess you go with whatever unlikely story that imagination can come up. Anything to defend the glory of a gun hero!

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
107. Better than convicting solely because he CCW's.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:54 PM
Jul 2012

That's a common lust here, hate the CCW no matter what, guilty until proven innocent...OMFG-WITNESSES-SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
116. no, just seeing your bullshit for what it is
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:03 PM
Jul 2012

I'm not doing anything the cops aren't doing. They are asking the same questions. I did not say he was lying. My point was "so what makes him the authority anyone should listen too." Not trying to vindicate anyone. Protect him from a lynching maybe, but not vindicate. The lawyers, when it comes to that, will be asking the same questions. You are reading something in the article that isn't there.
I don't know what drunks to, or this drunk does. You don't know either. For all of your rants about rational thinking, you are not displaying it.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
95. "William Powell" wasn't the one getting his head stomped.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:28 PM
Jul 2012

“It wasn’t worth the loss of life,” said William Powell, who witnessed the fight.

So William, you speak from experience? When was the last time somebody cleaned your clock in a liquor store parking lot? Did you pepper spray them?

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
102. That's right. Attack that witness! Maybe he's an evil gun-grabber!
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:44 PM
Jul 2012

Who cares what the witnesses say. We're talking about a gun hero and his quest for glory!

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
265. So, have you abandoned your defense of the lie in the jpak cite?
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 10:46 PM
Jul 2012
Witness told the DMN that the shooting was uncalled for


Which story are you backing now?

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
96. yeah and sometimes drunk men beat their wives
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:32 PM
Jul 2012

those women should have "the good sense just to leave," right?

hack89

(39,171 posts)
194. The guy did leave - just like the first guy
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:35 PM
Jul 2012

the difference is that the drunk followed the second guy.

aikoaiko

(34,127 posts)
301. He wasn't trying to pick a fight, he WAS fighting. He WAS assaulting someone.
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 09:25 AM
Jul 2012

The big difference between Zimmerman and this case are the witnesses to the entire event.

 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
36. Not a rowdy drunk that was singing loudly out of tune or pissing on mailboxes
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:56 AM
Jul 2012

but one that was committing assault.

That's a pretty key fact in this case.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,470 posts)
49. When I was a rowdy drunk...
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:22 AM
Jul 2012

...no one shot me. I guess I was lucky. I was in my 3rd year in college. One Friday night a few of us had a lot of beer and got rowdy. I "liberated" a cylinder of helium from the Chemistry department and we inflated about 300 balloons and filled a teacher's office from the ceiling to about 3 feet from the floor for his upcoming birthday. No one even drew a gun!

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,470 posts)
120. I don't know.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:05 PM
Jul 2012

I assaulted the Chem Lab, the helium, a teacher's office (and indirectly the teacher using the balloons as a booby trap) and don't forget the countless balloons...

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
88. i knew a woman who killed her "rowdy dunk" husband
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:17 PM
Jul 2012

during the middle of her upteenth beating. shot him dead. jury found her guilty of murder and sentenced her to probation.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
204. when I was a kid
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:23 PM
Jul 2012

one of my classmates shot his drunk step father. "Dad" was in a drunken rage beating the kid's mom to death. The kid put an abrupt end to it. The DA and family court judge decided it was justifiable even under Wyoming's duty to retreat law in the 1960s.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
12. Offering $100 not to beat you to death is even cheaper.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:56 AM
Jul 2012

Really, the drunk is trying to cave your head in but all you need to do is think fast. Grab your wallet and shove a benjamin in his face, repeat until the assailant wants a hug. Is that enough kumbaya for you?

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
26. I'll ask again.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:24 AM
Jul 2012

What are the people who do not have a weapon suppose to do?

Are you suggesting that all citizens carry and make decisions like this? To shoot dead any aggresor?

Why do you think people take self defense classes when they could just get a weapon? Why a hand gun, why not pepper spray??

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
28. Good Question: Why a hand gun, why not pepper spray??
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:33 AM
Jul 2012

And the answer is, because it's not really about self defense and personal safety. It's about the glory of shooting down bad guys and then bragging to your gun buddies.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
31. Now I know that your just another typical
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:43 AM
Jul 2012

gun grabber. Your perception of conceal carriers is so much crap it boggles the mind.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
62. When you insult someone, you should really try to get your grammar right.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:38 AM
Jul 2012

Otherwise you just end up perpetuating stereotypes about pro-gunners...

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
35. YUP, ask LEO's about pepper spray vs drugged-up perps.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:53 AM
Jul 2012

Ya know, you may be onto something, LEO's don't need guns either, just a can of pepper spray!

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
37. because that is what he had
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:56 AM
Jul 2012

and it is about self defense and personal safety. If you seriously think he is going to be bragging to his gun buddies, you don't have the slightest clue.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
41. They should carry both if anything.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:01 AM
Jul 2012

They should have options to avoid a deadly decision. That isn't asking much imo.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
42. I agree
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:04 AM
Jul 2012

but some states don't allow the carrying of pepper spray so that kind of narrows the options. Luckily, my state does.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
50. I believe you are a good person.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:24 AM
Jul 2012

I hope you never have to use a gun. They should make gun holsters with a compartment for pepper spray.

Not only would that help in court, that you used option A, but also in your own mind...that you did all you could.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
58. Thank you
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:35 AM
Jul 2012

as I believe you are also. I look forward to reading your posts.

I sincerely hope I never have to use my gun. If I did through no fault of my own, I would not, in the words of another poster here, go bragging to my friends that I got to shoot someone. No one here has ever said that and we would not tolerate it either, I would feel deep remorse and deep anger that I was forced to do so.
Those of us that choose to conceal carry do so to defend ourselves on the very small chance that we would need to, we are not bloodthirsty ghouls looking to shoot and or kill another human and then go bragging about it.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
69. I don't support the bloodthirsty bragging language.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:48 AM
Jul 2012

It's just hard for me to wrap my head around the fact that people across this country are solving fistfights and assault with deadly force. There just has to be something in between...that's not who we are.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
79. I agree, but neither of us were there
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:00 PM
Jul 2012

and we don't know how close he might have been to being beaten to the point where he would be helpless. The drunk's death, while a sad tragedy, was the drunk's fault, not the man getting a beating, and, the shooter did try to get away but was followed outside where the assault continued.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
97. I don't have any answers, permatex.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:36 PM
Jul 2012

However, these SYG laws open a 55 gallon drum craziness. I just don't think the average person is qualified to make a clear decision on when their life is in danger. People are gonna die and people who carry will be put in prison. That is why I suggested options, for the good of everyone.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
103. Now here's where you lose the argument
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:45 PM
Jul 2012

He didn't try to stand his ground, he tried to leave the area but was followed out where the assault continued. I disagree that the average person isn't qualified to make a clear decision on when their life is in danger. If I'm getting an ass kicking, I sure as hell will know when my life is in danger.

Are you aware that more people die because of fists and feet every year than die of guns?
Something to ponder.

Thanks for the civil conversation. I'm sure we will disagree in the future but at least we can do it civilly.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
109. He stood his ground at some point.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:56 PM
Jul 2012

But yes, we agree to disagree and we can be civil in doing so.

Good health to you and yours, my friend.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
113. He may very well have been still trying to get away but was unable to at that time
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:00 PM
Jul 2012

Regardless, there will be an investigation and if charges are warranted, then the DA will file them.

Good health to you and your family also my friend.

HALO141

(911 posts)
310. We'll see.
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 03:29 PM
Jul 2012

As I said before (somewhere, maybe in one of the other threads on this item) the Dallas D.A. is known for prosecuting EVERY shooting, regardless of the circumstances. I expect that the victim in this case will be charged with manslaughter, at the very least. Being charged doesn't always mean those charges are warranted. From the information presented, this shooting sounds legally justifiable but I'm not the one conducting the investigation so I'll have to reserve judgement.

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
311. When he takes it before a Grand Jury, as required by Texas law,
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 08:54 PM
Jul 2012

The jury could prefer the charges, change them, or no bill. In the latter the D.A. is shit out of luck.
Also if no billed, found innocent or not guilty, the family of the drunk can not sue in civil court according to Texas law.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
127. Why should lawful persons EVER be required to retreat in the face of criminal action?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:16 PM
Jul 2012

At what point can I stop retreating?

Why does a criminal's "right" to commit a crime outweigh my Rights to peacefully go about my lawful business?

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
117. Wow. Just... wow.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:03 PM
Jul 2012
I just don't think the average person is qualified to make a clear decision on when their life is in danger.


Holy. Fucking. Shit.

So, who does get to make that decision? Where are they? Are they going to be there when in incident like this occurs, so as to give the victim permission to defend themselves?

Are YOU going to be there to make these judgement calls?

Yeah, I didn't fucking think so.
 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
125. I'm having a Beavis moment.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:12 PM
Jul 2012

97. I don't have any answers, permatex.

However, these SYG laws open a 55 gallon drum craziness. I just don't think the average person is qualified to make a clear decision on when their life is in danger. People are gonna die and people who carry will be put in prison. That is why I suggested options, for the good of everyone.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Seriously, this member has me stupified to that extreme.


edit to add: apologies to Beavis!

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
145. Republicans build prisons with glee.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:59 PM
Jul 2012

There will always be a cell for someone who makes a piss poor decision and kills someone, including you.

I'm just going to have to trash the whole gun group threads. Most of you never give an inch...not even listen.

So, let's just stop here.

 

Marengo

(3,477 posts)
297. Why would a reasonable person listen to anything you have to say...
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 08:08 AM
Jul 2012

after issuing such an absurdity as this:

"I just don't think the average person is qualified to make a clear decision on when their life is in danger."

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
133. Onset of sudden attack is a legal qualifer for self-defense.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:20 PM
Jul 2012

If you are minding your own business and someone suddenly attacks you then you are allowed to defend yourself with lethal force. The law does not require you to discern why you are being attacked or at what level of injury to yourself the agressor will be satisfied and will stop the attack. You seem to forget that people can die from beatings.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
209. I guess this will last forever, since you don't get it.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:28 PM
Jul 2012

When you leave the house tomorrow, take something to handle those situations that are not life threatening.

Pistol whip them if you must. I'm seeing a whole lot of bullshit written here.

You're not even willing to fight, kick and scream, yell for help, pepper spray the fucker, hold him off with an umbrella, run, get in your car, hit him with your shoe...not those options! The law allows me to shoot this dude and by god that's what he deserves.

The military has rules of engagement and perhaps they feel like their hands are tied, but they deal with it.

You must wake every day thinking it's your last. Why do you put yourself in that position?

Maybe you just want to get a rise from me? Is that your goal here? Well, i'm not caving!

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
207. Congratulations, you won the Valarie Hodges award
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:53 PM
Jul 2012

for half baked ideas and absurd statements.

I just don't think the average person is qualified to make a clear decision on when their life is in danger.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002904834

So who's judgement "is the average person" supposed to depend on?

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
210. Forget the dumbass remarks!
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:35 PM
Jul 2012

Do you think this man should have shot the drunk guy dead, or no?

I'm waiting!

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
213. That would be just about all of your posts...
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:11 PM
Jul 2012

Legally it looks like a clean shooting.

Whether or not it was a good shooting is still TBD since there is not enough information on the shooter as to their health and other options.


The fact is those under the influence who are violent are not rationale and often have a greatly diminished pain response. OC spray will do nothing and they will often charge a drawn weapon.

Should ones ninja skills be up to date, there are hand to hand options, but the use of them places you at markedly more risk that shooting them.

I've ninja'ed people in my day. The most recent was a couple of years back. I either destroy their elbow or their knee. Had one perp tell me later that I should have shot him...

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
219. Ok.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:57 PM
Jul 2012

Are you not satisfied with the results? Would you prefer that person dead, even now?

If you are the ProgressiveProfessor of Du, I may need to reconsider my being here.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
223. the dead person brought it on himself
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 12:04 AM
Jul 2012

the shooter did not bring getting the shit beat out of him on himself. There is a difference. If he was not a bully and kept his hands to himself, he would not be dead.

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
224. If you are referring to the events in my life, I am satisfied with the results
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 12:30 AM
Jul 2012

I made real time judgements and have lived with the outcomes. Been second guessed a few times which is why I support SYG. Legitimate self defense should not have location dependencies.

I am a progressive professor working at a California public university teaching in the geek fields. DU has multiple profs posting here. Some of us even know each other. Pro gun progressives are not nearly as rare as some believe.

In addition to on campus teaching, I also teach weekend weapons classes, mostly to GLBTQs and women, those traditionally more likely to be attacked and be unarmed. I focus on handguns and take a non-traditional approach

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
227. Good for you. Try to keep up!
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 12:56 AM
Jul 2012

Carry all the hand guns you want. If you don't equip yourself with the tools to ward off idiots that are drunk and stupid, you left yourself with no option but to fight or shoot. Is that what you teach? Is that your position?

A yes or no would suffice.

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
236. Complex issues deserve more than sound bite answers
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 09:12 AM
Jul 2012

Sound bite thinking is never a good thing. Your approach smacks of ideology with no real world experience and a level of situational capriciousness that is unsuited for the law. Your fetish for so called non lethal weapons shows just how little practical knowledge you have.

A real life threatening event can be a real brain burner. Fight or flight kicks in and what works for one may not work for another, regardless of size, training, and available weapons. The military understands this and trains appropriately. I try to do the same, but in a weekend its a tall order. However the concepts are the same.

Personally I am well equipped to deal with drunk and disorderly idiots. Like you I am quite large and I also have extensive training in martial arts. However there are many situations that martial arts, non lethal weapons, and confident bearing cannot address. For those firearms are the best answer until something better comes along.

Civilian self defense is not like being in law enforcement. The victim has *no* obligation to disarm or secure the perp and has every right to do whatever it takes to safely survive the situation. For most, the best answer is a handgun, and will remain so until we invent the phaser.

Be able to defend oneself effectively against counter revolutionary operatives and other criminals is also a progressive value.



 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
246. Can you, with 100% accuracy, and a guarantee of compensation for failure....
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 04:32 PM
Jul 2012

tell us what will be needed to fend off any attack, under any circumstances, at any time?

Can you do so for drunks only?

Are attacks by drunks not potentially lethal for the attacked victim?

Some specifics would suffice.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
216. based on the information,
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:30 PM
Jul 2012

yeah he should have shot him. Dead? You shoot to stop. There is no evidence of a summary execution. As for the witnesses, I actually don't give a shit because eye witnesses are unreliable and biased. That is why cross examination in court exists.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
245. A person used force to end a violent, potentially lethal attack on themself.
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 04:28 PM
Jul 2012

What is your problem?

 

Marengo

(3,477 posts)
299. Oh, forgot to ask...Do you include yourself in this analysis?
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 08:45 AM
Jul 2012

Are you an "average person" not qualified to make a clear decision as to whether or not your life is in danger?

 

Clames

(2,038 posts)
68. No it wouldn't.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:45 AM
Jul 2012
Not only would that help in court, that you used option A, but also in your own mind...that you did all you could. 


Fall in the same hole as firing a warning shot. If you use the pepper spray you state you didn't fear for your life or injury to the point requiring a deadly response. Typical anti-gunner armchair lawyering at work. Also, anyone with experience using such sprays knows they can easily get a dose for themselves by splash or moving into the aerosolized residue. What do you think that does to being able to properly use a gun if the situation further escalates? Not a smart choice.

Common Sense Party

(14,139 posts)
29. Use a firm voice
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:35 AM
Jul 2012

and give the drunk a good talking-to.

I just learned here on this forum that this is the way to stop 100% of our crimes.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
32. What part of "use $100 bills instead of a gun" do you not comprehend?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:49 AM
Jul 2012
What are the people who do not have a weapon suppose to do?
Obvious answer is to prepare for a potentially life-threatening beatdown, but have some $100 bills at your disposal.

Are you suggesting that all citizens carry and make decisions like this? To shoot dead any aggresor?
Read my post slower, I suggested $100 bills as an ammicable solution to both parties. You might wind up with a broken jaw and an empty wallet, but at least you didn't shoot the drunk!

Why do you think people take self defense classes when they could just get a weapon?
Why a hand gun, why not pepper spray??

No idea why they take those classes, maybe it makes them invincible?
Ask a LEO about the wondrous benefits of using pepper spray on a meth head.


 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
84. About as ridiculous as
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:09 PM
Jul 2012

As ridiculous as getting drunk and going into a store and randomly hitting people and then chasing someone out of said store for no reason with the intent of beating them SOME MORE.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
150. He'll get a chance to test his fighting skills
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 02:58 PM
Jul 2012

if he goes to prison. You don't expect to see every person walk for killing a person when they get slapped or punched, do you?

A serious reply would be nice. Or none at all.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
198. People die or are seriously injured by getting punched
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:44 PM
Jul 2012

6 percent of all murders are due to hands or feet. Toss in manslaughter and it is not an insignificant number. Why should I gamble that I won't be killed or seriously hurt just to ensure my attacker doesn't get killed?

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
57. You do know that the great majority of gunshot wounds do not result in death, yes?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:33 AM
Jul 2012

"self defense classes" are merely one part of a layered defensive strategy. Weapons are another part.

Did you know that being beaten can also be lethal? (So can defensive physical force.) I'm sure you do. At what exact point are we allowed to use potentially lethal tools for defense?

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
146. It's called problem solving, Texas style.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 02:22 PM
Jul 2012

Apparently, self defense classes are too expensive. Plus, you have to get up off the couch and move that big wobbly thing called a belly around. Pepper spray is for sissies and what if you can't tell which way the wind is blowing. Nah, with that trusty S&W on your hip, you can blow away anyone who looks at you the wrong way, which would be for you to judge.
This is a classic SYG case and the shooter will undoubtedly walk without going to trial. That some here consider these laws "progressive", boggles the mind.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
148. you did not read the article
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 02:30 PM
Jul 2012

the shooter retreated. Should I highlight and bold it for you too? So no, it does not have a fucking thing to do with SYG. I looks like you would be legal under DTR laws.

The rest of your rant, you need some coffee or Earl Grey.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
151. I read the article and other articles. I'll go with the witnesses.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:01 PM
Jul 2012
"Witness told the DMN that the shooting was uncalled for, though it's a safe guess the shooter, who has a concealed handgun license, will walk. this seems the prototypical example of the situation covered by Texas' 2007 Stand Your Ground law which "abolishes the duty to retreat if the defendant can show he: (1) had a right to be present at the location where deadly force was used; (2) did not provoke the person against whom deadly force was used; and (3) was not engaged in criminal activity at the time deadly force was used," as summed up by the Baylor Law Review. All of which seems to apply in this case."
http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2012/07/man_kills_attacker_at_northeas.php


Had two capuccinos already. Teatime in about 3 hours.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
157. I read it, and I read the original article.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:35 PM
Jul 2012

One thing.

2007 Stand Your Ground law which "abolishes the duty to retreat if the defendant can show he: (1) had a right to be present at the location where deadly force was used; (2) did not provoke the person against whom deadly force was used; and (3) was not engaged in criminal activity at the time deadly force was used,"
not relevant because the shooter retreated. Let me repeat The shooter retreated to the parking lot.


Police said the man, who was in his 30s, walked into EZ Trip Food Store shortly before 4 p.m. and slapped a customer across the face. He chased the customeroutside before walking back inside the store and hitting another customer.

The fight continued outside, where the second customer pulled out a handgun and shot the man, police said.
The man stumbled back inside the store before being taken to Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas, where he was pronounced dead. Police did not release his name Thursday.

Of course, if the witnesses disagreed with your preconceived view, they would be blood thirsty rednecks. I'll take the police full investigation, thank you.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
170. WTF does retreating to the parking lot have to do with anything?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:21 PM
Jul 2012

This is classic SYG, unless you think the parking lot was some walled off space from which no further retreat could be made. The shooter had a good understanding of the law and took full advantage of it.
I don't have a preconceived view. I'm just quoting those at the scene and those who interviewed them.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
180. he could not escape with out being more exposed
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 06:18 PM
Jul 2012

to danger. His chances of retreating further was existent. It was not mutual combat.

The shooter had a good understanding of the law and took full advantage of it.
Maybe, but I don't have a problem with it.

I don't have a preconceived view. I'm just quoting those at the scene and those who interviewed them.
Actually you do, you made a couple of unfounded assumptions. Witnesses in a newspaper article does not mean shit until it is under cross examination.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
182. And you know that because...
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 06:22 PM
Jul 2012

Actually, you don't know that. The eyewitnesses disagree with you. All the shooter had to do was leave the scene, get in his car, and not kill anyone. You're just making stuff up, in order to validate the actions of yet another wannabe gun hero.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
184. and you know he could leave the scene because
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 06:35 PM
Jul 2012

the attacker was in close range. He slapped one and was punching the second. He followed the second. That is a reasonable assumption based simple fucking logic. Until these witnesses are cross examined to verify their reliability, my guess is equally valid. Certainly more valid than your stupid and bigoted "executes rowdy drunk guy" value judgments. Some asshole throwing punches is not "rowdy" and defending yourself is not summary execution.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
193. YUP, witnesses do disagree, just ask Sharpton or Nifong or...oh wait.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:34 PM
Jul 2012

Witnesses might lie too, and the attorneys of the witnesses might not only disagree but also lie, good luck with your argument.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
195. Uh, because it was stated in the article that he retreated?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:37 PM
Jul 2012

Dude, are you posting while watching 24 or something?

MicaelS

(8,747 posts)
196. I don't care what the eyewitnesses said, or didn't say.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:39 PM
Jul 2012

Any lawyer will tell you eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. Let the police and the prosecutors do their work. I'm willing to bet the DA never takes this to the Grand Jury, and even if he does, knowing the attitude here in the Metroplex, I'm willing to bet the decision would be a No Bill.

 

Clames

(2,038 posts)
231. And you know that how?
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 01:56 AM
Jul 2012

How do you know he had a car there? Maybe he walked to the store. Talk about making stuff up

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
238. The witness statement, "...not worth a life..." is his judgement and would not be allowed in court.
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 10:07 AM
Jul 2012

As soon as he said it you would hear, "Objection, Your Honor", "Sustained. Jury will disregard that statement. Witness will please limit himself to observed facts."

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
149. You can see the flak i'm getting.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 02:51 PM
Jul 2012

It does boggle the mind. It hurts to think people will go through the trouble to get a handgun, but a stun gun or mace is just too much to carry along with that gun.

The only option they have when they get in a situation is a gun. It's not even open for discussion.

If you disagree, they come running like a mob. It's sad.

 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
153. Aren't stun-guns lethal weapons?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:23 PM
Jul 2012

That's the line whenever cops use them.

And mace doesn't always stop a person dead in their tracks. You've blinded them. And pissed them off. Great, if you're much bigger. Not so great if they've grabbed you and have a hundred+ pounds on you.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
165. I'm told they are "less lethal."
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:06 PM
Jul 2012

Given a choice, i'd much rather take my chances getting stunned than shot.

I'm a big guy and a former Marine. This drunk would have had a real problem dobbing me. Someone smaller, who doesn't have fighting confidence could use mace and run to their car and lock the doors.

The point i'm tyring to make throughout this thread is that we shouldn't be solving things like this with lethal force...that there are options.

Maybe the drunk guy would have woke up the next day, full of "i'm sorry." Perhaps that incident would be the trigger for him to clean his life up.

I should also say that those people who watched this are assholes for not grabbing this drunk and stopping this.
At least keep him busy til the cops arrive.

Now, one guy is dead and another might be fighting for his freedom.

 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
168. Ah, so *you are a big guy*
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:18 PM
Jul 2012

therefore you don't need a gun, therefore no one should have one.

Isn't that basically "I've got mine, screw you"?

Why can't all those old people or small people or physically handicapped people just be big healthy dudes instead? Frankly being weak is an immoral lifestyle choice that warrants being severely beaten on occasion by stronger people. Really why would they be weak and small if they didn't want to get beaten up from time to time?



Amiright?

(mace doesn't always stop the guy, and not everyone can "run to their car". Implying that people deserve to get beaten if they are small or slow seems a lot like blaming the victim).

/he could have woken up the next day feeling remorseful and changed his life. He could have woken up in jail after hospitalizing (or worse) someone else. He could have gotten away with it only to murder someone else later (with his fists or a car, doesn't matter in the end). He could have gone on to be president and declared war on Canada and ultimately lost, leaving us all in the thrall of the great white Canadian menace to the north. We don't know what "coulda" happened. We just know what he did: commit multiple physical assaults until ultimately he was stopped using violence, not persuasion. And we know with absolute certainty that he won't hurt anyone again.

//I'm a decent sized guy myself (not huge, but above average without false modesty). But there are plenty of people who could beat me up because either they are physically stronger, get the drop on me, more skilled, or just so drunk/drugged out that they aren't feeling any pain or capable of hesitating. Knowing that I would hesitate to forcibly disarm the rest of the population that on average is significantly smaller/weaker than I am.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
173. Now you're writing all my thoughts for me?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:50 PM
Jul 2012

Just pull that gun and shoot the next person that slaps you. That is all you can do, isn't it? You have no other way out I guess, even though I suggested several in this thread.

I can see a few ignores from this thread. It won't be any loss either.

 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
175. I used what you wrote
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 05:13 PM
Jul 2012

and filled in the blanks.

You're a big guy. Great. You don't ever have to worry about defending yourself. Great.

But acknowledge that others are not necessarily "big guys".

And that mace doesn't always work.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
178. I will acknowledge that.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 05:35 PM
Jul 2012

I'm not saying i'll win the fight because i'm a big guy either. I would just rather fight it out till the cops arrive than shoot them.

You never know how many times a person might punch you. Would you shoot them after the second one?
Seriously, at what point do you make that choice?

A person should do what it takes to get some help. We should do something short of killing. That's how I see it.

 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
179. Alright, fair enough
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 05:45 PM
Jul 2012

You would rather fight it out. I don't dispute that.

I'm just saying that there are many people who would feel threatened from the get-go and could very well be dead after the second punch.

To take an extreme example: if a 90 year old 100 pound woman were being pummeled by some belligerent drunk (not always the most chivalrous of people) I wouldn't demand she wait till the 2nd or 3rd or Nth punch before she could have permission to feel threatened. I certainly wouldn't expect her to fight it out at all. Nor would I blame her for being unable to run away from her assailant. If she were to shoot the SOB dead after the first attack I wouldn't blame her in the least. And good riddance.

I take that extreme and work backwards: at what point is it acceptable to demand an individual fight for his/her life because there's a reasonable chance that he/she will win? And frankly I can't draw a line between those who are too weak/frail to have a chance and those who may win out by bronze alone. Not a clear one anyway. Some MMA fighter? Yeah he's probably safe. An average dude? Depends.

And since this was the second guy to be assaulted after the first person ran I think it's safe to say that help wasn't on it's way. At least not in time.

If your personal ethical code forbids killing in such a situation I have no problem with that. I would be extremely hesitant to even consider drawing a gun on someone no matter the situation. All I'm saying is that sometimes it is justified.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
181. I get what you are saying.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 06:21 PM
Jul 2012

When a person beats on a helpless person, they deserve attempted murder charges. They should rot in prison a long time. They should be on death row if they actually do kill someone.

And it really sucks that criminals push this decision on victims like this.

And yes, I choose not to carry a gun and might become a victim some day. I'll take my chance and not begrudge those that do. But i'm a part of this society and I don't want to see life cheapened or people thinking that it's ok to gun down people because it's easier to do that than scrape a knuckle.

I'm 52 yrs. old. I'd like to think i've learned as the days roll. But you know that a lot of young people are gonna get a CCW and they are gonna get drunk and they will think it's ok to solve their issues by unholstering that weapon...they've already seen it. I don't want to see that. I don't think you want to see that either.

 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
185. I don't think we're really in disagreement here
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 07:00 PM
Jul 2012

at least not by much.

Sorry for going off on you earlier.

I would just say though that I don't think CCW will have much of an impact on those who are going to go out and get drunk and then look for trouble (using a gun). I think they would do that regardless.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
186. No need to apologize.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 07:30 PM
Jul 2012

You're speaking your mind. I respect that. Even if I were to think that you're wrong.

Stories like this are going to get a lot of scrutiny, and rightly so.

One day, I might help someone who is in trouble...like the people standing around in this story who didn't. And maybe one day, a person with a CCW will stop a person that tries to rob me or carjack me, or worse.

I started here with offering options, and thats all I wanted to do. So let me just end with the following scenario:

If you leave the house in the morning with a hand gun and forget your umbrella, you're not even prepared for rain.
However, had you taken an umbrella, it could have been used to fend of an idiot attacker.

Thanks for your kind words, 4th.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
169. I don't have your options. At 58 with health problems, the last thing I'm going to
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:18 PM
Jul 2012

do is let someone wail on me until help arrives.

One lucky punch, one lucky kick and I'm down for the count. There may be other options, but for me, they're severely, severely, severely limited.

What do I do?

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
174. Yell for help. I would help.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 05:01 PM
Jul 2012

People do help others, you know.

You can shoot em and take your chances I sure hope you don't, though.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
187. Good to know. I'll let you know my daily schedule and you can always
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 07:33 PM
Jul 2012

be there if I need help. If you CAN'T be there, I reserve the right to defend myself by all means necessary.

Deal?

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
188. Silly replies are not helping you.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 07:46 PM
Jul 2012

Do you want to adopt me so you don't have to live in fear? I have my own money! Do you have NO faith in your fellow man?

I might start using a walking cane. I don't need it but I can knock an attacker upside the head with it. That beats the hell out of dumping a shit load of bullets in them. Perhaps you would rather the bullets.

You have not learned a thing from this thread, have you?

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
189. I have very limited faith in my fellow man. No one wants to get involved
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 07:51 PM
Jul 2012

for fear of retribution. I trust only myself, no one else.

My reply was not silly. Failing any type of security for my person, I alone am responsible for it. I will defend it by any means necessary.

Consider this silly or consider it real life, your choice.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
191. I'm sorry you feel that way.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:00 PM
Jul 2012

Do you realize the odds that some will beat you to death tomorrow?

So, if you shoot someone, wouldn't you be doing it because you already have that fear...that you already anticipate it? Don't you have any way of fending off a drunk idiot, besides killing them? Thats what this citizen needs to know.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
239. If you try your method of self-defense in a real street fight you will get your ass whipped...
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 10:14 AM
Jul 2012

...and your head stomped. You have obviously never been in a real fight since you were a kid.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
200. You could use Diamond Daves patented NINJA CHOP!
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:49 PM
Jul 2012

A few of the antis here recommend it instead of shooting an assailant.



Personally, I think just wearing the cape would ward off anyone intent on bodily harm.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
254. It is sad, but you have to develop a thick skin around here.
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 06:12 PM
Jul 2012

Fear is a powerful force and fear mongers are the agents of divisiveness. Unfortunately, a number of our brethren have been sucked into this vortex of bogus logic, which has nothing to do with public or even personal safety, but selling more handguns and the endless supply of accessories that flood the market daily. It's really about power and greed manipulating the emotions of vulnerable people.
My advice is to ignore the flak. They are a loud minority. There are several reasonable members on the other side of the argument who are capable of having reasoned, intelligent conversations. Ignore the loud mouths. Most of them are here to disrupt, rather than engage.
But don't give up. They are trying to chase you away right now. There are very few of us on DU who can stomach much of the discussions around here. Most stay away and like some other controversial groups, the bullies try to take over by drowning out the voices of reason. Basic troll strategy.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
256. Have to honestly disagree
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 06:51 PM
Jul 2012

Most if not all of the bogus logic on this one is coming from your side.

There are several reasonable members on the other side of the argument who are capable of having reasoned, intelligent conversations. Ignore the loud mouths. Most of them are here to disrupt, rather than engage.
Sorry, anyone who says "the average person can't be trusted to judge when their life is in danger" while getting the crap beat out of them does not fit my definition of intelligent or reasoned. Claiming that the shooter should have "simply walked away" when the article clearly said that is what he was trying to do, also forces me to question "intelligent and reasoned".

 

Clames

(2,038 posts)
257. Loud minority?
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 07:29 PM
Jul 2012

You must not being paying much attention to the polls started here. Yourself, Hoyt, DanTex, ellisonz,bongbong, jpak, and a few others would make up the vocal minority. Disruptive, divisive, insulting, unoriginal, and for the most part would rather see this whole group deleted than have a civil conversation.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
270. Loud minority of DUers, not Gungeoneers.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 12:47 PM
Jul 2012

I think you are fully aware that you do not represent the majority of DUers, who do not support SYG, or the routine carrying of concealed weapons for so called, self defense. You are part of a fringe group of DUers, that spends most of it's time in the Gungeon, trying to convince other DUers that carrying a gun around is a smart thing to do.
I have civil conversations here on a regular basis with those who reciprocate. It is obvious from all the polls here that the Gungeon is loaded with pro gun carriers, including you. I don't know anyone who opposes gun ownership or proposes a total ban. You bandy words like anti and pro around, but I don't know what they mean. I support gun ownership. I support self defense. I even support using a gun for self defense, if there is no other option available. I do not support the ridiculous behavior of grown men walking around with guns, in constant fear of their lives.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
273. how many of those DUers actually understand what SYG is?
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 02:05 PM
Jul 2012

Much of what I have seen in progressive media is less than accurate in the letter of various SYG laws especially Florida's. If they actually understood how the laws work, the history and reasoning, and accurate information, I would be willing to bet many if not most would move from "against" to at least "agnostic."

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
274. Well, this is a subject where you and I have opposing takes on SYG.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 02:16 PM
Jul 2012

I think most people see it the way I do, which is basically an extension of Castle Doctrine. There is a huge difference between killing someone in defense of your home and family, and standing in the street "High Noon" style. It is pretty transparent that ALEC and the NRA sold this bill of goods to various state legislatures as a ploy to inflame and divide public opinion.
Now it has started to backfire, with corporate sponsors pulling out, ALEC is distancing itself.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
275. not clear at all
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 02:42 PM
Jul 2012

ALEC is simply a vehicle. Why should you or I give a rat's ass about ALEC's well being? There is not "High Noon" because the movie was about a duel. Simply by making that reference, you misrepresent the truth about the law. But then, most of the "antis" here would be opposed to defending inside the home and would equally oppose those who do retreat before firing. Should I provide the links saying that how more civilized it is to hand over the money or allow themselves be beaten? They don't use those specific words, but that is what they are saying. This thread is an obvious example. It is clear the shooter retreated. Based on the factual evidence in the article (witnesses opinion does not count, and would not be allowed in court.) this would have been a legitimate self defense case in a DTR state. The article specifically states that he tried to retreat while being attacked. Yet they failed to read or simply ignored that fact and pained the assault and battery victim as a "gun hero" and a "macho killer". How does that make them any different than the teabagger that doesn't understand or ignore that Medicare is a government program? Not much. Different issues, but the same lack of rational and honest thought and discourse.

That said, if the NRA, along with the voter suppression supporters, destroy ALEC, how is that a bad thing? If anything, it shows the oligarchs are willing to risk losing their corporate welfare out of fear bad press or a rerun of the French Revolution. Either way, if it destroys ALEC I'm all for it.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
281. I don't give a rat's ass about ALEC's well being, or the NRA's, or any other right wing org.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:00 PM
Jul 2012

To say that ALEC is a vehicle is like saying a Hummer is a vehicle. It doesn't alter the fact that they are both vehicles that symbolize arrogance and disdain for public safety and the environment.

"Should I provide the links saying that how more civilized it is to hand over the money or allow themselves be beaten? They don't use those specific words, but that is what they are saying.

Why use the words if they are not used and you cannot quote them? The word you do use is "antis". Anti what? Anti self defense? Anti gun? Anti is not a word, unless you include a qualifier.

It is not more "civilized" to hand over the money to an armed robber, it is more sane. We hear a lot of brave words from some of our macho friends, but I doubt any of them would shoot anyone over pocket cash. Carrying a gun doesn't mean you have to divorce yourself from common sense.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
283. they basically are.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:31 PM
Jul 2012

they function for their members.
Judging from many posts, anti gun and anti self defense are almost synonymous. What I find odd is that most of them are OK with Brinks cars, diamond couriers, etc with having CCWs. So, it is OK to defend the one percent's money, but not ones self. That is part of why the Dems have a problem with white working class and white rural people. That is why the left has a problem with rural areas in general. As I regularly whine and Orwell noted years ago
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2008/05/obama_and_orwell.html?fb_ref=sm_fb_like_chunky&fb_source=timeline

It is not more "civilized" to hand over the money to an armed robber, it is more sane. We hear a lot of brave words from some of our macho friends, but I doubt any of them would shoot anyone over pocket cash. Carrying a gun doesn't mean you have to divorce yourself from common sense.
It may or may not be more sane, depending if he really just wants the money or is a sociopath who will kill you any way. "Macho" does not have anything to do with it. We are not talking about pocket cash either. In the gas station case, it was an unprovoked attack for no apparent reason. Can you give an example mentioned here when it was clearly "about stuff"?

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
284. I didn't see where this was about robbery at all.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:38 PM
Jul 2012

Just a drunken bully acting stupid and getting himself killed. I have no sympathy for the drunk. I feel for the guy who shot him. Can you imagine how shitty he must feel? The worst thing I can imagine is feeling that no other option is available than to kill someone.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
285. I can think of worse feelings
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:45 PM
Jul 2012

but those you can heal from after awhile. Taking another human life for any reason, not so much. I had a neighbor who still had nightmares from WW2.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
266. "Are you suggesting that all citizens carry...?" No-one is suggesting any such thing, of course.
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 10:53 PM
Jul 2012

Please note that some peoples decision to not be armed is not a legal or moral limiting factor on others.

 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
39. Showing a belligerent individual who isn't thinking clearly that you have lot's of cash on hand
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:57 AM
Jul 2012

and won't defend yourself is a sure-fire way to get him to leave you alone.

Next up: if being stalked by a hungry lion, cover yourself in bacon grease and let it lick your hand.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
98. Unlikely...and in any case probably far less effective.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:37 PM
Jul 2012

Last edited Mon Jul 9, 2012, 10:00 AM - Edit history (1)

The number of classes in any effective martial art that one could purchase for the price of a handgun and the ammunition needed for frequent practice at the shooting range would not put you in a position of being able to count on your training for self defense. Three of four months of classes is more likely to give a person just enough misplaced confidence to get themselves beaten to a pulp by a street thug with dozens of real fights under his belt.

If you're a small person (like me: 5/3" 109lbs), even years and years of serious martial arts training wouldn't be enough to give me a very good chance of prevailing against someone twice my size and with experience in real fights. It only works that way is shitty action movies and those ridiculous "defense classes" that have people beating on someone lumbering around in a padded suit, not in the real world.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
118. Well, if you can't use your hands,
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:05 PM
Jul 2012

pepper spray, a rock, or a stick, I guess you're gonna have to shoot em. Why are less lethal options never discussed? Why go from A straight to Z?

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
128. perhaps for a couple of reasons
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:16 PM
Jul 2012

part of it is that they are not as effective and have limitations like range and wind deflection (my dream SD weapon would be a Star Trek phaser with a stun only setting, I would pick it over my Ruger or Walther, assuming I carried. Since I am either in Mayberry, the woods, or college campus the issue is moot to me.)
another might be some confusion about legality.
Another could be simply be sucky marketing. They sell them at all of the same gun shops. Some states only allow FFLs to sell them.

Either way, we know it is not price. But it is a legitimate conversation worth having.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
139. I actually DO consider non-lethals a viable option.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:35 PM
Jul 2012

One has to accept a greater degree of risk if one is going to rely on non-lethals, though. Bottom line, they are not as effective. If one is willing to accept that greater degree of risk (not an unreasonable thing) then choosing something like pepper spray makes sense.

I should also point out that defensive gun usages in which no shot is fired (which would seem to be the more prevalent variety) are a legitimate consideration. A firearm would have considerably greater deterrent value, I would think.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
2. from what I gather
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:30 AM
Jul 2012
How much of a beating is a person supposed to take before they can shoot? Do our resident antigunners require that a person be dying from the beating first?
they want you to throw punches back while calling the cops. If you can't punch hard enough and you die in the process, tough shit.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
4. What would the victim do if
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:41 AM
Jul 2012

he didn't happen to have a weapon? Maybe he would have raised his hand in defense?

People who don't carry need to know.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
6. Run faster.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:46 AM
Jul 2012






edit with sarcasm tag before some lost soul actually takes me seriously about running faster.
 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
13. I'm 64 yo
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:57 AM
Jul 2012

not as spry as I used to be, what would you have me do in that situation? Take a beating or defend myself with the best tool available to me?

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
30. Pepper spray doesn't always work
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:39 AM
Jul 2012

especially on a drunk who is tuned up. I will use whatever is at my disposal to protect myself if I'm getting an ass whoopin, and if that means drawing my soon to be conceal carry gun and using it, then so be it.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
33. Will you agree to carry both?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:51 AM
Jul 2012

That way you are equipped to handle situations like this. Give yourself more options.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
38. I already carry a small container of pepper spray
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:57 AM
Jul 2012

and I OC also. But using pepper spray in such close proximity to another runs the risk of blinding yourself, but if I could use it safely, I would, nobody, except maniacs, want to have to shoot anyone despite what another poster said in this very thread.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
85. Victim gettin his a*s whipped (conversation)
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:12 PM
Jul 2012

Victim: Stop beating me or I'll use this pepper spray!
Perp: Use the spray, I don't care
Victim: Ok, you asked for it, but first, can we change places? The wind is at your back and I don't want to get a dose in my eyes
Perp: Fool (As beating continues)

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
87. On TV, the wind always blows in the right direction.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:17 PM
Jul 2012

So I hearby reject your reality and substitute my own!

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
140. Will you never give any ground on this issue?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:39 PM
Jul 2012

There isn't really any discussion, if not. Even the police avoid deadly force with a host of less lethal weapons. For drunks, especially. If you fear for your safety, get pepper spray, a stun gun, and a .45. Don't set yourself up with only one option. Why won't you get onboard with this?

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
141. Won't you?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:44 PM
Jul 2012

Your options require getting up close, within arms distance or closer. One lucky punch or one lucky kick and your lights are out.

I'm 58 with health problems. I'd NEVER get that close. It'd be an a*s-whipping waiting to happen.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
142. Maybe it's because I don't watch television so
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:47 PM
Jul 2012

all I see everyday with my own eyes is the reality of that which is. I would suggest you take a stroll through the hood sometime, get back to me with your impressions, just keep them honest.
That said, enjoy your stroll........and be ready to run for your life.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
143. You forgot to tell him to have plenty of Benjamins to hand out in case
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:49 PM
Jul 2012

he's attacked. That'll stop the attack for sure.

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
158. Lol! Now that isn't a bad option.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 03:38 PM
Jul 2012

You can get the money back after his conviction and your lawsuit.

sarisataka

(18,220 posts)
163. Not to be a PITA
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:03 PM
Jul 2012

but if a person starts carrying all of that, won't certain folks chime in that now you are just acting out cop wannabe fantasies?

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
167. Probably. But if a gun is all you have,
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:16 PM
Jul 2012

lethal force is all you have. And people shoot to kill.

Raise your hands and fight or pull the gun. So, if you're not a fighter you're a shooter. That seems to be all.

sarisataka

(18,220 posts)
172. True if your only tool is a hammer
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:30 PM
Jul 2012

every problem looks like a nail.

Sometimes however the problem is a nail. Some just cannot accept that.
You do seem to allow the possibility

DocMac

(1,628 posts)
176. If a guy jumps in front of you with a knife,
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 05:17 PM
Jul 2012

shoot em. Shoot em twice. If they try to car jack you, shoot em. To me, a fist fight doesn't deserve deadly force.

Those who think it does, do it your way. Shooting an unarmed person seldom looks good.

We'll see how it works out for the guy in this story.

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
212. Effective your view of what is appropriate is very dependent on the victim
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:02 PM
Jul 2012

A 90 lb woman in her 60s has a better case than a big guy in his prime who is a former marine. The former, just about anybody would consider reasonable. The latter could be heavily second guessed.

That is one of the main reasons SYG is gaining popularity. Such after the fact second guessing has no place in the law.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
248. "...a fist fight doesn't deserve deadly force."
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 04:49 PM
Jul 2012

A fist fight is deadly force.


"Shooting an unarmed person seldom looks good."

You seem to believe that having only hands and feet equals being unarmed.


The entire point of martial arts, and the fact that more people are beaten to death than killed with rifles and shotguns, entirely destroys your assumptions.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
247. "But if a gun is all you have, lethal force is all you have."
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 04:45 PM
Jul 2012

"That seems to be all."

You seem to live in a binary process, devoid of actual logic and reason.

"That seems to be all.", indeed....

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
16. depending on size an muscular strength
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:01 AM
Jul 2012

of the two, and it seems the drunk had a much greater advantage, my guess the victim would be in the hospital or dead. He already tried to retreat before the drunk caught up with him and started pounding on him again. There is no logical reason to assume the outcome would have been good.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
21. I think some here actually want a CCP to get his skull cracked open
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:10 AM
Jul 2012

in a liquor store parking lot. You know, as long the drunk goes home safely.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
22. That's my take on it also
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:15 AM
Jul 2012

although I really hope I'm wrong, but judging by a few of the comments here, it would seem so.

shadowrider

(4,941 posts)
90. You're relatively new to this forum but I must admit
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:21 PM
Jul 2012

You're very close in your assessment. Actually, many would accept the ccp to get his skull cracked open. The victim is permitted to defend himself with either ninja skills, cans of beans, a handy staff or a bicycle tire. Anything as long as it isn't a gun. See, in this group, the perp gets lots of love and the victim who defended himself (with a gun) is the bad guy.

But you're catching on quick.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
136. It isn't our (CCWers) fault if you choose to limit your options.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:27 PM
Jul 2012

You make a choice and you live or die with the consequences of that choice.

enki23

(7,786 posts)
34. And yet, somehow, the first attacked customer survived his or her brutal beating...
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:51 AM
Jul 2012

and didn't even seek medical attention. Must have been one tough sumbitch.

I'm not sure where I stand on this event in any case, especially without more information, but the excessively gun-loving sorts seem to be stupidly, almost gleefully exaggerating the imagined fearsomeness of the beatings being dished out by "the drunk". It seems to me that there might... there just *might* be a bit of exaggeration of the intense danger this poor little carrier of a concealed deadly weapon may actually have been in. That is, unless they have information not contained in that article to back up their claims that deadly force was justified against someone who was temporarily, and very likely permanently mentally impaired, and who may or may not have posed sufficient threat to justify resorting to a course of action the shooter had every reason to expect to have fatal consequences for his or her target.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
40. "excessively gun-loving sorts" - Diane, is that you?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:00 AM
Jul 2012

"I'm not sure where I stand on this event in any case, especially without more information, but the excessively gun-loving sorts seem to be stupidly, almost gleefully exaggerating the imagined fearsomeness of the beatings being dished out by "the drunk". It seems to me that there might... there just *might* be a bit of exaggeration of the intense danger this poor little carrier of a concealed deadly weapon may actually have been in. That is, unless they have information not contained in that article to back up their claims that deadly force was justified against someone who was temporarily, and very likely permanently mentally impaired, and who may or may not have posed sufficient threat to justify resorting to a course of action the shooter had every reason to expect to have fatal consequences for his or her target.


I could be wrong, but you seem almost disappointed that the CCW didn't suffer life-threatening injuries. Ray Charles could figure where you stand on it.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
46. did you read the article?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:08 AM
Jul 2012

If so not very well. The first was able to get away, the second one could not.

"the drunk". It seems to me that there might... there just *might* be a bit of exaggeration of the intense danger this poor little carrier of a concealed deadly weapon may actually have been in. That is, unless they have information not contained in that article to back up their claims that deadly force was justified against someone who was temporarily, and very likely permanently mentally impaired, and who may or may not have posed sufficient threat to justify resorting to a course of action the shooter had every reason to expect to have fatal consequences for his or her target.
It seems to me you did not actually read the article well and process the information without an ideological filter. Since bare hands kill more people than "assault weapons" in fact, two times more than all long guns combined, I would call that a real threat. Since he did try to retreat, as the article said, I would hardly call it "looking to kill someone" so you speculating based not on any information given, but what you think with your own bias.

this poor little carrier of a concealed deadly weapon
so you side with violent drunks and bullies against someone minding his own fucking business with no intent to harm anyone?

enki23

(7,786 posts)
217. I can't possibly take anyone seriously when they write something like what you did.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:36 PM
Jul 2012

"It seems to me you did not actually read the article well and process the information without an ideological filter. Since bare hands kill more people than "assault weapons" in fact, two times more than all long guns combined, I would call that a real threat"

That's called a "base rate fallacy." And I don't mean a run of the mill base rate fallacy. I mean that has to be the grandaddy of all base rate fallacies. That's freaking phenomenal. You can't actually be serious with this shit, can you?

I can play this silly game too. The common cold is far more deadly than a nuclear weapon. It's killed <insert ass-derived number> times the number the people ever killed by nuclear weapons. The common cold is a real threat. In light of the millions of humans who have died to the common cold, surely it poses enough of a threat to justify shooting people who look like they might sneeze in your vicinity.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
221. the fact remains
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 12:00 AM
Jul 2012

bare hands are deadly weapons. If there is a difference between size and strength, there is a disparity of force. Since the shooter was unable to outrun the attacker, it was a clear threat. The shooter tried to retreat.
Since you were not there, and don't know jack shit about the situation other than what the article says, you have no business judging the shooter's actions.
What was he supposed to do? Punch it out? If some drunken bully starts beating the shit out of someone for whatever reason, I fail to see the moral obligation to risk his life or health to satisfy your moronic sense of "civilization". I'm guessing if it were you, you would have used a weapon.

I may have used a logical fallacy, but it is a fact found in the FBI UCR.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
65. 1. What evidence do you have that the attacks were of the same level and ferocity?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:42 AM
Jul 2012

2. What evidence do you have that the attacks were identically perceived by the victims?

3. Exactly how much of a beating must a victim endure before taking effective defensive measures? Please be specific.

4. "action the shooter had every reason to expect to have fatal consequences for his or her target" Did you know that the great majaority of gunshot wounds are non-fatal?

dtom67

(634 posts)
51. Screw this topic.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:24 AM
Jul 2012

as far as I am concerned, this should be a non-topic.The economy is where the Republican party threatens America most. Any time the Dems start to talk about corporate influence or economic inequality, all the right has to do is throw out a story about gun control or abortion and we run with it. All the while, stirring up the GOP base.

This is how the Repubs beat us.

By letting us do the work for them.

Like it or not. Many Americans want the right to keep and bear arms.

period.

right or wrong has nothing to do with it.

So,choose:

Rant about how we should go door-to-door confiscating all firearms, and thereby lose elections that might have helped the poor, the hungry and the uninsured,

or

Try to actually win in November by hammering the Right on its economic policies. This is where they are vulnerable. This is also where the greatest threat to our democracy lies.

The corporate takeover of our democracy is going on right now.

This is the war we should be fighting.

Arguing topics like gun control and abortion does not convert anyone to our side, no matter how irrefutably logical the argument is. It merely swells the ranks of the enemy at the voting booth.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
54. as long as Threads like this one:
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:29 AM
Jul 2012
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=48035

continue to get the Recs then we will conitnue to have an issue with getting Dems elected.

Thus the problem and the reason why this Group exists.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
108. So you don't think that gun control or abortion rights are worth fighting for?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 12:55 PM
Jul 2012

Are there any other issues where you'd like to see the Democrats cave to the right-wing crazies? How about we let them teach creationism in schools, and stop fighting for environmental regulation. And let's give up on LGBT rights as well. "Guns, God, and Gays", right? If we try hard enough, maybe we can out-right-wing the right-wingers!

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
121. WTF? Are you that ignorant? RW masturbates to gun control.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:07 PM
Jul 2012

Never heard of Brady or VPC? Jim Brady, Sarah Brady, do those names ring a bell? Ronald Reagan/Black Panthers/Mulford Act, Wiki is your friend. Maybe I should digress but I thought you knew WTF you were talking about.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
131. I was trying to give the poster SOME benefit of the doubt.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:17 PM
Jul 2012

Never said I had any sense so go easy on me!

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
135. Apparently he's never heard of Ronald Reagan.
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:26 PM
Jul 2012

Hopefully the poster has enough aptitude to use Google.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
130. LOL. Yes, gun control is so very popular with right-wingers!
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:17 PM
Jul 2012

Is there a limit to your delusions?

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
137. Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, in 2012...
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:29 PM
Jul 2012

...the NRA and the gun crazies are almost all right-wingers. Wayne LaPierre, Grover Norquist, Ted Nugent, etc.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
138. The NRA that endorses Democratic candidates?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 01:32 PM
Jul 2012

How about the Brady Campaign that gives President Obama an F?

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
197. Why do you let the NRA scare you so much?
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 08:42 PM
Jul 2012

Why invoke the NRA card every waking moment? Who cares?

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
214. Gun control? Of course not
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:17 PM
Jul 2012

Gun rights, abortion rights, voting rights, civil rights of course.

Private gun ownership is a progressive value. Gun control has racist and classist roots. Those that work against gun rights are neither liberal nor progressive and keep very bad company.

sarisataka

(18,220 posts)
171. This is why SYG is spreading
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 04:24 PM
Jul 2012

Two people assaulted without provocation. Both try to retreat. One succeeds for unknown reason. Second faces continued assault and defends himself.

All the armchair QBs (I hate using sports analogies) are saying "well you didn't retreat enough", "why didn't you drive away" (who says the victim didn't walk there), "use other options", "were you really in danger"


Everyone jumps up to defend the criminal and criminalize the victim.
Who here would say about a rape victim -she shouldn't have walked alone at night, she had other choices on what to wear, why didn't she retreat, she obviously was looking for it so probably really wanted it...
All ludicrous, unless a person used a gun to defend themselves.

 

Tejas

(4,759 posts)
205. She just LOVES Texas law (Hale v Tavai)
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 09:25 PM
Jul 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/21/us/no-indictment-in-fatal-use-of-gun-in-traffic-fight.html

But Nina Butts, a spokeswoman for Texans Against Gun Violence in Austin said the decision sends a dangerous message. "The grand jury says the murder was justifiable, but is it necessary to kill each other over broken side view mirrors."

Ms. Butts said Texans don't want a state in which ordinary citizens settle disputes with guns. "The bottom line is a person died over a side view mirror and we question whether it would have happened if Gordon Hale had not been permitted to carry the gun," she said. "This law is not about public safety, it's about selling and promoting guns."


................................................

JMHO, but I still believe Tavai getting out of his vehicle and walking over to Hales vehicle and reaching through Hale's window and beating him senseless might be the reason Tavai is dead.

 

Meiko

(1,076 posts)
208. When I was a young man
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 10:27 PM
Jul 2012

and had a lot of the scrapper in me I probably would have traded a few punches with the drunk, I was pretty feisty in my younger day's, but that was then and this is now. I am a lot older and have a multitude of health issues. I for one am not going to stand by for any amount of time and let somebody beat on me, drunk or not. I am going to defend myself as needed. If that means shooting and killing the attacker than so be it, the attacker made a bad life decision and will suffer the consequences of his actions.

I don't give a fat rat's ass about what some anti-gunner has to say about me defending myself. If I made a legitimate attempt to get away from the attacker and he pursued me, how far am I suppose to retreat? how much of a beating am I suppose to take? I am not talking about the shooting of a teenage boy by a block watch captain with bad decision making skills. I am talking about stopping an unprovoked violent attack on my person that could very easily result in death or serious and permanent injuries. Who is going to take care of me after I am paralyzed by the attacker?, you Mr. anti-gunner, yea right. As human beings we have certain rights and one of those is the right to defend ourselves.

You can argue until hell freezes over about how life would be so much better without guns and of this I have no doubt, but that's not the way it is. Until the time comes when the country has evolved to the point where we don't feel the need to kill each other, and that's the real issue here, then I will carry a gun and I will use it if I have to and I don't care what anyone else has to say about it, carry on.

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
215. When I was younger I followed much the same course
Sat Jul 7, 2012, 11:25 PM
Jul 2012

Except I would dance with them a little bit before I dropped them. The goal was a one hit knockout.

Today I no longer take that chance and just drop them. Sometimes with the ninja thing, sometimes with a weapon. Its situational.

AndyTiedye

(23,500 posts)
309. Maybe I Could Dance With Them Until They Drop
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 07:01 AM
Jul 2012
When I was younger I followed much the same course … Except I would dance with them a little bit before I dropped them. The goal was a one hit knockout.


Maybe I could dance with them until they drop. That might be my best option, particularly with a drunk.
I got no ninja training (was way tooo uncoordinated for that when I was younger) and I'm 5'6", so decking them wouldn't really have ever been an option anyway. A gun, if I had one, would most likely not be with me in the places I would be most likely to encounter drunks, i.e. in or coming out of a nightclub or bar, since weapons are not allowed in them.

geckosfeet

(9,644 posts)
251. "the attacker made a bad life decision and will suffer the consequences of his actions."
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 05:35 PM
Jul 2012

The shooter is not going to have an easy time of it either. He will have court appearances and he will have legal expenses.

When you kill someone, even if it may be justifiable, they don't let you just walk away.

 

Meiko

(1,076 posts)
261. I understand that
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 09:53 PM
Jul 2012

believe me. I don't know what his final outlay will be but it won't be cheap, lawyers don't work for free. Then there is the emotional end of it. Regardless of the circumstances most normal people are going to have remorse for killing someone, to what extent depends on the person I guess. I imagine it would be a lot of baggage for some people to carry around.

 

backwoodsbob

(6,001 posts)
229. self defense
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 01:45 AM
Jul 2012

defensible shooting..no doubt.
Weren't the cc people the one's that were supposed to get drunk and shoot people?Guess this one puts that to rest

 

Meiko

(1,076 posts)
235. Yep
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 05:13 AM
Jul 2012

just like we were suppose to get involved in shoot outs where numerous innocent people are shot....the list goes on.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
249. Hey, that's a point that was overlooked all through this thread....
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 04:55 PM
Jul 2012

With so many witnesses, how is it possible that all of them left unscathed?

Shouldn't 5 or 6 of them have been bleeding out in the parking lot?

 

Meiko

(1,076 posts)
250. At least 5 or 6
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 05:24 PM
Jul 2012

It would depend on the capacity of the magazine in the gun....that's how the cops do it, right? Just keep squeezing the trigger until the mag is empty.

 

Meiko

(1,076 posts)
253. That makes sense
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 06:11 PM
Jul 2012

if someone isn't beating on you. I would hope the clerk was smart enough to call the cops when he saw what was going on.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
255. And the guy gets to beat on you for five minutes until the cops get there.
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 06:32 PM
Jul 2012

Five minutes is a good response time for cops. Why do you want to give a violent felon the right to beat folks up?

 

orpupilofnature57

(15,472 posts)
258. I don't that's why I'd have him Legally
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 08:28 PM
Jul 2012

ARRESTED.And yes I'd take an ass kicking rather than KILL someone.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
260. and if the beating victim dies or requires a long stay in the hospital,
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 08:33 PM
Jul 2012

that is OK as long as he is taking one for your definition of civilization?

 

Meiko

(1,076 posts)
262. Wow!
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 09:58 PM
Jul 2012

are you serious?????? You would rather stand there and take a beating then defend yourself? How about your wife or girlfiend if you have one? would you stand by and watch while she was raped rather then defend her?

 

orpupilofnature57

(15,472 posts)
287. Is there anyway of defending your-self and my raped wife
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 09:29 PM
Jul 2012

besides a gun? Yes in my sheltered world there is , unlike you people that obviously live in a war zone!

 

Meiko

(1,076 posts)
294. You didn't answer my question but that's OK
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:50 AM
Jul 2012

I am glad you live a sheltered life but the rest of live in the real world. Of course when it is all said and done it is your right to get your butt kicked if that's what you want, enjoy it.

MicaelS

(8,747 posts)
267. As long as that is YOUR choice,
Sun Jul 8, 2012, 11:03 PM
Jul 2012

Last edited Mon Jul 9, 2012, 10:34 PM - Edit history (1)

And you don't try to foist it on others, and make them live by it.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
268. That's your choice.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 09:55 AM
Jul 2012

It is not, however, one that you (or anyone else) has the ethical right to mke for me.

 

orpupilofnature57

(15,472 posts)
289. Would never presume to mke that choice for
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 09:33 PM
Jul 2012

Anyone else ,including my Wife ,who would Drop them in a second ,with the Gun I didn't know about.

 

Spoonman

(1,761 posts)
269. Please Mr. Drunk Asshole,
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 11:52 AM
Jul 2012

stop kicking the shit out of me so that I might ask the clerk to phone the police.
If you will just spare me a moment, I assure you that there will be adequate time for you to beat my ass until you are exhausted while we wait for the authorities to show up.

Response to Spoonman (Reply #269)

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
276. If there was no stand your ground law what would have happened? Does having a gun present
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 02:49 PM
Jul 2012

mean you no longer give a shit about a human life? I think so.

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
280. Real Life(tm) is not that binary.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 04:00 PM
Jul 2012

Just because one has a gun does not mean all other options are now unavailable.

Also, did you actually read the incident articles? The man tried to retreat at least twice, leaving the store and trying to leave the immediate vicinity. Or should he have just taken a potentially fatal beating?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»UPDATE: Texas EZ Trip Sho...