24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
-->
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 14 of 72 1 2 12 13 14 15 16 71 72
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 69,503
Likes: 30
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 69,503
Likes: 30
Originally Posted by goalie
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


He’ll be charged. He fuqked up when he went and retrieved his weapon during a verbal argument. He became the aggressor at that point.
Luckily for the little Asswhole, he’ll have to face a Lubbock Jury and not one in Dallas or Austin.

My guess is hell be charged and tried, but found Not Guilty.


He told the guy to leave his property.

When he didn't leave, the property owner armed himself.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Well, other than he should have been armed from the start. 😉


He’d of stood a much better chance of not being charged if he had already had the gun on his person, as in having a handgun on his hip for open carry.
Which would have been perfectly legal under the TX Constitutional Carry Law.
He fuqked up by retrieving the rifle during a verbal argument, and became the aggressor at that point.


"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston
Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"

~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
GB1

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
R
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
R
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


That’s exactly where he fuqked up. You can’t point a gun at someone over verbal argument.
Like I mentioned in my above post, he became the Aggressor at that point.
And that’s gonna come back and bite him in the ass.


The verbal argument was over the minute the guy told him to leave his property. Watch the video, the gun was not pointed at "Dad" until he was shot.


Dog I rescued in January

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]



Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 23,506
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 23,506
Did I hear correctly that the dead ex-husband was saying something about how he was going to expose the affair to the wifey-Judge, between pussy boy and his whore?.....Then he get’s shot?

Couldn’t that be spun into a motive to shoot him by the prosecutor?

Thinking like the mind of Kenosha ADA Thomas Binger.

LOL

🦫


Curiosity Killed the Cat & The Prairie Dog
“Molon Labe”
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,997
Likes: 8
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,997
Likes: 8
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


Years ago I was living in Wyoming. There was a Truck stop between Green River and Rocks Springs where a young man and his mothers boyfriend had a shoot out. Kid won and was not charged. Argument was over the man beating the young guys mother. Once you tell someone to leave your property no matter what if they do not leave they are the aggressor. None of us know what kind of man the dead guy was before his timely death.



Dead guy was clearly the aggressor, the home owner allowed the aggressor to advance right face to face which is too close, and that is what allowed the aggressor to attempt to take the weapon.

Shooter walks



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
R
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
R
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
Originally Posted by JeffP
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by JeffP
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by antlers
What the family court system has systematically and by design done to this country is probably the worst thing that has ever been done to the people of this country.


And nobody ever wants to talk about fixing it.


Love your wife, stay at home, make it work. Like millions of families do.


If your mom keeps sucking my dick, should your dad make it work?

LOL

Never would have happened
But dad’s Should make better picks....


So why are we knocking the woman? There could be several good reasons the boy was not at the boyfriends house. And several very good reasons the parents were divorced and not the fault of the woman. Odd too that the father threw a fit instantly when he found the boy was not there. Temper issues?


Dog I rescued in January

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]



IC B2

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,471
Likes: 2
J
JeffP Offline OP
Campfire Tracker
OP Offline
Campfire Tracker
J
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,471
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by JeffP

Should have made a better pick....


That's incredibly insightful.

Thanks for contributing today.

LOL


I see you left out never happened


Decades of voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us just that.....
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,363
Likes: 3
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,363
Likes: 3
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by ironbender
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by ironbender
The mother should have just had the son there as the court ordered.

It almost seems like a setup.


Yep. Having someone there to video the whole thing makes it seem like they all knew something was gonna happen.

Who ran video from inside? Dead dude’s ex-MIL?




I'm pretty sure it was jag. Coincidence??


The dead guy's current wife shot the video from inside the car, she's the one who released the video.


Remember why, specifically, the Bill of Rights was written...remember its purpose. It was written to limit the power of government over the individual.

There is no believing a liar, even when he speaks the truth.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 69,503
Likes: 30
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 69,503
Likes: 30
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


That’s exactly where he fuqked up. You can’t point a gun at someone over verbal argument.
Like I mentioned in my above post, he became the Aggressor at that point.
And that’s gonna come back and bite him in the ass.


The verbal argument was over the minute the guy told him to leave his property. Watch the video, the gun was not pointed at "Dad" until he was shot.


I watched it. There’s no audio to the clip I watched.
He still fuqked up by retrieving his rifle.
TX Law has no justification for that. He brought a rifle to a verbal dispute, and at that point became the Aggressor.
You can’t threaten someone with Deadly Force unless the Justification For Deadly Force has been Met.
You can’t use Deadly Force or threaten Deadly Force for Trespassing in TX.
His only Justification would have been if he was in fear for his life, or he life of another.


"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston
Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"

~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Likes: 13
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Likes: 13
Originally Posted by JeffP
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by JeffP

Should have made a better pick....


That's incredibly insightful.

Thanks for contributing today.

LOL


I see you left out never happened


Please reduce the RPM on your intellect engine.

She gonna blow.

LOL


Originally Posted by Geno67
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual.
Originally Posted by Judman
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
Originally Posted by KSMITH
My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Likes: 13
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Likes: 13
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


He’ll be charged. He fuqked up when he went and retrieved his weapon during a verbal argument. He became the aggressor at that point.
”Section 2 of Texas Penal Code 9:31 Use of Deadly Force”
“2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; “




Mmm, no.

If he''s charged it will be due to public outcry and unknown political motivations.

At that point he had every right to arm himself.


Originally Posted by Geno67
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual.
Originally Posted by Judman
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
Originally Posted by KSMITH
My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
IC B3

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,471
Likes: 2
J
JeffP Offline OP
Campfire Tracker
OP Offline
Campfire Tracker
J
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,471
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by JeffP
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by JeffP

Should have made a better pick....


That's incredibly insightful.

Thanks for contributing today.

LOL


I see you left out never happened


Please reduce the RPM on your intellect engine.

She gonna blow.

LOL


Sure ....
beaver Mensa award for you


Decades of voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us just that.....
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,125
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,125
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


That’s exactly where he fuqked up. You can’t point a gun at someone over verbal argument.
Like I mentioned in my above post, he became the Aggressor at that point.
And that’s gonna come back and bite him in the ass.


The verbal argument was over the minute the guy told him to leave his property. Watch the video, the gun was not pointed at "Dad" until he was shot.


I watched it. There’s no audio to the clip I watched.
He still fuqked up by retrieving his rifle.
TX Law has no justification for that. He brought a rifle to a verbal dispute, and at that point became the Aggressor.
You can’t threaten someone with Deadly Force unless the Justification For Deadly Force has been Met.
You can’t use Deadly Force or threaten Deadly Force for Trespassing in TX.
His only Justification would have been if he was in fear for his life, or he life of another.


That’s when it escalated, when he brought the gun. Guy never touched him before that.


~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Likes: 13
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Likes: 13
Originally Posted by Cheyenne


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


You must have better eyes or be watching a different video than I watched.


Originally Posted by Geno67
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual.
Originally Posted by Judman
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
Originally Posted by KSMITH
My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
R
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
R
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


That’s exactly where he fuqked up. You can’t point a gun at someone over verbal argument.
Like I mentioned in my above post, he became the Aggressor at that point.
And that’s gonna come back and bite him in the ass.


The verbal argument was over the minute the guy told him to leave his property. Watch the video, the gun was not pointed at "Dad" until he was shot.


I watched it. There’s no audio to the clip I watched.
He still fuqked up by retrieving his rifle.
TX Law has no justification for that. He brought a rifle to a verbal dispute, and at that point became the Aggressor.
You can’t threaten someone with Deadly Force unless the Justification For Deadly Force has been Met.
You can’t use Deadly Force or threaten Deadly Force for Trespassing in TX.
His only Justification would have been if he was in fear for his life, or he life of another.


Even on your own porch? How do you know the dead guys intentions? It may go in front of a jury but he will walk. Lubbock after all. I think the deceased went beyond mere trespassing. The dead guy made a terroristic threat and actually pushed the issue. He was stupid and it got him killed. Hopefully his stupid doesn't get the other guy prison time.


Dog I rescued in January

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]



Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
R
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
R
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
Originally Posted by SandBilly
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


That’s exactly where he fuqked up. You can’t point a gun at someone over verbal argument.
Like I mentioned in my above post, he became the Aggressor at that point.
And that’s gonna come back and bite him in the ass.


The verbal argument was over the minute the guy told him to leave his property. Watch the video, the gun was not pointed at "Dad" until he was shot.


I watched it. There’s no audio to the clip I watched.
He still fuqked up by retrieving his rifle.
TX Law has no justification for that. He brought a rifle to a verbal dispute, and at that point became the Aggressor.
You can’t threaten someone with Deadly Force unless the Justification For Deadly Force has been Met.
You can’t use Deadly Force or threaten Deadly Force for Trespassing in TX.
His only Justification would have been if he was in fear for his life, or he life of another.


That’s when it escalated, when he brought the gun. Guy never touched him before that.


So you did not watch the video.


Dog I rescued in January

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]



Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,997
Likes: 8
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,997
Likes: 8
Originally Posted by SandBilly
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


That’s exactly where he fuqked up. You can’t point a gun at someone over verbal argument.
Like I mentioned in my above post, he became the Aggressor at that point.
And that’s gonna come back and bite him in the ass.


The verbal argument was over the minute the guy told him to leave his property. Watch the video, the gun was not pointed at "Dad" until he was shot.


I watched it. There’s no audio to the clip I watched.
He still fuqked up by retrieving his rifle.
TX Law has no justification for that. He brought a rifle to a verbal dispute, and at that point became the Aggressor.
You can’t threaten someone with Deadly Force unless the Justification For Deadly Force has been Met.
You can’t use Deadly Force or threaten Deadly Force for Trespassing in TX.
His only Justification would have been if he was in fear for his life, or he life of another.


That’s when it escalated, when he brought the gun. Guy never touched him before that.


If he would not have touched him after he'd still be alive



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 69,503
Likes: 30
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 69,503
Likes: 30
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by rickt300
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by deflave
Texas law is pretty clear on these issues and dad clearly advanced on the little guy.

Dad also verbalized that he would take the weapon from little guy and fugk him with it. Which would easily be interpreted as a threat of deadly force by most people.

Dad made two overt motions to grab the weapon. He was shot the second time.

Even if arrested and charged, Texas jury isn’t going to convict based on that video.


I don't know Texas law, and I certainly agree that dad clearly advanced on the shooter, threatened to take the weapon away from the shooter, and even attempted to take it. What I am wondering is whether Texas law authorizes a home occupant to point a firearm at a verbally irate person who does not leave his property upon the home occupant's request, because the issue of who is the aggressor could be determined based on that point rather than at the point where dad goes after the shooter. If home occupant was legally justified to point the gun, dad was the aggressor. If not, home occupant may be considered the initial aggressor for pointing the gun (ordinarily considered aggravated assault unless justifiable) and dad may have a right of self-defense which could include taking the gun away. (Dad did not step on the porch until after home occupant swung the rifle past dad.) I also agree that, at least around here, these cases are hard to get a conviction on an intentional homicide charge.


That’s exactly where he fuqked up. You can’t point a gun at someone over verbal argument.
Like I mentioned in my above post, he became the Aggressor at that point.
And that’s gonna come back and bite him in the ass.


The verbal argument was over the minute the guy told him to leave his property. Watch the video, the gun was not pointed at "Dad" until he was shot.


I watched it. There’s no audio to the clip I watched.
He still fuqked up by retrieving his rifle.
TX Law has no justification for that. He brought a rifle to a verbal dispute, and at that point became the Aggressor.
You can’t threaten someone with Deadly Force unless the Justification For Deadly Force has been Met.
You can’t use Deadly Force or threaten Deadly Force for Trespassing in TX.
His only Justification would have been if he was in fear for his life, or he life of another.


Even on your own porch? How do you know the dead guys intentions? It may go in front of a jury but he will walk. Lubbock after all. I think the deceased went beyond mere trespassing. The dead guy made a terroristic threat and actually pushed the issue. He was stupid and it got him killed. Hopefully his stupid doesn't get the other guy prison time.


Like I mentioned before, he’ll probably walk because of a mostly Conservative West TX Jury in Lubbock.
Had it occurred in Austin or Dallas, he’d be screwed.


"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston
Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"

~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Likes: 13
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Likes: 13
Originally Posted by Cheyenne


This isn't about the court system. This is about adults failing to act responsibly in the best interest of their children. Lawyers, cops and courts can't fix that, although lawyers and cops get a lot of calls about these incidents.



That is absolutely not true.

Family courts sign documents ensuring parental rights with zero recourse if they are not followed.

It causes untold amounts of death and violence in this country every day and nobody wants to fix it.

If that mom standing there casually smoking her cigarette knew that she was going to face a night in jail, $10K fine, and all associated legal fees, that kid would have been there at 3:15 like he was supposed to be, and there would have been no confrontation.


Originally Posted by Geno67
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual.
Originally Posted by Judman
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
Originally Posted by KSMITH
My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 25,578
Likes: 17
A
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
A
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 25,578
Likes: 17
I can’t help but laugh at the little guy. Once he had a firearm he got a false sense of being a tough guy. He was able to muster a cowards courage and get all puffed up. He should get some prison time and a little rectal stretching as well as some prison tats to show what a badass he is.


�Politicians are the lowest form of life on earth. Liberal Democrats are the lowest form of politician.� �General George S. Patton, Jr.

---------------------------------------------------------
~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
R
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
R
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,522
Likes: 4
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by Cheyenne


This isn't about the court system. This is about adults failing to act responsibly in the best interest of their children. Lawyers, cops and courts can't fix that, although lawyers and cops get a lot of calls about these incidents.



That is absolutely not true.

Family courts sign documents ensuring parental rights with zero recourse if they are not followed.

It causes untold amounts of death and violence in this country every day and nobody wants to fix it.

If that mom standing there casually smoking her cigarette knew that she was going to face a night in jail, $10K fine, and all associated legal fees, that kid would have been there at 3:15 like he was supposed to be, and there would have been no confrontation.




Seems stupid that the boy was to be picked up at the boyfriends house.


Dog I rescued in January

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]



Page 14 of 72 1 2 12 13 14 15 16 71 72

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
AX24

640 members (12344mag, 160user, 06hunter59, 10gaugemag, 10gaugeman, 1234, 78 invisible), 2,648 guests, and 1,250 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,194,530
Posts18,530,852
Members74,033
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 


Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.



Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.120s Queries: 55 (0.037s) Memory: 0.9635 MB (Peak: 1.1073 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-05-23 02:56:40 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS