Regarding that shooting at the Houston Mexican restaurant a few weeks ago....did y'all see where the shooter...

[Ward Jr]

What you're saying isn't true. Force absolutely has to match the threat.

You're wrong on this one. As long as the good Samaritan had reason to believe the gun was or could have been real, that's the issue of importance. The only reason this heads to grand jury is because the Soros-backed DA doesn't want the acquittal on her resume.

 

[JGH 35]

You don't realize what you're arguing. I'm trying to help you see the problem with what you're saying.

I know exactly what I'm arguing. It is you I'm not too sure about. You said "Two wrongs don't make a right." There weren't 2 wrongs. Only a failure of our criminal Justice system to protect its citizens. The law allows citizens to protect themselves for that very reason.

 

[uscwatson21]

What I keep in mind about this is the defender likely overwhelm by fear and adrenaline reacted abnormally due to stress brought on by the armed robber. In this circumstance you can say even though the defender acted unreasonable but the armed robber created this event and i would not fault the defender.

The law doesn't work that way though. The fear and adrenaline doesn't provide you with a blank check.

If he had mistakenly killed five kindergarten students, it wouldn't be justified because there was an armed robber in the restaurant. Once you chose to immerse yourself in the situation by firing a weapon, you owe a duty to those around.

 

[uscwatson21]

Only a failure of our criminal Justice system to protect its citizens.

It failed because it failed to enforce the laws. Now you're arguing the same system should not enforce the laws.

Do you not understand how that's exacerbating the problem?

 

[DeeDave]

No it's not different. Your post made the inference that our criminal justice system works - "Thousands upon thousands upon thousands are prosecuted for it every year." I disagree. In Texas this citizen had to defend himself and the other patrons of the restaurant precisely because it doesn't work. The criminal had a long history of crime and had in fact killed someone before, but instead of being in prison where he belonged he was free to rob and threaten people all over again. I can guarantee you one thing though. He'll never do it again, now.

You just want to argue. I don't.

"works" is subjective. The system works very well for millions of Americans every year. I was in court 2 weeks ago for a situation where someone damaged my private property. The court handled it fine and the guilty party was held responsible. They certainly didn't ignore it. Routine. Happens all the time.

There are instances where it doesn't work very well. Those are highly publicized, certain media focus on them, and are made to appear more frequent than they actually occur.

My stating that "thousands are prosecuted" doesn't mean that everyone is prosecuted perfectly to your - or even my - satisfaction. It's a human process with human beings involved. Of course it's not going to be perfect, or even great all the time. But that doesn't mean it doesn't work all across the country. That's not even logical.

Interesting you had no issue with the comment I responded to" "very few laws being enforced in our country anymore."

That's 100% factually incorrect whether you agree with it, or like it, or not- which was my point.

and I am assuming that no one is going to test the theory out with a carjacking tonight under the firm theory it won't be prosecuted.

 

[DeeDave]

In addition, once somebody has the legal right to act in self-defense and use lethal force in self-defense, they can shoot him once or a hundred times.

It depends on many factors.

Your statement would give someone the right to shoot someone in the back that clearly drops their weapon and runs the opposite direction. The law doesn't and there are people in jail now that have found that out the hard way.

There are simply too many scenarios to make such blanket statements.

That's why police investigate these incidents and take the information to the local prosecuting attorney for consideration. The answer is usually: It depends.

That's why this guy in Texas is at least facing a grand jury instead of avoiding that process altogether.

My CWP instructor must have said "it depends" a dozen times in our class when answering all the questions posted by fellow students.

There are situations where it's pretty straight forward clear. But there are also situations where most people think it's very clear, where it's not very clear at all to those investigating it and asking questions afterwards.

 

[ElectricalCock89]

Self defense exists to protect the life of an individual, not to punish a criminal.

It's an important and necessary distinction.

I think he got what he deserved! Bring back public executions!

 

[DeeDave]

The only reason this heads to grand jury is because the Soros-backed DA doesn't want the acquittal on her resume.

Nonsense. You watch too much wacky cable news who intentionally don't tell you the full story so they can protect their ratings and make more money.

The Houston DA is a vocal critic of bail reform and is popular with Houston Republicans.

She has repeatedly criticized politicians that have mentioned less funding for law enforcement.

Putting this case before a grand jury made up of citizens of the community made sense.

Kim Ogg's request for 100 more prosecutors criticized by reformers

Assistant District Attorney Michael Hanover crouched against the wall outside courtroom...

www.houstonchronicle.com

 

[DeeDave]

I think he got what he deserved! Bring back public executions!

I do too but public executions never stopped crime- and aren't helpful to anyone. Bloodlust never solved a problem.

 

[Ward Jr]

Nonsense. You watch too much wacky cable news who intentionally don't tell you the full story so they can protect their ratings and make more money.

The Houston DA is a vocal critic of bail reform and is popular with Houston Republicans.

She has repeatedly criticized politicians that have mentioned less funding for law enforcement.

Putting this case before a grand jury made up of citizens of the community made sense.

Kim Ogg's request for 100 more prosecutors criticized by reformers

Assistant District Attorney Michael Hanover crouched against the wall outside courtroom...

www.houstonchronicle.com

Ogg is on the payroll Dave.
https://www.chron.com/politics/article/Billionaire-Soros-makes-500-000-ad-buy-for-9970130.php

 

[turncock]

It depends on many factors.

Your statement would give someone the right to shoot someone in the back that clearly drops their weapon and runs the opposite direction. The law doesn't and there are people in jail now that have found that out the hard way.

There are simply too many scenarios to make such blanket statements.

That's why police investigate these incidents and take the information to the local prosecuting attorney for consideration. The answer is usually: It depends.

That's why this guy in Texas is at least facing a grand jury instead of avoiding that process altogether.

My CWP instructor must have said "it depends" a dozen times in our class when answering all the questions posted by fellow students.

There are situations where it's pretty straight forward clear. But there are also situations where most people think it's very clear, where it's not very clear at all to those investigating it and asking questions afterwards.

I should have noted that just cause has to be established. The video clearly shows just cause and his legal right to act in self-defense. The number of shots once just cause is established is not of relevance in this circumstance.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

The last shot to the head while he was on the ground is murder.

You can't murder a dead body. His body didn't flinch the slightest from the head shot. He was already dead. Don't know that for a fact but that's what I think. Charge him with abuse of a corpse if they want to charge him with something.

 

[adcoop]

I know exactly what I'm arguing. It is you I'm not too sure about. You said "Two wrongs don't make a right." There weren't 2 wrongs. Only a failure of our criminal Justice system to protect its citizens. The law allows citizens to protect themselves for that very reason.

Imminent Threat. A guy with his back turned walking out is not an imminent threat. I tried to sit out of this one, but the legal opinions on here are so far off from reality that I just had to say something. If he had shot the guy while the robberies were taking place, he would have a much better defense.

 

[Ward Jr]

Imminent Threat. A guy with his back turned walking out is not an imminent threat. I tried to sit out of this one, but the legal opinions on here are so far off from reality that I just had to say something. If he had shot the guy while the robberies were taking place, he would have a much better defense.

Re-watch the video. The guy is shot from the Southwest side and looks like he is headed toward the dude in the corner booth tremoring with his hands up.

And let's be honest - this type of thing has been going on for decades. Criminals target illegals and the places the frequent because they are cash heavy and afraid to draw any attention to their status. This guy knew exactly what he was doing.

 

[bill222]

Re-watch the video. The guy is shot from the Southwest side and looks like he is headed toward the dude in the corner booth tremoring with his hands up.

And let's be honest - this type of thing has been going on for decades. Criminals target illegals and the places the frequent because they are cash heavy and afraid to draw any attention to their status. This guy knew exactly what he was doing.

I was going to say, the terrorist was still pointing his gun as he walked past the table of the guy that shot him.

 

[Lurker123]

I was going to say, the terrorist was still pointing his gun as he walked past the table of the guy that shot him.

Yes, the imminent threat can be to other people, and given the robber is still waving a gun around, it's not unreasonable to still feel threatened for the shooter. I agree that some of the legal opinions are way off from reality, but it's not from those arguing this is justified.

We need this shooter to put a few bullets in this thread. It's useless now. I can sum it up for all of you.

Side 1: An armed robber got shot during a robbery. Oh well.

Side 2: My political views on guns means I have to argue the shooter was in the wrong, regardless of the facts. Guns are bad.

Now we can move on.

 

[JGH 35]

You just want to argue. I don't.

"works" is subjective. The system works very well for millions of Americans every year. I was in court 2 weeks ago for a situation where someone damaged my private property. The court handled it fine and the guilty party was held responsible. They certainly didn't ignore it. Routine. Happens all the time.

There are instances where it doesn't work very well. Those are highly publicized, certain media focus on them, and are made to appear more frequent than they actually occur.

My stating that "thousands are prosecuted" doesn't mean that everyone is prosecuted perfectly to your - or even my - satisfaction. It's a human process with human beings involved. Of course it's not going to be perfect, or even great all the time. But that doesn't mean it doesn't work all across the country. That's not even logical.

Interesting you had no issue with the comment I responded to" "very few laws being enforced in our country anymore."

That's 100% factually incorrect whether you agree with it, or like it, or not- which was my point.

and I am assuming that no one is going to test the theory out with a carjacking tonight under the firm theory it won't be prosecuted.

"There are instances where it doesn't work very well. Those are highly publicized, certain media focus on them, and are made to appear more frequent than they actually occur." Actually, it is the exact opposite. There are hundreds of people shot with many killed every weekend just in the city of Chicago. Show me any media reporting on that. It doesn't exist. The media surely didn't report when my niece was carjacked and raped, along with many other similar crimes that I am personally aware of.
"no one is going to test the theory out with a carjacking tonight under the firm theory it won't be prosecuted." Really ? Hundreds of car-jackings and break-ins happen every day in California, especially since they changed the law whereby if they caught they are released without bail and most are never prosecuted. They have already tested your theory out and have won.

 

[uscwatson21]

Yes, the imminent threat can be to other people, and given the robber is still waving a gun around, it's not unreasonable to still feel threatened for the shooter. I agree that some of the legal opinions are way off from reality, but it's not from those arguing this is justified.

We need this shooter to put a few bullets in this thread. It's useless now. I can sum it up for all of you.

Side 1: An armed robber got shot during a robbery. Oh well.

Side 2: My political views on guns means I have to argue the shooter was in the wrong, regardless of the facts. Guns are bad.

Now we can move on.

You’re clearly not an attorney so maybe you should leave it up to those who are to analyze the law.

The hypocrisy of course being that your political views on guns are why you’re coming to your conclusion. When the ones disagreeing with you are basing their analysis on the law.

 

[ElectricalCock89]

You’re clearly not an attorney so maybe you should leave it up to those who are to analyze the law.

The hypocrisy of course being that your political views on guns are why you’re coming to your conclusion. When the ones disagreeing with you are basing their analysis on the law.

Yet, your political views on guns comes to your conclusion. Mr. I argue with everyone….

 

[Lurker123]

You’re clearly not an attorney so maybe you should leave it up to those who are to analyze the law.

The hypocrisy of course being that your political views on guns are why you’re coming to your conclusion. When the ones disagreeing with you are basing their analysis on the law.

You're also clearly not an attorney, and while I am pro 2nd Amendment, I also get to rely on the facts of the case, the law and a convenient video of the incident to back up my conclusion.

And you calling someone else a hypocrite would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

But you got some more responses! Good job. I doubt any post you make will be worth another one from me.

 

[cocks rule]

Of course. Thousands upon thousands upon thousands are prosecuted for it every year.

Anyone willing to go carjack someone in downtown Columbia today to test their belief that prosecutions don't happen? They know better.

They’re turning em loose everyday in many big cities all across the USA. Coming soon to a town near you if something doesn’t happen. Assault is a misdemeanor in New York City so it’s pretty much over for all the big cities as we speak. Well actually it’s been over for a couple of years. Fact….

 

[Cybercock]

Let's play a game of guess the left wing whackos
Read the comments without looking at the usernames.
I bet most of us could put names with the posts. I got the first two correct..

 

[uscwatson21]

You're also clearly not an attorney, and while I am pro 2nd Amendment, I also get to rely on the facts of the case, the law and a convenient video of the incident to back up my conclusion.

And you calling someone else a hypocrite would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

But you got some more responses! Good job. I doubt any post you make will be worth another one from me.

Boy would I love to read your analysis of the law.

 

[adcoop]

You’re clearly not an attorney so maybe you should leave it up to those who are to analyze the law.

The hypocrisy of course being that your political views on guns are why you’re coming to your conclusion. When the ones disagreeing with you are basing their analysis on the law.

I am and agree with your opinion. However, the majority of the comments on this thread highlight that Jury Nullification is real. Most people, and they make up jurors, are driven by their emotions, passion, and ideas/persons that they like or dislike. As a result, a Grand Jury probably won't True Bill this guy. However, present the same facts and make the shooter someone that people don't like and opinions, which turn into Jury Verdicts, tend to change. The moral of the story here? Just because this guy may get off doesn't mean that he shouldn't be charged or found guilty if you go strictly by black-letter law and take the emotions out of it.

 

[DeeDave]

They’re turning em loose everyday in many big cities all across the USA. Coming soon to a town near you if something doesn’t happen. Assault is a misdemeanor in New York City so it’s pretty much over for all the big cities as we speak. Well actually it’s been over for a couple of years. Fact….

I agree that some are releasing people that have no business being released. No argument from me on that. But that's not new. It's been happening for years and years and years - and - and -

It doesn't just happen in big cities. It happens in little ole South Carolina too. But that doesn't make cable news.

This guy was from Greenwood

South Carolina man killed by Alabama police had 48-page rap sheet, should have been in jail, chief says

An angry Oxford Police Chief Bill Partridge identified the slain man at 26-year-old Alexander Kade Lanier and lashed out at a judicial system that he said puts police officers in danger of career criminals every day.

www.al.com

But that doesn't mean "very few laws are being enforced in the country anymore."

 

[DeeDave]

Ogg is on the payroll Dave.
https://www.chron.com/politics/article/Billionaire-Soros-makes-500-000-ad-buy-for-9970130.php

Yes- Billionaires make donations all the time for politicians. Happens every single day of the year- especially when they can't stand the opposition candidate.

Interestingly enough- and you didn't mention it - but one of the reasons offered for donating to her was that her opponent screwed up and ended up jailing a rape victim.

Jailing a rape victim so she will testify in court is a BAD MOVE.

“Jenny’s Law” Passed after Texas Prosecutor Jails Rape Victim; District Attorney Voted Out | Prison Legal News

and her record is strong- and she's campaigned numerous years for increased funding for law enforcement in Houston.

She's also openly campaigned against bail reform.

That's why she's not mentioned on Fox News every day - even though Soros bought ads promoting her 2016 campaign. Of course, as stated, Billionaires fund at least 66% of Congress right now. Almost every Senate candidate that won in 2022 had a billionaire funder.

 

[DeeDave]

I should have noted that just cause has to be established. The video clearly shows just cause and his legal right to act in self-defense.

I agree.

The number of shots once just cause is established is not of relevance in this circumstance.

The Texas law specifically states "The second question is whether the actor used only the degree of force necessary to protect himself."

That is always relevant. Texas law makes it so. While I see no chance a grand jury will indict him (I wouldn't), it's clearly relevant and it's a question for the grand jury.

 

[DeeDave]

Imminent Threat. A guy with his back turned walking out is not an imminent threat. I tried to sit out of this one, but the legal opinions on here are so far off from reality that I just had to say something. If he had shot the guy while the robberies were taking place, he would have a much better defense.

You can't assume someone walking out isn't an imminent threat. There are videos all over the place of criminals aiming a gun behind them as they run away. I know in tv shows and movies they talk about someone walking away but that's in the movies.

Plus, in the video, there is a couple sitting at a booth to the direct side of the guy who is walking out. The shooter, I believe, could have very easily had a reasonable belief that they were in the path of harm because they were not behind him at the time he shot.

Regardless, the guy could have easily turned around at anytime and shot if he had a gun.


That is different than someone who is clearly not a threat running away and is shot. For example, if the guy had ran out and was across the street running down the road and was shot, then that is clearly illegal.

 

[DeeDave]

Actually, it is the exact opposite. There are hundreds of people shot with many killed every weekend just in the city of Chicago. Show me any media reporting on that. It doesn't exist. The media surely didn't report when my niece was carjacked and raped, along with many other similar crimes that I am personally aware of.

Hundreds of car-jackings and break-ins happen every day in California, especially since they changed the law whereby if they caught they are released without bail and most are never prosecuted. They have already tested your theory out and have won.

It's not.

Chicago media report on murders in Chicago all the time. I was in Chicago before Christmas. It's a nightly feature on the news.

Not a week goes by that Fox News doesn't cover it for their own political reasons.

The problem in Chicago is not ignoring murders. The problem is catching the people who murdered someone in the first place because witnesses are afraid to talk or simply won't help law enforcement because they don't trust - or respect them.

No, the media doesn't report every carjacking or rape. No one said they did. No one should expect them to either.

Car jackings and "break-ins" are felonies.

There is nothing in the law in California- where I have spent most of January- that forgives felonies.

But again, Chicago and California- or highlighted cases in other cities is not proof that "laws aren't enforced anymore anymore than one of the stories I posted about someone in South Carolina being out on bond and murdering someone means South Carolina approves of murder or doesn't enforce the law.

 

[DeeDave]

They’re turning em loose everyday in many big cities all across the USA. Coming soon to a town near you if something doesn’t happen. Assault is a misdemeanor in New York City so it’s pretty much over for all the big cities as we speak. Well actually it’s been over for a couple of years. Fact….

They also turn them loose in South Carolina.

Criminals get released all the time all across the country. I know it doesn't make the news sites you listen to- but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

The guy was from Greenwood. Using your logic, this means South Carolina doesn't care about crime.

South Carolina man killed by Alabama police had 48-page rap sheet, should have been in jail, chief says

An angry Oxford Police Chief Bill Partridge identified the slain man at 26-year-old Alexander Kade Lanier and lashed out at a judicial system that he said puts police officers in danger of career criminals every day.

www.al.com

 

[DeeDave]

I am and agree with your opinion. However, the majority of the comments on this thread highlight that Jury Nullification is real. Most people, and they make up jurors, are driven by their emotions, passion, and ideas/persons that they like or dislike.

It's real, but rare.

People say things on message boards they wouldn't say in mixed company- or in a professional environment.

Nuance is often dead on a message board with certain people that have more bravado than anything else. But in real life it's very real.

 

[duckcock2.0.0]

Not a week goes by that Fox News doesn't cover it for their own political reasons.

Does CNN cover it? Does MSNBC cover it? Does NBC cover it? Does CBS cover it? Does ABC cover it?

 

[cocks rule]

My niece was carjacked taken to an abandoned house and raped. The guy was already out on bond for 2 previous rapes. In this particular case the guy had already killed someone, plead to a lesser offense and was lightly punished in spite of a long criminal record. So please pardon me if I don't agree with you.

I agree that some are releasing people that have no business being released. No argument from me on that. But that's not new. It's been happening for years and years and years - and - and -

It doesn't just happen in big cities. It happens in little ole South Carolina too. But that doesn't make cable news.

This guy was from Greenwood

South Carolina man killed by Alabama police had 48-page rap sheet, should have been in jail, chief says

An angry Oxford Police Chief Bill Partridge identified the slain man at 26-year-old Alexander Kade Lanier and lashed out at a judicial system that he said puts police officers in danger of career criminals every day.

www.al.com

But that doesn't mean "very few laws are being enforced in the country anymore."

Not only aren’t they being enforced they’re being changed from felonies to misdemeanors just to lower the numbers for a statistical appearance of lower crime numbers for people like you.

 

[cocks rule]

Does CNN cover it? Does MSNBC cover it? Does NBC cover it? Does CBS cover it? Does ABC cover it?

Hell no they don’t cover anything except what’s ordered from the powers in charge.

 

[Neanderthal]

Hell no they don’t cover anything except what’s ordered from the powers in charge.

And the powers in charge are only looking at the ratings. $$$$ talks, as always. Those that get off easy even when the evidence is stacked against them have big money, except maybe Murdaugh. But that’s another story.

 

[FORKCOCK]

In a thread like this, it's easy to see the kind of people you can trust to have your back.

One or two posters here would be glad the guy saved their life but would back stab him when being interviewed by the police.

 

[cocks rule]

In a thread like this, it's easy to see the kind of people you can trust to have your back.

One or two posters here would be glad the guy saved their life but would back stab him when being interviewed by the police.

Truth

 

[DeeDave]

Not only aren’t they being enforced they’re being changed from felonies to misdemeanors just to lower the numbers for a statistical appearance of lower crime numbers for people like you.

pleading down is as old as the justice system itself. It's not new. Happens right here in South Carolina where nearly every politician can't wait to talk about how tough they are on crime. Yet, pleading to a lesser offense happens every day- often with those very same "tough" politicians defending the perpetrator in court as their defense attorney.

I am always interested in reading about specific stories myself to see the reasoning behind such moves. I sometimes don't agree myself with the decision.

But again, that doesn't mean most of the laws in the country are being ignored.

 

[Caleb Alexander]

It didn’t get quite too gnarly in here but still too much mud slinging and calling each other libs or conservatives. I’m going to lock it before it gets worse but I’ll leave it here.