The female caller was his wife, and during that call she handed the phone back to him. That was not the initial call, that was a second call AFTER he fired from inside his garage at people out on the street. People came to see what happened, and were fairly understandably angry. I believe that was also the call that he refused to give his address to the 911 operator.
He was probably following the advice of the Vice Pres, Joe Biden. He was in his garage, fired his shotgun as a warning shot.
Seriously though, he has no right to protect his street, he barely has right to protect his lawn and I don't think anyone was on his lawn. Someone comes in his house, he's got the right to do whatever in most states. Unless there was another 911 call earlier from him asking for police and they never came, nothing he does makes any sense at all to me. Maybe if he'd been calling all night and being ignored by the cops, he'd be pissed enough to fire off a round in his garage to scare folks. Still stupid of course.
In any case, it's certainly possible the idiot fired a warning shot into the air or the ground or something and it caused the fatality. Seems easy enough for forensics to catalog and decide if it's just manslaughter or whatnot.
"I only feel two things Gary, nothing, and nothingness."
For reference: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.2743504
They say that they were outside for a party that was two doors down from where the shooting happened.
I feel like there's an entire part of the story missing. People walking to the party and he yells at them to quiet down? Goes to the party to yell at them? Who knows, need more info before making a judgment. Well, I'll make a judgment that warning shots aren't required or legal in NC, so the justification for firing the gun is certainly wrong.
Yeaaaahh..."warning shot".so I fired a warning shot," he says. "And, uh, we got somebody that got hit."
Exactly why I put warning shot in quotes. I'm not calling it that, that's what the man who shot it called it.
- - - Updated - - -
Because it's against the law to brandish a weapon. So if they had them out, they are, by definition, not Law Abiding.
"Yeah man, I'll help you with whate- Oh, you have a spider problem? Yeah.... Fuck that."
I think you entirely missed the point of his post. We don't know that they were even brandishing. We know that he said they were in the 911 call. All we know is what he said. We can't prove they were brandishing weapons, but we can prove that he fired an illegal warning shot and killed someone with it. Which means a court of law can prove that what he did was illegal, and can't prove that his reasoning for it actually happened.
Maybe go read my post on the first page about how the guy is an idiot and I in no way agree with what he did, let alone believe he's in the right...
When all we have to go in is a story, I'm just trying to keep the story straight. The guy said they had weapons out. Then someone in the thread said "how do you know they weren't law abiding citizens with weapons" and then I said "If they were brandishing them then they could not have been law abiding."
- - - Updated - - -
See above.
I never said they were brandishing weapons. I'm just answering his question. He asked "how do you know they weren't law abiding citizens with weapons" and I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record now, but again, "if" they had them out, the would not have been abiding by the law. I'm not saying they even had weapons at all, let alone had them out. But when we only have the story to go off of, and no real facts other than someone is dead we cannot expect to reach logical conclusions by injecting presumptions into said story.
Last edited by Phatsamurai; 2016-08-09 at 11:02 PM.
"Yeah man, I'll help you with whate- Oh, you have a spider problem? Yeah.... Fuck that."
I'm not defending the guy by any means, but if a guy 30' in front of me has a gun, and I fire a warning shot into the tree to my left, it's possible to hit some other guy behind the tree and kill him.
You're still responsible for the death, even if it's not premeditated murder.
But then, we're all discussing articles with very little actual facts. I mean, it should be fairly easy for forensics to determine if the victim was hit by a direct shot from the guy at his garage, but the articles don't look for details.
"I only feel two things Gary, nothing, and nothingness."
Yeah...but if the guy is in front of you and you fire a "warning shot" to the tree on your left...it's rather unlikely you are going to hit the guy directly in front of you. If you shot the guy directly in front of you...it's probably because you were shooting in that direction.