Poll: Do you Support Assault Weapons Ban?

  1. #58681
    Quote Originally Posted by Egomaniac View Post
    Not if the court rules that grabbing the gun itself was the escalating factor
    And now we come to the conundrum: Did the guy that was killed have a justifiable fear for his life when crazy homeowner got a gun and fired a shot next to his feet? I imagine it's fairly easy that, at that point, he felt he was in lethal danger and that if he turned his back to walk away that he might have been shot by the crazy guy with a gun.

    Which is why, as always, bringing a gun to anything other than a gunfight is always a bad idea for everyone (and gunfights are a bad idea in general). Armed vigilante civilians living out their dreams of being Paul Kersey are a danger to society, as evidenced.

  2. #58682
    Quote Originally Posted by Egomaniac View Post
    Not if the court rules that grabbing the gun itself was the escalating factor
    There is no escalating factor requirement when someone is forcibly removing you from your home. Theoretically, the moment Father used force to push Boyfriend off his porch, it was the same as if he had snatched a kid from the house and lethal force is allowed. The presence of the gun is still a defense factor at the point it's introduced, even. The Boyfriend didn't come out and start shooting, he just armed himself to better protect his house from someone that wouldn't leave, in theory. The escalation of threats and the Father grabbing the gun don't really matter either, so much since we're not discussing Self Defense at all. Two idiots got into a fight, one died, the other is legally fine, unless the publicity leads to charges that otherwise wouldn't be filed.

    Like that Mutual Combat in Chicago, different situation, but still a big "meh, whatever" so far as the law is involved.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    And now we come to the conundrum: Did the guy that was killed have a justifiable fear for his life when crazy homeowner got a gun and fired a shot next to his feet? I imagine it's fairly easy that, at that point, he felt he was in lethal danger and that if he turned his back to walk away that he might have been shot by the crazy guy with a gun.
    At the end of the day, it's easy, only one person had a right to be there. If the Father had taken the gun and killed the Boyfriend, he could have concocted some story about feeling like he couldn't retreat, but he had so many chances to retreat, it would be ignored. The guy didn't come out of the house and shoot a round, he didn't come out of the house and shoot him. Sure, he should have at most went inside, locked the door with gun in hand and waited for police rather than arguing with Father, but who knows what history exists between them.
    Hell, don't use a Ruger PC9 to get in somebodies face, there's your advice for the day.

    Which is why, as always, bringing a gun to anything other than a gunfight is always a bad idea for everyone (and gunfights are a bad idea in general). Armed vigilante civilians living out their dreams of being Paul Kersey are a danger to society, as evidenced.
    I rolled my eyes so hard I think I pulled an ocular muscle! Vigilante indeed.
    "I only feel two things Gary, nothing, and nothingness."

  3. #58683
    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post
    I rolled my eyes so hard I think I pulled an ocular muscle! Vigilante indeed.
    If your response to someone standing on your property and not leaving is to shoot them, even if it's legal in your state, yes. I have no problem mocking these wannabe vigilante fucks that think that they should dish out some extrajudicial "justice".

    You seem to think I care about the laws around this in TX. I don't. The laws are garbage and are crafted specifically to allow murder-hungry gun owners to murder folks more freely. It's an insane law that is, in essence, the state ceding its monopoly on the use of violence and accepting that police are incapable of doing their jobs.

  4. #58684
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Which is why, as always, bringing a gun to anything other than a gunfight is always a bad idea for everyone (and gunfights are a bad idea in general). Armed vigilante civilians living out their dreams of being Paul Kersey are a danger to society, as evidenced.
    In a genuine home defense situation, bringing a gun to something other than a gunfight is an excellent plan.

  5. #58685
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    In a genuine home defense situation, bringing a gun to something other than a gunfight is an excellent plan.
    Defending his home from...an unarmed dudebro having an argument with his ex-wife. I mean, I guess it's an excellent plan if you want to "win" a fight. But so would bringing a pack of rabid timberwolves. Or a chainsaw. Or getting in a backhoe and driving over them. Or a lot of other pretty outrageous and insane things.

  6. #58686
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Defending his home from...an unarmed dudebro having an argument with his ex-wife. I mean, I guess it's an excellent plan if you want to "win" a fight. But so would bringing a pack of rabid timberwolves. Or a chainsaw. Or getting in a backhoe and driving over them. Or a lot of other pretty outrageous and insane things.
    Objection - nonresponsive to actual comment text.

  7. #58687
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    70,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    In a genuine home defense situation, bringing a gun to something other than a gunfight is an excellent plan.
    In what world was this a home defense situation?

    It was his girlfriend's ex-husband. Who was there to pick up his kid. Over whom he had shared custody and it was his time with the kid. So he had every legal right to be there. Hell, the dad had more cause to call the cops than the shooter.


  8. #58688
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    In what world was this a home defense situation?

    It was his girlfriend's ex-husband. Who was there to pick up his kid. Over whom he had shared custody and it was his time with the kid. So he had every legal right to be there. Hell, the dad had more cause to call the cops than the shooter.
    Not to mention the sissy removed himself from the situation only to return with a gun later. All the people who flock to these cowards defense are laughable.

  9. #58689
    Immortal PhaelixWW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    7,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    In what world was this a home defense situation?

    It was his girlfriend's ex-husband. Who was there to pick up his kid. Over whom he had shared custody and it was his time with the kid. So he had every legal right to be there. Hell, the dad had more cause to call the cops than the shooter.
    I think you're missing the point of the statement. Spectral's use of the phrase "genuine home defense situation" was likely meant to imply that this wasn't, especially considering his previous statement.


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  10. #58690
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    Objection - nonresponsive to actual comment text.
    Fair point, I misinterpreted it as you calling this a home defense situation rather than making a separate but related point.

  11. #58691
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    In what world was this a home defense situation?

    It was his girlfriend's ex-husband. Who was there to pick up his kid. Over whom he had shared custody and it was his time with the kid. So he had every legal right to be there. Hell, the dad had more cause to call the cops than the shooter.
    You have parsed the sentence you replied to incorrectly.
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    I think you're missing the point of the statement. Spectral's use of the phrase "genuine home defense situation" was likely meant to imply that this wasn't, especially considering his previous statement.
    This is correct.

    The point is that in an actual home invasion, bringing a gun to deal with unarmed intruders is an excellent plan. There is no legal or ethical requirement that someone only use a firearm in the event that it's already a gunfight.

  12. #58692
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    In what world was this a home defense situation?
    In the Texas legal sense.

    It was his girlfriend's ex-husband. Who was there to pick up his kid. Over whom he had shared custody and it was his time with the kid. So he had every legal right to be there. Hell, the dad had more cause to call the cops than the shooter.
    No, he had a legal right to custody, but he does not have a legal right to be on private property, nor to force the rightful person off of their property. His proper legal remedies were to raise the issue with the courts, and possibly the police would have assisted with the enforcement of the custodial order/ visitation rights.

    It's quite easy to call both of them idiots, you do not need to side with one for the other to be wrong in some moral sense. Speaking to the legality of the matter though, there's just the one truth.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    If your response to someone standing on your property and not leaving is to shoot them, even if it's legal in your state, yes. I have no problem mocking these wannabe vigilante fucks that think that they should dish out some extrajudicial "justice".
    Using the phrase "vigilante" in this confrontation just makes it obvious you're making it about something else. It was not about Justice, he was not trying to apprehend someone or anything. Two rams butted heads, one of them had bigger horns.

    You seem to think I care about the laws around this in TX. I don't. The laws are garbage and are crafted specifically to allow murder-hungry gun owners to murder folks more freely. It's an insane law that is, in essence, the state ceding its monopoly on the use of violence and accepting that police are incapable of doing their jobs.
    Nyah, I know you don't care about the law or anything other than a crusade. But, I think you've made your feelings clear, so there's nothing to discuss but the actual legal facts concerning the case. I don't live in Texas myself, so I have no personal investment in this in either case. I don't know that any discussion we have would help you with your feelings, but the board isn't exactly bustling with activity anymore so maybe.
    "I only feel two things Gary, nothing, and nothingness."

  13. #58693
    Using the phrase "vigilante" in this confrontation just makes it obvious you're making it about something else. It was not about Justice, he was not trying to apprehend someone or anything. Two rams butted heads, one of them had bigger horns.[/quote]

    Any idiots that try to take the law into their hands are vigilantes, even if the state they live in legally allows them to do so. I have no problems continuing to refer to clearly deranged people like this guy as vigilantes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post
    Nyah, I know you don't care about the law or anything other than a crusade.
    I don't care about dumbass, bullshit, stupid laws. And sure, I guess I'm on a crusade because I'm tired of people in my country having rates of death by gun violence being closer to what is seen in developing nations and nations where crime is a major issue like Colombia, Uraguay, Mexico, or South Africa. We're at least 4x the per-capita death rate of the closest developed western nation - 12.2/100K for the US compared to 2.7/100K for Austria.

    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post
    I don't know that any discussion we have would help you with your feelings
    My feelings are fine and don't need any help, thanks tho.

  14. #58694
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Any idiots that try to take the law into their hands are vigilantes, even if the state they live in legally allows them to do so. I have no problems continuing to refer to clearly deranged people like this guy as vigilantes.
    Again, no law was taken into hand in any real sense. Not sure why you think "vigilante" is somehow more apt than "murderer" or "killer" or just "idiot".

    I don't care about dumbass, bullshit, stupid laws. And sure, I guess I'm on a crusade because I'm tired of people in my country having rates of death by gun violence being closer to what is seen in developing nations and nations where crime is a major issue like Colombia, Uraguay, Mexico, or South Africa. We're at least 4x the per-capita death rate of the closest developed western nation - 12.2/100K for the US compared to 2.7/100K for Austria.
    Texas is closer to Mexico than Austria, and Mexico has plenty of gun laws. And as I said at the start, this is not even a gun issue. If the result would have been the same with a knife, would you have cared?

    My feelings are fine and don't need any help, thanks tho.
    Righteo, don't give yourself an ulcer worrying about such things that have no affect on your life in any real sense.
    "I only feel two things Gary, nothing, and nothingness."

  15. #58695
    Btw, 4th person has died following the school shooting.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59484333
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadoowpunk View Post
    Take that haters.
    IF IM STUPID, so is Donald Trump.

  16. #58696
    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post
    Righteo, don't give yourself an ulcer worrying about such things that have no affect on your life in any real sense.
    I think you are projecting, bud.

  17. #58697
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    70,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post
    No, he had a legal right to custody, but he does not have a legal right to be on private property, nor to force the rightful person off of their property. His proper legal remedies were to raise the issue with the courts, and possibly the police would have assisted with the enforcement of the custodial order/ visitation rights.
    If you want to get technical, if his ex-wife was court-ordered to turn their kids over for his custody time, and she was refusing (or unable; it amounts to the same thing here), then what was occurring in that moment was a kidnapping. So yeah; the father is in the legal right to push the issue against the people kidnapping his kids.

    That's what refusing to turn children over for custodial rights is. It's kidnapping. Literally the legal definition.

    You're probably right that the better angle would have been to back off, call the cops, and have both his ex-wife and her boyfriend arrested and charged with kidnapping. Would pretty much guarantee his ex-wife loses custody, too.

    Regardless, the ex-boyfriend retreated to arm himself, rather than calling the police, so that makes the shooting first-degree murder. I could care less if you're gonna whine about a minor case of trespass at best when the father's kids are being kidnapped, it doesn't remotely justify the murder.


  18. #58698
    Quote Originally Posted by Easo View Post
    Btw, 4th person has died following the school shooting.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59484333
    Not directed at you, but a fourth child is dead.

    One day this country will start giving a shit about kids. One day.

  19. #58699
    Immortal PhaelixWW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    7,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Not directed at you, but a fourth child is dead.

    One day this country will start giving a shit about kids. One day.
    What law can you suggest that would have prevented this tragic attack?


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  20. #58700
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,130
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    What law can you suggest that would have prevented this tragic attack?
    Can you suggest one?
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •