[Moogs]

What is it with this place? Aside from the right to carry concealed weapons everywhere, electing execution-happy governors, etc is there something in the water?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/03/....ap/index.html

So a woman is having an affair. Husband comes home to see his wife working up a lather with some guy in their driveway. She cries rape (wolf), so... the guy tried to drive away... therefore making it impossible to suggest anyone's life was in danger. Unless the wife was in the truck as the guy drove away but I don't get that impression. I don't think the husband would do that knowing a dead driver could end up killing his wife too, if she wasn't in control of the vehicle. So the husband pulls a gun and shoots the guy dead as he drives away. Murder charges later dropped, now the wife is getting manslaughter charges? WTF is wrong with these people.

The wife clearly deserves some type of punishment for inciting the incident and not saying "don't shoot, he didn't rape me! I was lying!" when the gun was pulled... but the guy still did the shooting when no one's life was in danger. How this can end up as anything other than 2nd degree murder and accessory to 2nd degree murder, I have no idea. Texas-style stupidity knows no bounds. I honestly think a lot of these concealed weapon carrying assholes think this is the old west or something. That getting a gun is like being deputized.

Fucking unbelievable. So a guy is dead because he was having an affair (not that a have much sympathy for him, but... who knows what the circumstances of the marriage were), and all we get out of it is a manslaughter charge against the woman he was banging. Meantime the husband still gets to walk around and shoot people apparently. WTF.

[Kickaha]

Personally, I think it played out the way it should have. I would have plugged the guy too.

Well, actually, I would have done my best to jam my thumbs in his forebrain through his eyesockets and strangle him with my own hands, if I thought he was raping my wife, but if I had a gun, I guess I could use that too.

Crowbar to the back of the head (point first preferably), snap the neck, break the back... not really caring at that point, y'know?

I'm sorry, are you supposed to step back, call the cops, and say "Golly officer, my wife was being raped, and yeah, he went thataway..."? Uh... no?

Now, given that, what do you honestly think the wife was to expect by pulling her stunt?

[Moogs]

EDIT: apparently CNN is so lazy they didn't even check the Ft. Worth paper... that paper says the truck drove forward which doesn't sound like "drove off" at all. Journalistic integrity my ass.

Roberson raced back to Arlington to find a blue Chevrolet Silverado pickup parked in front of his house. In the cab, he saw a man kissing his wife, who was wearing a bathrobe. He pulled out a 10 mm handgun and approached the truck. Prosecutors argued that Tracy Roberson called out to her husband that she was being raped. The pickup moved forward, and Darrell Roberson fired four times. One bullet entered LaSalle's jaw and went into his spine, Marc Krouse, Tarrant County deputy chief medical examiner, testified.

And she was in the truck sounds like... so... now the husband's actions are more understandable, but still. That hardly seems like the only course of action. You could put the gun right in the guy's face and order him out of the truck or your wife out of the truck... not really a shoot-or-die sort of situation. Except in Texas of course.

In my mind the only time it's reasonable to shoot in domestic altercations or home invasions, etc... is when you have good cause to believe you or someone in your family is in imminent danger of dying if you don't shoot. That clearly doesn't apply here IMO unless the driver himself had a gun that he pulled. If he was not making any violent motions to keep the wife subdued or whatever, you put the gun up to the window and you warn the guy if he pulls out of the driveway, he's dead. "Stop the fucking truck, put your hands on the wheel and let my wife out of the car or you're dead!"

That's step one. From there things transpire however they do. But we don't get to execute people because someone yells rape, for obvious reasons. And furthermore how likely IS IT really, that your wife is being raped when she's in her ROBE, in another guy's truck? How many scenarios can we think of, where intended sexual activity isn't involved, where a married woman gets into another guy's vehicle wearing a robe? And you find them kissing?

You can certainly argue none of this was premeditated and that it was a crime of passion but... the shooter absolutely deserves prison time IMO (or at least probationary sentencing so the felony goes on his record), regardless of what happens to the wife.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Moogs EDIT: apparently CNN is so lazy they didn't even check the Ft. Worth paper... that paper says the truck drove forward which doesn't sound like "getting away" at all. And she was in the truck sounds like... so... now the husband's actions are more understandable, but still. That hardly seems like the only course of action. You could put the gun right in the guy's face and order him out of the truck or your wife out of the truck... not really a shoot-or-die sort of situation. Except in Texas of course.

Oh come on... let go of the Texas and gun hate here, and admit it - he had the gun out, approached the truck, the truck starts to move with his wife in it, and you *STILL* think he didn't have any right to fire?

Moogs... you're expecting someone to make rational decisions, taking into account all possible factors, in split-seconds, when the person they trust is telling them they're being raped... right. Think about the insanity of that for a minute. Please. Cops get away with much, much, MUCH more tenuous circumstances. (Sean Bell anyone?) And they're supposed to be *trained* to handle such situations. If it's good enough for them, it's certainly good enough for us.

The only reason your panties are in a bunch is because it happened in Texas, and it involved a gun. If it had been in Boston, with a baseball bat to the head, I really don't think you would have posted this.

[curiousuburb]

Did they have to call the Wolf to get it cleaned?

[Moogs]

I'm sending the Wolf Di-rectly.

Kick: you are right I have something against the Texas system (but it's not random Tex-hate). The thing I don't agree with is concealed gun laws in public spaces, not the right to own a gun in general (which I have no problem with as long as it's not some frickin commando-style machine gun, but that's another story). And you're right about the bat scenario because nobody in a truck is going to be afraid of a guy with a bat, so there is no chance to force the driver to stop. You either swing for the fences as fast as you can or you may never see your wife again. The gun makes it a totally different power balance.

The reason I do not like concealed gun laws, is because of this very type of thing. People think, "OK I'm licensed to carry this thing around and protect my property and my family." There's no doubt it's a self-deputizing activity for many people in Texas. I understand the whole deterrence argument to be made but this is a perfect example of where things get fucked up.

I guess we can't really know for sure unless we know things like which direction the truck was facing in teh driveway, whether he wife was screaming the whole time, whether the truck started to move slowly or whether the guy attempted to peal out, etc. But the way this reads right now, there is nothing I see that would prevent the guy from trotting right up to the window and ordering the guy to stop.

It's not that complicated. If you're screwing some guy's wife and he catches you and she yells rape, even if you're dumb enough to try and pull away with her in the car, are you going to keep going when someone puts a gun 18" from your face with nothing but a car window in between, and he says "STOP!"? No. You're going to stop, unless you have a death wish.

This was obviously partly the wife's fault but it's not like you have to be thinking like Perry Mason to make a smarter decision than emptying half a clip into the guy before you even give him a warning. This guy wanted to kill the dude fucking his wife and found a perfect excuse to do it, now he's off scot-free.

I would not have posted this if the story went the same but one little detail inserted

"As the truck moved toward the street, the husband stayed close to the cab, yelling at the driver to stop. When he didn't stop, the husband fired four shots."

I would have no problem with that whatsoever because then you fear your wife's life really is in danger / that you may never see her again if you don't shoot and let the guy drive off. That's not what happened here AFAICT.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Oh come on... let go of the Texas and gun hate here, and admit it - he had the gun out, approached the truck, the truck starts to move with his wife in it, and you *STILL* think he didn't have any right to fire? Moogs... you're expecting someone to make rational decisions, taking into account all possible factors, in split-seconds, when the person they trust is telling them they're being raped... right.

You're making a great case for why he should never have been allowed to hold a gun in the first place.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by chucker You're making a great case for why he should never have been allowed to hold a gun in the first place.

By that reasoning, we shouldn't be allowed to ever protect ourselves. Golly, we might have to make a decision that might not be 100% correct in all instances. We obviously can't trust ourselves to take care of ourselves, or protect our own lives. Therefore, we should place all trust for such things into another institution, right?

Fuck. That. Noise. The cops can not be there 24/7 to bodyguard and protect you. At best, they are an after-the-fact investigatory team, in 99.9% of cases. I will always, at all times, take the steps that I feel are best from the circumstances involved, to protect myself and my family. In this case, the husband thought the circumstances included a rape, with his wife being taken away by the rapist, and he had the means to stop it.

Are you seriously saying you wouldn't do the same? Remember, from what he could tell, she was being raped, by her own claim. Not screwing around the side with a poor schmuck about to be thrown under the bus, but *raped*. And taken away. That's what he had to work with. Assume that what he had to work with *was* reality... assume you were in his position. What would you do?

Also, by that reasoning, cops shouldn't be allowed to carry guns either - look at the cases where they, *with training* fuck up abysmally.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Moogs I'm sending the Wolf Di-rectly. Kick: you are right I have something against the Texas system (but it's not random Tex-hate). The thing I don't agree with is concealed gun laws in public spaces, not the right to own a gun in general (which I have no problem with as long as it's not some frickin commando-style machine gun, but that's another story). And you're right about the bat scenario because nobody in a truck is going to be afraid of a guy with a bat, so there is no chance to force the driver to stop. You either swing for the fences as fast as you can or you may never see your wife again. The gun makes it a totally different power balance.

Gun... large vehicle... Hmm. Again, look into the Sean Bell case. *50 rounds* emptied into a car with unarmed men, solely because the car tried to get away, and made a motion at one of the plainclothes cops in doing so. All charges acquitted.

The reason I do not like concealed gun laws, is because of this very type of thing. People think, "OK I'm licensed to carry this thing around and protect my property and my family." There's no doubt it's a self-deputizing activity for many people in Texas. I understand the whole deterrence argument to be made but this is a perfect example of where things get fucked up.

Why yes, yes it was - because the woman yelled rape, and the two men had very different views on what was happening.

I guess we can't really know for sure unless we know things like which direction the truck was facing in teh driveway, whether he wife was screaming the whole time, whether the truck started to move slowly or whether the guy attempted to peal out, etc. But the way this reads right now, there is nothing I see that would prevent the guy from trotting right up to the window and ordering the guy to stop.

I'm sure we could find court transcripts...

It's not that complicated. If you're screwing some guy's wife and he catches you and she yells rape, even if you're dumb enough to try and pull away with her in the car, are you going to keep going when someone puts a gun 18" from your face with nothing but a car window in between, and he says "STOP!"? No. You're going to stop, unless you have a death wish.

Apparently he did...

This was obviously partly the wife's fault but it's not like you have to be thinking like Perry Mason to make a smarter decision than emptying half a clip into the guy before you even give him a warning.

Assumption...

This guy wanted to kill the dude fucking his wife and found a perfect excuse to do it, now he's off scot-free.

Wait, what?? You're equating infidelity with *rape*?? Wow.

I would not have posted this if the story went the same but one little detail inserted "As the truck moved toward the street, the husband stayed close to the cab, yelling at the driver to stop. When he didn't stop, the husband fired four shots." I would have no problem with that whatsoever because then you fear your wife's life really is in danger / that you may never see her again if you don't shoot and let the guy drive off. That's not what happened here AFAICT.

Again, assumption. It's funny, because I rather assumed he did. Interesting how we each assumed a particular scenario to support our opinions.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Kickaha By that reasoning, we shouldn't be allowed to ever protect ourselves.

When "protecting oneself" means killing another in the process, that's a rather strange definition. Yes, we all have our aggressive moments, and yes, this man was right to be agitated. That's no excuse to exert vigilante justice.

Golly, we might have to make a decision that might not be 100% correct in all instances. We obviously can't trust ourselves to take care of ourselves, or protect our own lives.

He didn't protect, and he sure didn't protect himself.

Also, by that reasoning, cops shouldn't be allowed to carry guns either - look at the cases where they, *with training* fuck up abysmally.

It happens.

[thegelding]

i try to keep out of these...

i have two statements and two questions

statements:

1) a man died...was killed...shot in the face

2) he was not a murderer, he was not a rapist

questions:

1) did he deserve to die?

2) if you wrongly take a life, should you be punished?

g


it just seems to me that if you chose to use a gun and you are right, ok...but if you chose to use a gun and you are wrong, you should face up to that and take responsibility...after all, a man is dead who shouldn't be

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Why yes, yes it was - because the woman yelled rape, and the two men had very different views on what was happening.

So if the man had raped his wife, that would have made shooting him on the spot okay?

I guess we really don't need judges in Texas — any real man™ is perfectly capable of protection™!

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by chucker So if the man had raped his wife, that would have made shooting him on the spot okay? I guess we really don't need judges in Texas — any real man™ is perfectly capable of protection™!

Oh for fuck's sake, chuck...

Again, put yourself in his position. This wasn't a case where he had the guy apprehended, and his wife was no longer in danger, and he put a bullet in him. He thought, based on her claim, that she was being raped and the guy was about to take her away in his car. Imminent danger.

Jesus, I give up.

[thegelding]

All charges acquitted.


mmmm, all charges acquitted on OJ too...all charges acquitted on the guy who shot the 16 yr old japanese exchange student who was trick or treating...all charges acquitted doesn't mean it is right, doesn't mean it is wrong either...just means...well who knows...i guess it means some person is free and some person is dead


grrr i hate these threads...bye

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by chucker When "protecting oneself" means killing another in the process, that's a rather strange definition. Yes, we all have our aggressive moments, and yes, this man was right to be agitated. That's no excuse to exert vigilante justice.

Ah yes, that old chestnut.

Vigilante justice is the application of justice by a vigilante. Justice is an action that takes place after a crime has been committed and/or stopped. A vigilante is a self-appointed law enforcer who seeks out that enforcement.

This was not someone who sought out the situation, nor was the supposed crime completed - it was, from everything he could tell, still happening.

"Vigilante justice" does not apply here.

If he had gone after the guy a week later, *that* would have been vigilante justice, and he would have been guilty of first degree murder.

If he had yanked the guy out of the truck, had him on the ground, and *then* killed him, *that* would have been vigilante justice, and he would have been guilty of murder, probably second degree.

He didn't protect, and he sure didn't protect himself.

I'm sure your family sleeps well knowing that you're not willing to protect them, just yourself. (Come on chucker... you would and you know it.)

It happens.

Exactly. It happens.

[thegelding]

eh, it's texas...it will all even out...i'm sure lasalle's family has guns too...and will be looking to even the score...

which is why i hate guns...fists, fine...even knives...ok cause you gotta HATE to kill with a knife...it is close and personal...

guns, not so much...

so, without guns, guy comes home and kicks other guys ass...

all is good...guy deserves ass kicking, not death

with gun, guy dies, woman goes to jail and i bet there is a 50% chance that some family member takes out the husband...i know i would if i was raised in a gun family and somebody killed my brother...

just sad all around...i don't want to take away guns, hell we can kill with knives and bare hands, but i do think guns make it too easy to kill...make it too easy to do something fast and violent without thinking

g

[Banana]

Kickaha nailed it on the head regarding the cops' role. They are never there the *instant* you need them to be, and by time they show up, the crime is already done and over. People are entitled to self-protection, and this can extend to their next of kin and their property.

if this was a child and mother firing the gun, nobody would have had their panties in bunch, right?

I also should remind that it's *far* much easier to be an armchair quarterback and debate what plays we could have taken to win the Super Bowl than it is to be an *actual* quarterback calling the play. You know what they say about hindsight...

As for assertions that guy shouldn't be even carrying a gun because he was a bit unhinged over that rape incident and so forth, this is a red herring. See, he was responding to his wife's scream of rape (whether it was truth or not is not relevant) and he was taking action to protect his wife. He already gave the guy the warning before he shot, so in that respect, he was *generous*. Seriously.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by thegelding eh, it's texas...it will all even out...i'm sure lasalle's family has guns too...and will be looking to even the score... which is why i hate guns...fists, fine...even knives...ok cause you gotta HATE to kill with a knife...it is close and personal... guns, not so much... so, without guns, guy comes home and kicks other guys ass... all is good...guy deserves ass kicking, not death with gun, guy dies, woman goes to jail and i bet there is a 50% chance that some family member takes out the husband...i know i would if i was raised in a gun family and somebody killed my brother...

gelding, I respect your opinion, but... um... define 'gun family', please. Because I was raised in a family where a gun (or several) in the household was the norm, and your logic there is pretty faulty. I would *never* consider such an act, and neither would any of my relatives, I'm pretty damned sure. Why the equality of 'gun family' with 'mindless revenge'?

just sad all around...i don't want to take away guns, hell we can kill with knives and bare hands, but i do think guns make it too easy to kill...make it too easy to do something fast and violent without thinking g

Agreed. Lack of thinking is generally the problem, no matter what the scenario.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Kickaha I'm sure your family sleeps well knowing that you're not willing to protect them, just yourself. (Come on chucker... you would and you know it.)

Protect friends and family? Of course. Violently defend them? No, because such cowboy scenarios just don't happen here.

Now, knocking someone unconscious I can sort of support, in such extreme cases of temporary insanity like this one where you don't have a clear head of what's going on and are, on top of that, being deliberately misled about it by your own wife — the one person you should be able to trust the very most. But it seems to me that this guy, had he not had a gun, would have used a knife or some other barbaric tool.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Gun... large vehicle... Hmm. Again, look into the Sean Bell case. *50 rounds* emptied into a car with unarmed men, solely because the car tried to get away, and made a motion at one of the plainclothes cops in doing so. All charges acquitted.

Whether or not someone was acquitted for a different action under a different circumstance is irrelevant. I'm not talking case-law here but just common sense of what the charges should've been in the first place.

Why yes, yes it was - because the woman yelled rape, and the two men had very different views on what was happening.

Very different views? How many interpretations can the guy in the car possibly make when

a) husband catches them
b) woman yells rape
c) husband pulls gun

Obviously not a fun position to be in but I'm at least trying to stop, put my hands up and tell the guy I didn't rape her. I'm probably going to get shot anyway but the last thing I'm doing is trying to drive away with her in the car unless he's verbally threatening her too.

I'm sure we could find court transcripts...

I don't have a lexis account, but knock yourself out.

Apparently he did [have a death wish]

No argument but that doesn't make the shooter's decision any less reckless until such time as he warns the guy to stop.

Wait, what?? You're equating infidelity with *rape*?? Wow.

What?

I'm saying if it were rape, it would be unlikely she'd be kissing the guy while sitting there in her robe. I suppose it's always possible the husband thinks he dragged her out of the house, into the car, while leaving the robe on, and kissing her before raping her? It doesn't fit the accusation the wife was making. Not unless there was some bigtime struggle going on in the truck when he saw her. Again nothing I read leads me to believe that is the case. AFAICT, he sees them and they're kissing. Not hardly a rape-like scene.

Interesting how we each assumed a particular scenario to support our opinions.

Of course we're making assumptions to some degree because of the lack of transcript. All I'm saying is, the shoot first ask questions later argument doesn't hold any water here for me, in this particular situation, as described. *shrug*

[turbulentfurball]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Oh come on... let go of the Texas and gun hate here, and admit it - he had the gun out, approached the truck, the truck starts to move with his wife in it, and you *STILL* think he didn't have any right to fire?

If that were me (and it never would be), I'd shoot the tyres of the car so he couldn't get away, then call the cops. Rather that than the chance I'd go down for murder.

[thegelding]

mmmm, actaully you talk about vigilante justice...that i don't understand...

revenge killing i actually do understand...if somebody killed one of my daughters i would hunt them down...i would kill them...does that make me a good human or a bad human? just human...

i would hope to find them before the police...and i would end their life...and then i would turn myself in to be punished in whatever way the courts decide...but i couldn't have that person in the world...that is my flaw...

but i have no access to guns, so it would be harder for me...

if i had lots of guns around the house and easy access, i would be out on the streets looking the same day

i assume this dead guy's family would do similar..but maybe not...which is why i gave it a 50% chance...

revenge killing is really the only type i understand...that and self preservation...but really less so the self preservation just because you can fight or flee for self preservation...you don't have to kill....

for revenge, you probably have to kill


old as time...eye for an eye and all that...i don't like it, i wish i was a better stronger person, but i easily see why a person couldn't allow an other person to keep walking this earth if they took someone you loved so dearly

g

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Moogs Whether or not someone was acquitted for a different action under a different circumstance is irrelevant. I'm not talking case-law here but just common sense of what the charges should've been in the first place.

Perhaps my memory is faulty, but wasn't the husband originally charged, and the charges were dropped when they realized the circumstances?

Very different views? How many interpretations can the guy in the car possibly make when a) husband catches them b) woman yells rape c) husband pulls gun Obviously not a fun position to be in but I'm at least trying to stop, put my hands up and tell the guy I didn't rape her. I'm probably going to get shot anyway but the last thing I'm doing is trying to drive away with her in the car. Although maybe he was in love and feared for her life too.

I'm thinking more of "Oh god, he caught us, but... he's not going to actually shoot over *that*... I've got to get the hell out of here!" as opposed to "He thinks I raped her, oh jesus he's *serious*... better stop..."

The driver may not have really been aware what she was claiming - while the husband obviously was.

Fundamental disconnect as to what might/could happen.

I don't have a lexis account, but knock yourself out.

Naw, I'm too lazy.

No argument but that doesn't make the shooter's decision any less reckless until such time as he warns the guy to stop.

The point on which we haven't the information, darnit.

What?

You said he wanted to shoot the guy for "screwing around" with his wife, and found a reason. Um... how do you equate this with the guy thinking his wife is being raped? Poor wording?

I'm saying if it were rape, it would be unlikely she'd be kissing the guy while sitting there in her robe. I suppose it's always possible the husband thinks he dragged her out of the house, into the car, while leaving the robe on, and kissing her before raping her? It doesn't fit the accusation the wife was making. Not unless there was some bigtime struggle going on in the truck when he saw her. Again nothing I read leads me to believe that is the case. AFAICT, he sees them and they're kissing. Not hardly a rape-like scene.

Wait, where did you get the kissing from? Link? Or another assumption? Again, my memory may be faulty, but IIRC, he found them making the two backed beast, wife freaks out, yells rape.

Of course we're making assumptions to some degree because of the lack of transcript. All I'm saying is, the shoot first ask questions later argument doesn't hold any water here for me, in this particular situation, as described. *shrug*

I really can't imagine the husband was silent during this, can you?

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by chucker Protect friends and family? Of course. Violently defend them? No, because such cowboy scenarios just don't happen here.

So it's by fiat of circumstance that you can avoid such a situation, and not personal belief. Good for you. Most people don't have that luxury.

Now, knocking someone unconscious I can sort of support, in such extreme cases of temporary insanity like this one where you don't have a clear head of what's going on and are, on top of that, being deliberately misled about it by your own wife — the one person you should be able to trust the very most. But it seems to me that this guy, had he not had a gun, would have used a knife or some other barbaric tool.

Wow. Now that is an assumption of the highest order.

[thegelding]

hate to repeat myself:

questions:

1) did he deserve to die?

2) if you wrongly take a life, should you be punished?



i could add a third....do you believe in personal responsibility?

if i wrongly took a life i would want to serve at least some punishment...but maybe that is just me

g

ps....

Most people don't have that luxury

.....actually most do...most don't carry guns...we can argue a lot of points...one we can not...without a gun this man would not have been shot in the face...he still might have been killed by the husband...who knows, but he wouldn't have been shot

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by thegelding mmmm, actaully you talk about vigilante justice...that i don't understand... revenge killing i actually do understand...if somebody killed one of my daughters i would hunt them down...i would kill them...does that make me a good human or a bad human? just human... i would hope to find them before the police...and i would end their life...and then i would turn myself in to be punished in whatever way the courts decide...but i couldn't have that person in the world...that is my flaw...

Fair enough. Thanks for being willing to share that. Me, I have a strong belief in the judicial system after the fact - it's what it's for, and taking it into your own hands is just wrong, in my opinion.

The hinge point however is 'after the fact'.

but i have no access to guns, so it would be harder for me... if i had lots of guns around the house and easy access, i would be out on the streets looking the same day

Okay. Having been raised in a 'gun family', that's the last thing that I would do - or any of my relatives, I wager. (Well, I have one uncle who's a bit off, he might.) I think it's *because* I was raised in a 'gun family' - we were taught from a young age what a gun was, how to use it, and most importantly, to respect it and learn how *not* to use it. To this day, I refuse to point so much as a BB gun at someone. (Hell, it feels all sorts of wrong to fire a paintball gun at someone. Fun, yeah, but I have to actively make myself do it - the locks and restrictions are that strong internally.)

I'm a strong believer that people fear what they have the least experience with.

i assume this dead guy's family would do similar..but maybe not...which is why i gave it a 50% chance... revenge killing is really the only type i understand...that and self preservation...but really less so the self preservation just because you can fight or flee for self preservation...you don't have to kill.... for revenge, you probably have to kill old as time...eye for an eye and all that...i don't like it, i wish i was a better stronger person, but i easily see why a person couldn't allow an other person to keep walking this earth if they took someone you loved so dearly g

Understood.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Kickaha So it's by fiat of circumstance that you can avoid such a situation, and not personal belief. Good for you. Most people don't have that luxury.

I don't understand why violence rates in the US are so insanely high compared to other remotely civilized countries, but I sure don't think "defending oneself" with guns is the answer to that, not even in the short term.

Wow. Now that is an assumption of the highest order.

What is?

[artesc]

well, I am from Texas and I'm pretty sure that we don't walk around with loaded guns waiting to become vigilante's at the drop of a hat. I'm also pretty sure that we aren't all cowboys, ride horses to work, live on ranches, love fajitas and wear sombreros. you are showing a rather biased and ignorant outlook. are all bostonians rude? are all black people good at sports? can not a single white person jump?

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by thegelding hate to repeat myself: questions: 1) did he deserve to die?

Nope.

2) if you wrongly take a life, should you be punished?

Define 'wrongly'.

i could add a third....do you believe in personal responsibility? if i wrongly took a life i would want to serve at least some punishment...but maybe that is just me

No, I don't think it's just you. I'd be wracked with guilt - but in this case, I'd also feel completely betrayed by my spouse - not so much for the infidelity, but for the rape claim that led me to believe that she was in imminent danger. I dunno, maybe the guy feels fine about it, but I wouldn't.

ps.........actually most do...most don't carry guns...

I was thinking more globally, and more about the crime situation than the gun ownership.

we can argue a lot of points...one we can not...without a gun this man would not have been shot in the face...he still might have been killed by the husband...who knows, but he wouldn't have been shot

And without a false claim by the wife, it's really really unlikely he would have been killed at all. I think that's the point from this pair of cases - the court felt that, given what he knew at the time, his actions were, if not completely justified, at least not completely out of line. Instead, they went after the instigator, the person who made a false claim that kicked off the situation.

[thegelding]

cool...

thanks for all the replies


and i stand by my first..."i try to keep out of these threads"

just have to try harder...

g


ps...define wrongly....

you answered it with the first question...

even if you think you are right at the time, and it's proven wrong (16 year old trick or treater, this case), then you face that fact...that is the personal responsibility...

"my wife fucked me over, but i took a life wrongly and so i do this"...now "this" can be community service or hard time...that is open to debate...but a man died...wrongly...karma needs something back for balance