[Paul53]

Clear case of self defense IMHO. They'll never find 12 people in Texas who see it any other way. Bet they plead down to misdemeanor littering. More than twice the legal BA.

[aspartz]

Originally Posted by Gallium

He is already in prison.

He's in jail, awaiting trial. I hope he is convicted and serves a long sentence. You and I both know that if a little-old-lady had dottered out of the other car and said "I KNEW my reactions were getting too bad to drive!!!" Hw would have done nothing. YEt his kids would still be dead. His action was politically motivated.

Originally Posted by fnfalman

I can dig it. Drunk driving is premeditated murder as far as I'm concerned.

You know that when you operate your car while impaired that you'd run the risk of running over something or someone, yet you take the chance anyway. If that's not premeditation then I don't know what is.

So every senior citizen who is driving with a base ability that is poor is under the cloud? Those who simply can't drive due to idiocy or any other cause?

Originally Posted by Paul53

Clear case of self defense

Where's the overt threat? Killing a disarmed and harmless person is not self defense, this was retribution.

ARS

[mtbinva]

Diminished capacity. Just remember that in your rational situation/state of mind.

Will he be punished? Probably. Bad? I personally don't think so.

Just my $0.02.

[racerford]

So, so far, we have no gun, and no witnesses. Unless the gunshot residue test comes up positive, proving the Father did it willbe more difficult. The Mother was there too. Maybe a cousin was following further back, and shot the guy.

As the sherriff(?) said, not having the gun is problematic.

I look forward to see how this develops.

[J_Rico]

Originally Posted by The Maggy

Justice is not left for the random person to dispense.

That pretty much describes the current legal system, except that it is twelve random registered voters.

Originally Posted by The Maggy

If someone kills your kids and you decide to do justice on the side of a road; do not expect sympathy, leniency, or a free pass.

So, you would not even offer sympathy? Guy watches a drunk driver crush two of his children and you can not offer sympathy?

[SC Tiger]

The kids should not have been pushing the car but that does not absolve the drunk of blame. A man is responsible for his actions whether drunk or sober.

What the dad did was illegal but I have a hard time judging him for it. If I saw my kids in the condition he likely saw his, my reaction would likely be similar - right or wrong.

I wonder if the old "temporary insanity" defense would work here. I honestly think if you give a jury a good excuse not to convict, they won't.

[SC Tiger]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

I can dig it. Drunk driving is premeditated murder as far as I'm concerned.

You know that when you operate your car while impaired that you'd run the risk of running over something or someone, yet you take the chance anyway. If that's not premeditation then I don't know what is.

For once we agree.

[larry_minn]

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthre...1#post19983731
So the father of this (severly injured) Officer can go down to the homes of everyone involved.

These were sim only guns. Trainee was supposedly shot with a duty weapon that wasn't turned in due to negligence. Academy commander resigned and six other commanders and supervisors were suspended. Academy was closed today

So can he murder just the shooter? or does the commander also get murdered? How about the supervisors? Kneecap again? (Still wondering if EMS doing CPR are in danger?
I must admit I never realized everyday folks were a danger to EMS. I thought just criminals.
Reading replies. I wish I had not spent time/money for CCWP in MN. I already had mine for decade.
If just reading story gets you so upset that you state you would gladly commit murder..... Maybe you should reconsider carrying a firearm.

[racerford]

Originally Posted by larry_minn

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthre...1#post19983731
So the father of this (severly injured) Officer can go down to the homes of everyone involved.

These were sim only guns. Trainee was supposedly shot with a duty weapon that wasn't turned in due to negligence. Academy commander resigned and six other commanders and supervisors were suspended. Academy was closed today

So can he murder just the shooter? or does the commander also get murdered? How about the supervisors? Kneecap again? (Still wondering if EMS doing CPR are in danger?
I must admit I never realized everyday folks were a danger to EMS. I thought just criminals.
Reading replies. I wish I had not spent time/money for CCWP in MN. I already had mine for decade.
If just reading story gets you so upset that you state you would gladly commit murder..... Maybe you should reconsider carrying a firearm.

First, there is a difference between an adult in a dangerous profession in training with no one involved impaired, and the father not right there; and your young children by an impaired driver, and you right there.

Second, very few are saying that it is the right thing to do, or that the Dad has a right to do it. Most understand it, many have said they would/may do the same thing. That is not the same as saying it is the right thing.

Third, you assume the Dad did the shooting. I don't think that we know that.


Did some say they would shoot EMS? I missed that one.

[The Maggy]

Originally Posted by J_Rico

That pretty much describes the current legal system, except that it is twelve random registered voters.




So, you would not even offer sympathy? Guy watches a drunk driver crush two of his children and you can not offer sympathy?

In my quoted post, "justice" is in reference to acting as judge, jury, and executioner on the side of a road. Circumventing the judicial system because you think that it is swift justice is not you place. Vengeance does not mean the same thing as justice.

Be honest about the situation. Yes he saw his two children die. I would offer my sympathies for this. Then he proceeded to walk home, retrieve a firearm, return to the scene, and execute the driver. This is where someone loses my sympathies.

[tslex]

Originally Posted by gwalchmai

See Anatomy of a Murder.

I'd like to see Lee Remick in those slacks again.

[gwalchmai]

Yes, she was special.

[JoeCitizen]

How about a 19 year old girl driving down the road texting. She's operating the vehicle in a diminished capacity. If she runs over and kills my kid while texting, it's ok to pull her out of the car and blow her brains out?

[mtbinva]

Not OK by any stretch. However the father witnessing his sons death would still put him in the diminished capacity and, well, he may have acted the same way as he did with the drunk driver.

I do not condone his actions, however I think the diminished capacity as a defense is viable.

[SixDemonBag]

Can't say I blame him. **** drunk drivers.

[RonS]

Once the legal system no longer functions we will have anarchy because people know that it is every man for himself.

Once we have anarchy we will elect an emperor to restore order out of desperation.

After we have had an empire for a few generations our decendants can overthrow the empire and try a republic.

Once we have a republic it wil devolve into a democracy.

The democracy will become bloated and disfunctional and stop working, including not having a working justice system.

We, the people, are the problem. Our society doesn't work because of dishonesty, selfishness and people abusing the system.

[fnfalman]

Originally Posted by aspartz

So every senior citizen who is driving with a base ability that is poor is under the cloud? Those who simply can't drive due to idiocy or any other cause?

Do these senior citizens drive without license? Do they drive under the influence of alcohol?

These "idiots" that drive; let's say that they're texting and driving, I say prosecute their asses for premeditated murder too. They purposely put others in harm's way over nothing.

Where's the overt threat? Killing a disarmed and harmless person is not self defense, this was retribution.

ARS

That's why it's "justice" and not necessarily "legal". Besides, crime of passion is still on the book.

What about the lady who put a .25Auto round in the back of the rapist of her child? This happened a few years back.

[AK_Stick]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

That's why it's "justice" and not necessarily "legal". Besides, crime of passion is still on the book.

What about the lady who put a .25Auto round in the back of the rapist of her child? This happened a few years back.

The murder of the Drunk, was not justice, it was retribution.

The murderer going to jail, will be justice.

The drunk was wrong, and death would have been a just sentance for him, but it wasn't for the father to dictate.


Saying that this guy was right in shooting the drunk, is like saying the next time a kid texting causes a wreck the cops should just shoot them and call it a day.


I won't say I'd have done it any different, but it was as wrong as the drunk drivers actions.

[GlockRik]

the father was a dumba** for having his kids pushing the truck on a dark road.

the drunk was a duma** for driving under the influence.

2 dumba**es met and 3 people are dead. 2 are innocent.

If I was on the jury, the father probably walks, but he is still a dumba**.

[GVFlyer]

Originally Posted by gjk5

it was pretty articulate (referring to your post), your assertion was asinine.

Asking Bob if he was a Texan was a question, not an assertion. Grammar much?


Making ad hominem attacks in lieu of engaging in meaningful discourse is a declaration of intellectual incompetency, BTW.


Just to remind you, the entirety of your articulate post was –

Originally Posted by gjk5

oh jesus, give me a break

If you think this ejaculation coherently expresses whatever your beef was with my original post, I am probably wasting my time with the rest of this post. However slight the chance of comprehension may be - here goes anyway.


To reiterate my original question to Bob, the subtext was, “Do you merely reside in Texas or do you embrace the typical belief systems and social mores of a Red State that codified laws excepting violent behavior based upon state of mind?” That question is in no way extremely stupid or foolish (as your use of “asinine” would allege).

Originally Posted by gjk5

I was born in SC but lived in TX from 2-25 years of age, was I a Texan then?

I have no way of knowing if your values and opinions reflect those of the majority of Texans. It’s much as I stated in another post, I have lived in a state populated by closet socialists who believe that when I quote from Marx’s Critique of the Gotha Programme - “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”, that it sounds like a pretty good idea - yet I have maintained by conservative views. Which, by the way, is why I asked Bob my original question.

[Louisville Glocker]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

Sorry but your wrong.

There are entirely too many incidents of sober drivers killing people on the road under those circumstances for the father to be completely blame free.

Also, it's entirely likely the vehicle broke down for reasons of operator/maintainer error.

If you put your kids out on a dark road pushing a disabled vehicle, you are setting the stage for tragedy. If they were only a few blocks from home, returning to the vehicle during daylight would have been a much more sensible option.


While he's only legally guilty of murder, he most definitely shares some of the responsibility for his kids being on that road.

Totally disagree. Well, almost totally. Life isn't completely safe, agreed. But now you're saying it is the guy's fault his car broke down? Give me a break.

In some yuppie world, of high priced monthly car payments, maybe your car never gets old, but cars do break for normal common folks. And if it breaks down close to your home, push it the couple blocks back.

Total fault is on the drunk. 100 percent. He deserved his punishment.

Dark road...oooh...did you know that there are reflectors on the back of cars? Did you know that cars are equipped with headlights? People should be able to notice a car in front of them on the shoulder of a road before they hit it.

I say the drunk deserved his death sentence, and blaming the victim is pure BS.

[ChuteTheMall]

Originally Posted by JoeCitizen

How about a 19 year old girl driving down the road texting. She's operating the vehicle in a diminished capacity. If she runs over and kills my kid while texting, it's ok to pull her out of the car and blow her brains out?

Yes, texting while driving is a crime that should be in the same category as drunk driving.

Just IMHO.

[Toetag]

Probation for Life.......if that, nothing more.

[SC Tiger]

Originally Posted by larry_minn

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthre...1#post19983731
So the father of this (severly injured) Officer can go down to the homes of everyone involved.

These were sim only guns. Trainee was supposedly shot with a duty weapon that wasn't turned in due to negligence. Academy commander resigned and six other commanders and supervisors were suspended. Academy was closed today

So can he murder just the shooter? or does the commander also get murdered? How about the supervisors? Kneecap again? (Still wondering if EMS doing CPR are in danger?
I must admit I never realized everyday folks were a danger to EMS. I thought just criminals.
Reading replies. I wish I had not spent time/money for CCWP in MN. I already had mine for decade.
If just reading story gets you so upset that you state you would gladly commit murder..... Maybe you should reconsider carrying a firearm.

These are not the same thing.

One involves men in a known-dangerous situation where a mistake happened.

The other (the case being discussed) involves an intentional act (the driver intentionally got drunk and then drove, so he is responsible for everything that happened after that). Not saying that shooting the driver is right, but I understand why he would want to do it.

[SC Tiger]

Originally Posted by ChuteTheMall

Yes, texting while driving is a crime that should be in the same category as drunk driving.

Just IMHO.

Agreed.