GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-14-2013, 21:35   #301
cbetts1
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: AUSTIN, TX
Posts: 70
If someone jumps out in front of you and your blood alcohol limit is a above legal limits, you are taking the rap event if it's not your fault. In this case the drunk kid was responsible for his vehicle and responsible for reacting to an obstruction in his lane. He failed, but I wonder if the broke down vehicle was blacked out. He it still responsible for reacting to an obstruction in his lane. I'm a father of two boy and I would never allow my boys to push the vehicle at night like that. Nothing worse than legs between two sets of bumpers at high speed. Although I can understand the desire to kill the drunk driver, there are much better ways to handle it. Any vehicle could break down. If was due to owner neglect, he will have to live with that.
cbetts1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 22:18   #302
racerford
Senior Member
 
racerford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: DFW area
Posts: 4,859


I haven't seen anyone say it was legal.


I have seen a LOT of people assume the Dad did it. I haven't seen a confession or hard evidence that he did do it.

Whoever the shooter was may very well go to jail. On the other hand he may get convicted and not go to jail. I mean drunk drivers kill people and get probation, why not the shooter? maybe he will get deferred adjudication. Maybe he will get off for you deadly force in the case of Criminal Mischief at Night.

We don't have enough evidence at the moment to convict the Dad of anything.

Has there been any more stories?
racerford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 04:03   #303
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by WarCry View Post
So, based on this quote - word-for-word what you said - you then agree with the call for gun control based on the tragedy at Sandy Hook?

If you can't see how that is identical to what you're advocating, then you're willfully picking and choosing when emotions should make something "okay". That is NOT the way the world works. The same rules have to apply to everyone.

Like I told Sputnik earlier, be careful to not draw inference from my observations about what I see, being what I want. I don't agree with any calls for gun control post Newtown, CT...but as you can see, the drumbeat has certainly swollen, based on my "theory".

With regards to Newtown, I know exactly why legislation is going to pass in CT, NY, etc... because it happened to a bunch of cute, little innocent, rich, (mostly white) kids in a bucolic setting, in one instance. MOST (so far looks like 12-14 of the parents of the killed kids have gone on record calling for more gun control. People are just like that. I've asked this same question on GT at least a dozen times - "Would your position on guns/drugs/dwi/etc change if it happened to your kid?

Most people are indifferent until **** happens to them, which is why I know our legal system sometimes is a joke. MOST PEOPLE who are anti-death penalty become virulent, passionate advocates when their 12 yr old son or daughter is dragged off his/her bike, sexually violated, strangled, and have their head and face beaten in with a pipe or rock.

If you choose to ignore that reality, not a damn thing I can do for you.

I am not going to sit on a jury and look at a dude who lost his two sons in a car accident to a drunk driver and tell him, "yeah, you should have better control of your faculties - you shouldn't have walked home, gotten your gun, walked back, whacked the guy".

As I have mentioned repeatedly, your mileage may vary. Good luck trying to pick apart my arguments or attempting to change my perspective. Been there, seen that, don't need 2nd hand observation to understand how that dude felt.
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 04:14   #304
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
You can not legally kill someone over the results of a motor vehicle collision.
Who cares really? He did. Maybe you mean "should not".

And it's not something as simple as a MV collision.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
All of your bluster and maneuvering aside that is the key issue.
There is no bluster or maneuvering.
  • We are working off the premise that he killed him.
  • We are working off the premise he will have a trial.
  • I have said if I was on the jury, I am not convicting, if the facts are what have been reported to date.



Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
The father murdered him, because he was upset about a car accident he helped create. There is no legal justification for that.
And again...your position...who cares?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
And you have never met me, you have no idea the impact drunk operating has had on my life. I simply have the ability to discuss the topic without becoming emotionally invested in an incorrect statement.
Fair enough. I am not "emotionally invested" in this topic. There are some things in life where I have a fairly good idea of how I am going to react, within a range of parameters.
What I see here is, apparently you have an issue because I don't agree with you, and the law, and what you assume is conventional thought.

Again, who cares? I don't. I am completely at peace with my position.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
But we come back around full tilt to, no matter how mad you are about the results of a traffic accident, killing the other driver because he hit you, is murder. Plain and simple.
So...if this goes to trial, and they don't apply for a murder charge, what will be your argument?

If he is not convicted by a jury of his peers, what will be your argument?


Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
The DD was guilty of many infractions, including manslaughter. But that does not give the father carte Blanche to murder him.

Justice is handled by the courts. Not upset individuals with firearms.
When you have offspring, and someone wipes them off the face of the earth from a drunken driving incident - even if "you started it" with leaving them in harm's way, create a post and tell us how you FEEL.

Because, as I have said before, despite all the solemn instructions given to juries about the facts, the law, the evidence, etc...more times than you choose to acknowledge...it boils down to emotion.

So for example, if I was the shooter in this case, and I was being offered a choice between a fast plea deal and a trial, I would take my chances at a trial.

If this were the case of a simple road rage accident, where no one in my family was hurt (your rear end collision) , and I'd walked up to the the other driver and put a shot in his/her head, I would take whatever deal the DA was offering, because chances are I would be totally screwed, up the creek, without a hope in hell...and in that scenario I don't see a DA offering a deal on anything.

- G
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 11:39   #305
sputnik767
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 8,082
Quote:
Originally Posted by frank4570 View Post
Would that be Northern Va? One of he suburbs of D.C.?
Not even close, about 3 hours south. Not that its relevant in the least, as I'm pretty sure murder is illegal in every state.

Last edited by sputnik767; 02-15-2013 at 11:42..
sputnik767 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 14:55   #306
mtbinva
Senior Member
 
mtbinva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by tx omfs View Post
The Okie Corral
roflmao!!!!!
__________________
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

Louis Pasteur
mtbinva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 04:17   #307
J-Pat
McBastage
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 66
Perhaps unqualified to post in this thread as I am not a father, but the guy should walk. He was under extreme mental duress directly related to the death of his two children.

If a psycho***** can take the time to chase her 5 children around to drown them and walk...this guy looks like a saint.

Last edited by J-Pat; 02-16-2013 at 04:20..
J-Pat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 13:05   #308
uncbear4
Senior Member
 
uncbear4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
Yeah, I suppose you are right. No sober driver has ever hit anyone walking down a dark back road at night.

I mean cars have reflectors, and there is no way a couple of kids standing behind a broke down vehicle could obscure those. And you know it's totally illegal to be pushing your vehicle down tge road in the lane of traffic, but lets not admit that.



And yeah, how rude of me to expect personal responsibility from the guy who's vehicle died. I mean it's not like the operator is expected to upkeep his vehicle. And it's not like most issues that disable vehicles stem from running the vehicle with a known issue till it becomes something that has to be addressed....

Yep, the driver is completely innocent. Nothing that he did put him and his family into a dangerous situation that night.



At the end of the day, the fathers actions contributed to the event. Had they got out, and walked on the side of oncoming traffic, which is pretty much SOP for walking dark backroads at night, they'd all be alive.

If they'd pulled to the side and waited for a tow, they might all still be alive.

Instead, the father elected to push a disabled vehicle down a dark backroad, and the kids died. There is no way you can look at all the things leading upto the collision and say he's not responsible.

He doesn't bare all the guilt, but he certainly bears a portion.
__________________
"The future is not a gift; it is an achievement. Every generation helps make its own future. This is the essential challenge of the present." - RFK
uncbear4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 13:20   #309
uncbear4
Senior Member
 
uncbear4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
It doesn't matter if someone dies. It's still murder either way. Trying to justify murder because the driver is drunk is silly. As multiple cops stated, what if he was diabetic?

You can kill to stop a encounter, that's jeopardizing someone's life. But I know of no law that makes it legal to shoot someone after the potentially lethal encounter is over.


His frame of mind has no bearing upon the charge, when you leave the scene, walk back to your house, get a gun, bring it back, use it and then hide it, clearly shows premeditation.

He may have been distraught, but that doesn't mean he's got a free pass at murder.
Knowing just what I know, and ignoring the known unknowns (i.e. where's the weapon in question? what other, if any, physical evidence exists?), I'd convict (a lesser charge, but a conviction, nonetheless).

I highly doubt it will happen, but if this guy gets the wrong jury, he will go down for first degree murder.

PS. Akstick: you're wasting your breath arguing w some of these posters. Logic trumps emotion every time; unfortunately, many seem unable to understand that proposition.

Best,
Bear
__________________
"The future is not a gift; it is an achievement. Every generation helps make its own future. This is the essential challenge of the present." - RFK

Last edited by uncbear4; 02-16-2013 at 13:22..
uncbear4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 15:04   #310
Annoyinglylongname
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbetts1 View Post
If someone jumps out in front of you and your blood alcohol limit is a above legal limits, you are taking the rap event if it's not your fault. In this case the drunk kid was responsible for his vehicle and responsible for reacting to an obstruction in his lane. He failed, but I wonder if the broke down vehicle was blacked out. He it still responsible for reacting to an obstruction in his lane. I'm a father of two boy and I would never allow my boys to push the vehicle at night like that. Nothing worse than legs between two sets of bumpers at high speed. Although I can understand the desire to kill the drunk driver, there are much better ways to handle it. Any vehicle could break down. If was due to owner neglect, he will have to live with that.
Bullcookies! You get behind the wheel of a car after drinking or consuming intoxicants, you get to suffer the consequences. I've got a great method of preventing that from happening, want to guess what it is?
I would never let my kids push a car in the dark, I would have gone home with them.
The one question I have is, with the surnames involved, were any of them here illegally? IMHO any person here illegally who kills someone else,regardless of intent should be guilty of capitol murder. My logic is, through a deliberately illegal act (them sneaking into my country) there resulted a death. Much like the cops are hindered by the fruit of the poisonous tree, illegals should be held to a higher standard than anyone else predicated upon the fact nothing would have happened if they'd kept their behinds in their own country. Can I get an Amen brothers and sisters?

Last edited by Annoyinglylongname; 02-16-2013 at 15:05..
Annoyinglylongname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 16:32   #311
writwing
Senior Member
 
writwing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by sputnik767 View Post
So am I right to understand that this shooting was not in self-defense? While I feel for him and for his loss, his actions were absolutely inappropriate and unjustified under the law. Keep in mind that our legal system isn't based on whether the drunk driver deserved it, the decision to charge the shooter is based on whether the shooter broke the law. In this case, he is not going to walk. Having said that, I am glad I'm not going to be sitting on his jury because I would hate to have to convict him.
Here is CT we have a number of instances of multiple offenders of DUI. Many are let go if they have connections. Dont talk to me about the "legal system" as anything but a corrupt body.
__________________
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life. T. Roosevelt
writwing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 20:19   #312
AR15 guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: WV
Posts: 342
Send a message via AIM to AR15 guy
I would have done the same...
AR15 guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 20:22   #313
klmmicro
Senior Member
 
klmmicro's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South End of the Left Coast
Posts: 2,575
Send a message via Yahoo to klmmicro


My grandfather worked in South America during the 40's, 50's and 60's. He watched a drunk driver get pulled from his car, put on is knees and shot on the spot for the crime. Cannot remember which country, but guess what crime was rarely committed...drunk driving!

It is a joke in this country. It should be a felony first time. Pull out a pistol and run through the mall. See how many felonies get thrown at you, even if no one is hurt. In most states though, one can get behind the wheel of a 3000 pound gasoline driven ramming machine and it is a misdemeanor. I have several acquaintances that have been convicted of DUI several times in a few years and they spent a whole three or four days in jail. Paid some small fine and it was business as usual.

Have a family member killed or maimed by some drunk driver and watch them walk in six months...then say how it is wrong to exact revenge upon them. They essentially get away with murder all the time. Who gives a crap if they feel bad about it "for the rest of their lives"...guess what, the victim(s)('s) family will too!

Hope he walks. The drunk deserved what he got, cause he gave it first. Oh, and we can all be sure that he was a first time/only time offender, right? Save your crying for someone deserving of mercy.
__________________
"The sword that cuts down evil is the sword that gives life"

*10 Ring, MBR and Reloading Clubs: #436*
klmmicro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 20:45   #314
GVFlyer
Senior Member
 
GVFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere in the air.
Posts: 6,553
When considering this case I think that it's important to point out two things: 1. Drunk drivers kill more people in the U.S. each year than do any other class of criminal. 2. Texas has "sudden passion" and "adequate cause" laws which mitigate crimes of passion.

For those of you do not recall what a crime of passion is, here's an extract.

"Crime of passion: a defendant's excuse for committing a crime due to sudden anger or heartbreak, in order to eliminate the element of "premeditation." This usually arises in murder or attempted murder cases, when a spouse or sweetheart finds his/her "beloved" having sexual intercourse with another and shoots or stabs one or both of the coupled pair. To make this claim the defendant must have acted immediately upon the rise of passion, without the time for contemplation or allowing for "a cooling of the blood." It is sometimes called the "Law of Texas" since juries in that state are lenient to cuckolded lovers who wreak their own vengeance."
__________________
The Truth Only Hurts If It Should.

http://www.specialops.org/

Last edited by GVFlyer; 02-16-2013 at 20:46..
GVFlyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 21:10   #315
jdeere_man
CLM Number 26
Charter Lifetime Member
 
jdeere_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NW Missouri
Posts: 3,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post

You can kill to stop a encounter, that's jeopardizing someone's life. But I know of no law that makes it legal to shoot someone after the potentially lethal encounter is over.
Actually in Missouri you can.

Missouri 563... (3) The actor was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of a forcible felony.

I have no problem with this guy walking.
__________________
Be weary of a summit that begins with sharing bread; for the sated man is at his weakest.

Last edited by jdeere_man; 02-16-2013 at 21:12..
jdeere_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 22:38   #316
vis35
Senior Member
 
vis35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Alaska
Posts: 377
What if….
The father went home, got his gun, came back and gave it to the drunk and said “Do the right thing”?
Or at least that could be his story.
I’d let him off.
__________________
Although my neighbors are all barbarians,
And you, you are a thousand miles away,
There are always two cups on my table.
- Tang Dynasty
vis35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 23:38   #317
jdeere_man
CLM Number 26
Charter Lifetime Member
 
jdeere_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NW Missouri
Posts: 3,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by vis35 View Post
What if….
The father went home, got his gun, came back and gave it to the drunk and said “Do the right thing”?
Or at least that could be his story.
I’d let him off.
there are plenty of things from an investigative standpoint that can determine how the shooting occurred.

But I think we agree that is besides the point
__________________
Be weary of a summit that begins with sharing bread; for the sated man is at his weakest.
jdeere_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 00:24   #318
Texas357
CLM Number 224
Señor Member
 
Texas357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CCTX
Posts: 10,042
You think the jury will get to hear the guy he shot was drunk? Depending on the lawyers and the judge, that might not get brought up until sentencing.
__________________
"The more ignorant the individual, the more credulous he becomes, and the more prone to believe in the fearful and satanic nature of the many things that pass his comprehension." - Charles W. Olliver


"I nominate you for President of Texas!" - Dr. Octagon
"I accept your nomination, and thank you for your vote."- Texas357
Texas357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 02:58   #319
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas357 View Post
You think the jury will get to hear the guy he shot was drunk? Depending on the lawyers and the judge, that might not get brought up until sentencing.

I am not an attorney.

For this specific case...why, and how would a jury not hear about the circumstances of what precipitated his attack on the 20yr old?

I can't see how this will not be introduced, and/or how the prosecution could ever block this from entering into the record.
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 03:08   #320
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,821
Blog Entries: 1
They may allow the accident to be in the defense, but being drunk probably not because there is no way that was known until after toxicology reports came back. The shooter only believed that the person he shot was drunk.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 06:30   #321
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
They may allow the accident to be in the defense, but being drunk probably not because there is no way that was known until after toxicology reports came back. The shooter only believed that the person he shot was drunk.
If I am on the jury I want to know caused this whole domino effect of events to unravel.

Questions I would be asking:

  • Why was dumbass dad pushing his car with his kids on a dark road?
  • Did other cars miss them?
  • If yes, what caused the driver who caused the collision to hit them? Distracted driving? Blind curve? Drunk driving?
The judge is gonna say it's not my business, and I'm going to be thinking "The **** you say, jackass" and then I'm voting not guilty, on the grounds that the dumbass prosecutor and judge are wasting my time by severely restricting me from the big picture.


With everything in life - give me the big picture. This is how the best decisions are made. They are not made due to narrow limited focus - ESPECIALLY when those things excluded from view have a tangible effect on the outcome of what is under consideration.


Yes, this might be opposite of how the CJ system works, but I never claimed to row my oar to the same beat.
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 06:57   #322
pesticidal
CLM Number 181
Eh?
 
pesticidal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 38,109
Send a message via Yahoo to pesticidal


I'm glad people believe in due process....
__________________
Never pass up the opportunity to pet your dog, talk to an old friend, or play catch with your kid.
pesticidal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 07:03   #323
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,821
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallium View Post
If I am on the jury I want to know caused this whole domino effect of events to unravel.

Questions I would be asking:
The questions you will be asking is actually none. As a juror you dont get to ask questions. You get to decide based what is presented to you. The Judge determines what questions are off-limits.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 07:10   #324
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
The questions you will be asking is actually none. As a juror you dont get to ask questions. You get to decide based what is presented to you. The Judge determines what questions are off-limits.
No. Those ARE the questions I am asking. If I can't ask them out loud, I am still asking them - in the jury room, or to myself.

If they don't get answered, I have way more than "reasonable doubt" that the system is screwed up.
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 07:11   #325
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by pesticidal View Post
I'm glad people believe in due process....

I believe in due process.
If I am on the jury.

Bring the guy to court and have him say what occurred. If the guy who kills his kids was drunk, he walks.
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 13:29.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,288
358 Members
930 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42