close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Father shoots drunk driver who killed his sons

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by xray678, Feb 11, 2013.

  1. jdavionic

    jdavionic NRA Member

    15,652
    3,595
    May 1, 2008
    I understand why he did it. He obviously broke the law to punish the other guy. He made the decision that committing the crime was worth the potential punishment.
     
  2. Gallium

    Gallium CLM

    28,685
    11
    Mar 26, 2003
    If I was on the jury, the ****ing president of the United States, and just about every one of those lying scumbag senators and representatives stand up, place hand on Bible, and swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

    They lie, I lie. As far as I heard when I was on that jury it went down just like you outlined. God help the system if I ever land on a jury with a case as this.

    One more thing: I thought drunk driving was illegal? How could that dude be possibly have been driving drunk? There are strict laws against that.
     

  3. sputnik767

    sputnik767

    8,536
    2
    Nov 1, 2007
    Chicago
    I completely agree with you. My only point is that in this case, the only person who will stand trial is the shooter. And since his shooting was not legally justified, he is probably not going to walk.
     
  4. TSAX

    TSAX USAF Vet

    10,162
    7
    Jun 5, 2010
  5. Ruggles

    Ruggles

    10,280
    23
    Jun 13, 2005
    Tejas
    If my jury summons is in the mail the courts can go ahead and dismiss me now.

    Not guilty.
     
  6. sputnik767

    sputnik767

    8,536
    2
    Nov 1, 2007
    Chicago
    VA did have a duty to retreat when I first applied for my CCW about 5 years ago. At least that is what I was taught in the course. Things may have certainly changed, but I didn't hear of it.

    Duty to retreat and gun friendly are not opposites of each other.
     
  7. GVFlyer

    GVFlyer Senior Member

    11,337
    2,655
    Sep 9, 2008
    Somewhere in the air.
    I'm from Texas; I don't think a Texas jury will convict this boy of murder.
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2013
  8. HollowHead

    HollowHead Firm member

    24,456
    2,060
    May 16, 2005
    Where the buffalo roam
    This is it. I've seen enough diabetics in full keto to know that not only do they act drunk, they smell it. This guy played judge and jury before the facts and should be locked away. HH
     
  9. Hummer

    Hummer Big Member

    2,180
    2
    Mar 16, 2003
    Western Colorado
    Given what we know from the brief article I'm not inclined to agree with the mob here. The man's truck broke down (possibly due to his negligence), so instead of calling a tow truck he has his son's push the truck along a county road late at night (almost midnight) in complete darkness (in a curve?) in an attempt to get it started. Someone comes down the road and collides with a disabled dark object. It could just as easily been your wife or child who hit the truck. An accident, but 'Mr. I can't get my truck started' decides to shoot victim #3 after he negligently put victims #1 & #2 at great risk, costing them their lives.

    The intoxicated driver obviously has liability but I don't buy the concept that it's exclusive, or that it justifies murder.
     
  10. Z71bill

    Z71bill

    15,881
    3,014
    Feb 19, 2007
    Texas
    So what should happen if the driver is not drunk?

    What if he had a stroke?

    What if he had a heart attack?

    What if he was texting?

    What if he was rushing to a hospital because his wife was having a baby?

    Or to save his child that was sick?
     
  11. I don't care how many times you try to convince me the driver could have just accidently killed that man' sons, and not been drunk, He will walk here in Texas. Count on it.
     
  12. Bushflyr

    Bushflyr ʇno uıƃuɐɥ ʇsnɾ Millennium Member

    3,532
    3
    Mar 17, 1999
    Western WA
    F.T.M.F.W. :thumbsup:

    IMO, driving after having some arbitrary number of drinks should not be illegal. As long as the operator is made to take full responsibility for any consequences of his actions.
     
  13. GVFlyer

    GVFlyer Senior Member

    11,337
    2,655
    Sep 9, 2008
    Somewhere in the air.
    FWIW, Texas still has "adequate cause" and "sudden passion" laws which have allowed people to walk for things ranging from shooting a guy who made your teenage daughter pregnant to shooting an adulterer off your wife.

    § 19.02. MURDER. (a) In this section:
    (1) "Adequate cause" means cause that would commonly produce a degree of anger, rage, resentment, or terror in a person of ordinary temper, sufficient to render the mind incapable of cool reflection.

    (2) "Sudden passion" means passion directly caused by and arising out of provocation by the individual killed or another acting with the person killed which passion arises at the time of the offense and is not solely the result of former provocation.
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2013
  14. Altaris

    Altaris

    11,052
    4,537
    Feb 16, 2004
    Round Rock, TX
    I agree.

    Especially if he was close enough to walk home and get his gun. If it is too dark and it is not safe to push the car, lock it up, walk home, and deal with it in the morning when it is light out.

    I would think a big thing in the court and juries eyes is, did he know if the driver was drunk or not. If he just shot someone without knowing, then he should go to jail. If he knew for a fact the guy was drunk, then he stands a greater chance of getting off. Proving that one way or another I think will be difficult though.
     
  15. Maybe he gets manslaughter or maybe he gets off for temporary insanity. When you see your children die before your eyes and the perp walking away, it is not too far fetched to think he might have gone into an emotional rage he had no control over.

    Not guilty by way of horror and grief induced temporary insanity.
     
  16. NeverMore1701

    NeverMore1701 Fear no Evil Platinum Member

    39,523
    5,218
    Jun 25, 2004
    Amarillo, Tx
    I'd vote to convict for littering, fine him $5 and move on to the next case.
     
  17. larry_minn

    larry_minn Silver Member Millennium Member

    9,998
    1,261
    Dec 16, 1999
    Minnesota
    From the info in article. HE left scene, went home, got gun, came back and committed FIRST DEGREE, PREMEDITADED MURDER.
    I feel bad for his loss. If he had beat up the driver I could see him getting a pass. Acting in momentary anger/loss would be one thing.
    Unless other info. If I was on jury I would (likely) vote guilty on manslaghter. (most likely charge)
     
  18. Inebriated

    Inebriated

    2,451
    58
    Feb 20, 2012
    All I can say is he's getting a "not guilty" from this juror.
     
  19. BuckFiddy

    BuckFiddy

    36
    3
    Nov 20, 2012
    Some people deserve it... and jury nullification comes to mind.
     
  20. HollowHead

    HollowHead Firm member

    24,456
    2,060
    May 16, 2005
    Where the buffalo roam
    And this is the crux. There are medical conditions (illustrated in many posts here) that mimic inebriation and he could have very well murdered say, an epileptic. HH