Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 4/11/2006 8:14:02 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:17:28 AM EDT
I wouldn't call him a kid at that age.



And with what he was doing
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:17:28 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:24:37 AM EDT
1 for good guys!

For now

Yeah if the kid died, no questions..
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:26:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:29:23 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:29:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By brouhaha:
Shot in the chest that didn't kill him?

Must have been a 9mm.


Fixed it for ya
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:32:32 AM EDT
It's absolutely criminal that the robbery victim could be sued for protecting his own life.

I wonder if the guy could counter-sue for emotional distress and medical (therapy) damages?
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:36:59 AM EDT
The man told the teen he would give him his wallet and acted as though he was going to get it, but instead grabbed a larger caliber revolver that was lying on the seat, police said.



WTF?large caliber and the kid walked away and was sitting on the curb???

Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:37:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:38:22 AM EDT
To Too
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:40:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MrPink123:

Originally Posted By brouhaha:
Shot in the chest that didn't kill him?

Must have been a 9mm 45 .


Fixed it for ya



Refix'd
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:43:43 AM EDT
Most likely a 38. A 357 would have done more damage as would have anything larger. We are talking about the liberal media. Anything over a 22 is large caliber.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:44:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/11/2006 8:45:08 AM EDT by Specop_007]

Originally Posted By Another_Dude:

Originally Posted By MrPink123:

Originally Posted By brouhaha:
Shot in the chest that didn't kill him?

Must have been a 9mm 45 .38.


Fixed it for ya



Refix'd



Properly fixed
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:46:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/11/2006 8:48:20 AM EDT by Gunner1X]
This didn't happen in a crap hole area...
I live in a upper middle class (gated) neighborhood in Valley Ranch, a suburb of Dallas. The city of
Dallas, in their infinite wisdom; decided to classify two apartment complexes in my community as
section 8 (government assisted housing). This happened a few years ago and the cities contract with
the apartments expires this year and it will not be renewed...thank God. Both sets of these apartments
are very nice and according to the Valley Ranch Association the apartment owners have had enough.

Social engineering doesn't work...never has and it never will. Who the hell wants to sit in the backyard
of their $250K-$500K home and listen to the distant sound of gangster rap from half a mile away?
The new elementary school in the area went down the crapper within the fist year of the section 8
classification. The local home owners pulled their kids out of that school like it was on fire.
Petty crime went up 200 fold...I can't wait to get these #*%! out of the community. They leave in
mass when the free ride is over.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:46:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Specop_007:

Originally Posted By Another_Dude:

Originally Posted By MrPink123:

Originally Posted By brouhaha:
Shot in the chest that didn't kill him?

Must have been a 9mm 45 .38 and a .22.


Fixed it for ya



Refix'd



Properly fixed



Fix'd once and for all.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:49:47 AM EDT
I have a CHL in texas and would be interested to know if any lawyers running around AR-15 have any idea how this will shake out civilly. Obviously, the charges will most likely be dropped in criminal courts, but I wonder if this kids family will win the aruguement on whether the use of lethal force in this situation was necessary, that'll be the crutch. How much of an impact will the kids age have on the civil trial. Additionally, in your expert opinion, how lenient are juries in this type of situation?
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:53:20 AM EDT
Yeah, it is too bad that he lived.

That's not too far from me either.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:53:22 AM EDT
More proof that we can't rely on one-shot-stops. Handgun rounds are not 100% even center mass. Large calibre revolver probably means .357 but could be a more powerful or larger cartridge. Either way, people need to learn to put at least two to three rounds in anything worth shooting. It helps if you sing Mozambique as you do it - gives you a nice rhythm.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:59:42 AM EDT

From the article:

As he pushed the teen’s gun away, the man shot the suspect, police said.



Training works.

Carry your gun, and train how to use it.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 9:07:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ARDOC:
Most likely a 38. A 357 would have done more damage as would have anything larger. We are talking about the liberal media. Anything over a 22 Red Ryder is large caliber.



Link Posted: 4/11/2006 9:34:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:
Nicely handled, but he apparently needs a bigger caliber and/or better bullets. Darwin at work--but not working quiiiite hard enough.



A few follow up shots were certainly called for.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 9:43:49 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 9:53:00 AM EDT
I am all for the killing of those who would commit violent crimes. It teaches a lesson to all other would-be punks. As far as civil suit goes, wouldn't the punk's family have more ground to stand on if the kid was dead? I know it will probably come down to some "class" issue, though. I was trained to be sure that (in a fight) make sure the threat is dead. But, now, as a civie, does this still hold true? I only question because I've heard of lots of cases of assailants' families suing and winning...
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 9:55:51 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 10:03:06 AM EDT
My favorite is in Texas, the criminal is charged with all the deaths in the accident - including the ones that were on his side.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 10:16:15 AM EDT
Another +1 for the good guys.
Too bad the ghetto rat lived, although he probablty learned a valuable lesson( we can only hope).
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 10:30:46 AM EDT
All the more reason to practice "Double taps" (I do!)
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 10:51:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RSF45:
Another +1 for the good guys.
Too bad the ghetto rat lived, although he probablty learned a valuable lesson( we can only hope).



Unless he learned

"Nextest time, I gonna shoots da man a foe he can shoots me."


Or

"Voy a tirar al individuo siguiente antes de que él me tire."


Or

"I will shoot the next victim without provocation, so he is unable to retaliate orstrike pre-emptively."
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 2:34:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tx_ARaddict-2005:
I have a CHL in texas and would be interested to know if any lawyers running around AR-15 have any idea how this will shake out civilly. Obviously, the charges will most likely be dropped in criminal courts, but I wonder if this kids family will win the aruguement on whether the use of lethal force in this situation was necessary, that'll be the crutch. How much of an impact will the kids age have on the civil trial. Additionally, in your expert opinion, how lenient are juries in this type of situation?



Unless state laws specifically preclude a civil suit somehow, it is always a possibility and then a jury trial is a crap shoot no pun intended. Self defense can be a defense to a civil trial as well but even if you are right you will probably be bankrupt and right. State laws and federal for that matter really need a protection from civil suit provision if a grand jury refuses to indite in cases like this. This may already exist but I have not found it anywhere.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 2:37:13 PM EDT
"too" not "to"

And he needs to learn double taps!
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 3:50:47 PM EDT

I'll bet there was some pucker factor for the victim while the police were 'looking for' the perp's gun. Without that gun...well, it could've been uglier, at least in a PR way.

Jim
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 3:55:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/11/2006 3:57:21 PM EDT by NME]

Originally Posted By The_Breakfast_Fox:

Originally Posted By Specop_007:

Originally Posted By Another_Dude:

Originally Posted By MrPink123:

Originally Posted By brouhaha:
Shot in the chest that didn't kill him?

Must have been a 9mm 45 .38 and a .22.
Any of the above.


Fixed it for ya



Refix'd



Properly fixed



Fix'd once and for all.



They all are teh suck.

Link Posted: 4/11/2006 4:02:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BBQMAN:
I bet the lawyers are just lining up to sue the robbery victim.




Originally Posted By Tx_ARaddict-2005:
I have a CHL in texas and would be interested to know if any lawyers running around AR-15 have any idea how this will shake out civilly. Obviously, the charges will most likely be dropped in criminal courts, but I wonder if this kids family will win the aruguement on whether the use of lethal force in this situation was necessary, that'll be the crutch. How much of an impact will the kids age have on the civil trial. Additionally, in your expert opinion, how lenient are juries in this type of situation?



Grand Jury? No bill.

Civil case? No lawyer would touch it on a contingent fee basis.
Link Posted: 4/12/2006 6:19:29 PM EDT
need to finish the job
Link Posted: 4/12/2006 6:32:58 PM EDT
Remember........handguns suck no matter what caliber. But he ended the threat, yes?

BTW.....he should be given a medal, and reimbursed for the cost of the bullet.
Top Top