Originally posted by: nweaver
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: exdeath
Originally posted by: nweaver
Originally posted by: ShellGuy
My main issue with this is that if the truck was moving away from him unless the guy had taken his wife he was no longer in fear for anyones life nor were they bing harmed how can he be justified to shoot him in the head...
Will G.
This has been covered ad nauseum....if someone had your wife in their truck, and you thought they may have been trying to rape her, and now may be kidnapping her, it IS justified. A person has the right, and a duty, to defend and protect their family. You better believe if you are driving off with my wife while she screams rape that I'm putting one in your head.
According to the reports, everything the man did while shooting was in compliance with laws regarding the use of force.
For all we know he merely TRIED to drive away and the shooter fired into the window from a distance of a few feet as he was peeling out of the driveway, with no chance of missing or hitting other property or a bystander.
Why does everyone here always assume that 'shooting at a moving vehicle' automatically means 'wildly shooting at a fast moving 45 mph vehicle 3 blocks away' ?
Very true, but even if he was at the drivers window, aiming straight at his head, he was still putting his wife's life in danger. I doubt he was in a proper mental state at this point to gaurantee an accurate shot. No one--the Victim, the Mife, and the husband--could have been acting rationally at this stage.
When actions are committed in such an irrational situation, the margin for human error increases dramatically.
It would be interesting to see if the defense can swing prior intent on the husband, to kill one (or even both of them), in order to reduce her sentence, or even get her off the hook...Who's to say that her action wasn't intended as self-preservation if she had reason to believe that he was willing to kill both of them? I still think she's a c**t...but it seems like a reasonable argument.
They take you through stuff like this when you are in a decent CCW class, just like a police officer. If this man had been a police officer, I promise you that the thought of "what is behind my target" would have come into his mind. Who is to say a CCW, who is current on training and works these things is not the same way? I know my friends who are CCW go through these once a year..."if I'm in this situation, I would do this, I need to think about this". Sure that MAY go out the window, but if you have talked/thought about it before hand, it's easier to think about it when it's crunch time. Why do you teach kids to stop, drop, and roll? How many really need to know that? It's because if you drill it into the mind, it will come back when needed.
Originally posted by: nweaver
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: TheNinja
He fired at a moving vehicle that had his wife in it? Sounds to me like this guy may have known something fishy was going on and went on a rampage. He probably didn't care who he hit at the time, and now he's jumping for joy at what has unfolded.
I agree. I imagine that he had suspicions about an affair by this point. He has a good lawyer who has a good story for him.
I wouldn't think that it's normal for people to walking around with handguns, but it's Texas. Rationality is not a quality of that state
Either way, the wife is a c**t and deserves the maximum sentence. I still find it negligent to absolve the husband of any responsibility though. I'd be interested to see if the defense can put together some evidence proving that he was suspicious of, or fully aware of the affair.
Then again...I'm not sure if his involvement can even be brought into play if she is the one facing charges. A strange case, this one. I smell Law & Order episode next season...
Charge the husband with what? Did he commit an crime?
Originally posted by: TheNinja
He fired at a moving vehicle that had his wife in it? Sounds to me like this guy may have known something fishy was going on and went on a rampage. He probably didn't care who he hit at the time, and now he's jumping for joy at what has unfolded.
Originally posted by: moshquerade
he fired four shots into the vehicle. i am surprised he didn't hit his wife too.
Originally posted by: Cutterhead
Sounds to me like the only thing he did wrong was marry her.
Originally posted by: zinfamous
well...that's the thing. my argument concerns the possibilty, based on his actions as reported in the article, that he was aware of this affair before the incident. If he was, and the wife's attorney(s) can prove that he was, they could swing a probable cause to commit murder against him. (sounds silly, yeah...is that even possible??) Either way, they could paint him as a reckless individual, perhaps willing to shoot both of them.
What if he was driving over there with the intent to shoot both of them? We haven't heard much of his story, so it's hard to say....
Originally posted by: waggy
good. she deserves to be charged of murder.
Originally posted by: austin316
I just thought too, this worked out well for the guy that was getting cheated on. He took out the person sleeping with his wife and then his wife ends up in jail.
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: TheNinja
I wouldn't think that it's normal for people to walking around with handguns, but it's Texas. Rationality is not a quality of that state
...
Originally posted by: nweaver
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: exdeath
Originally posted by: nweaver
Originally posted by: ShellGuy
My main issue with this is that if the truck was moving away from him unless the guy had taken his wife he was no longer in fear for anyones life nor were they bing harmed how can he be justified to shoot him in the head...
Will G.
This has been covered ad nauseum....if someone had your wife in their truck, and you thought they may have been trying to rape her, and now may be kidnapping her, it IS justified. A person has the right, and a duty, to defend and protect their family. You better believe if you are driving off with my wife while she screams rape that I'm putting one in your head.
According to the reports, everything the man did while shooting was in compliance with laws regarding the use of force.
For all we know he merely TRIED to drive away and the shooter fired into the window from a distance of a few feet as he was peeling out of the driveway, with no chance of missing or hitting other property or a bystander.
Why does everyone here always assume that 'shooting at a moving vehicle' automatically means 'wildly shooting at a fast moving 45 mph vehicle 3 blocks away' ?
Very true, but even if he was at the drivers window, aiming straight at his head, he was still putting his wife's life in danger. I doubt he was in a proper mental state at this point to gaurantee an accurate shot. No one--the Victim, the Mife, and the husband--could have been acting rationally at this stage.
When actions are committed in such an irrational situation, the margin for human error increases dramatically.
It would be interesting to see if the defense can swing prior intent on the husband, to kill one (or even both of them), in order to reduce her sentence, or even get her off the hook...Who's to say that her action wasn't intended as self-preservation if she had reason to believe that he was willing to kill both of them? I still think she's a c**t...but it seems like a reasonable argument.
They take you through stuff like this when you are in a decent CCW class, just like a police officer. If this man had been a police officer, I promise you that the thought of "what is behind my target" would have come into his mind. Who is to say a CCW, who is current on training and works these things is not the same way? I know my friends who are CCW go through these once a year..."if I'm in this situation, I would do this, I need to think about this". Sure that MAY go out the window, but if you have talked/thought about it before hand, it's easier to think about it when it's crunch time. Why do you teach kids to stop, drop, and roll? How many really need to know that? It's because if you drill it into the mind, it will come back when needed.
Originally posted by: Fayd
good, her husband wasnt exactly in the right, but i cant fault his actions.
she's a tramp, whore, bitch...yeah.
Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Originally posted by: zinfamous
well...that's the thing. my argument concerns the possibilty, based on his actions as reported in the article, that he was aware of this affair before the incident. If he was, and the wife's attorney(s) can prove that he was, they could swing a probable cause to commit murder against him. (sounds silly, yeah...is that even possible??) Either way, they could paint him as a reckless individual, perhaps willing to shoot both of them.
What if he was driving over there with the intent to shoot both of them? We haven't heard much of his story, so it's hard to say....
I might have swung to your way of thinking, *IF* she were not being charged with filing a false police report. This tells me that she told the police that she was being raped and kidnapped. So, she either lied to the police to cover her ass in all of this, too, or she is the dumbest woman on the planet... lying to the cops to cover her husband, not thinking she would be charged.