The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 3, 2012, 01:38 PM   #76
matthew261
Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2012
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 49
Every situation is different. In this case, a judge and jury reviewed the evidence and made the call. Having said that, I can certainly see why it is debatable. In the video it appears that the shooter's car is not really blocked in, thus leaving him an opportunity to pull away. It also seems the shooter might have been able to dial 911, explain the situation and that he was outside the police station with the maniac in pursuit.
matthew261 is offline  
Old March 3, 2012, 02:27 PM   #77
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvw3
fiddletown It did matter what I think. We had the same situation in my family. My nephew was carrying his gun due to the same type of situation. His girl friend had an x that had confronted him. I talked him out of carrying the gun as it is not legal in the state of IL...
That has nothing whatsoever to do with Mr. Waller or anything being discussed in this thread.
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old March 3, 2012, 04:12 PM   #78
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthew261
Every situation is different. In this case, a judge and jury reviewed the evidence and made the call. Having said that, I can certainly see why it is debatable. In the video it appears that the shooter's car is not really blocked in, thus leaving him an opportunity to pull away. It also seems the shooter might have been able to dial 911, explain the situation and that he was outside the police station with the maniac in pursuit.
Possibly, but only if he had a cell phone. Given that just about everyone has one, it seems likely that Waller did, too. We simply don't know that he had a cell phone.

I would submit that he may have pulled into the police station because he hoped he'd be safe there. If that's the case, that would indicate to me that his fear of death or bodily harm began well before he arrived at the CPD. Speculation, but not entirely unreasonable, I don't think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gvw3
. . . . If the other guy had a gun or a knife ok shoot him.
Arkansas law doesn't require anyone to confirm that their attacker has a weapon before defending themselves.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 3, 2012, 04:29 PM   #79
9mm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2011
Location: Land of the Free
Posts: 2,711
I would have my gun drawn and stayed in the car. There is a door and a window that protects you from someone smashing you/stabbing you. He could have fired through that if needed be.


Lets not forget this was over a relationship... Drama.. Should never involve in that type of drama.
__________________
See user title
9mm is offline  
Old March 3, 2012, 04:51 PM   #80
matthew261
Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2012
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 49
"Arkansas law doesn't require anyone to confirm that their attacker has a weapon before defending themselves."

That's an important factor in the judgement
matthew261 is offline  
Old March 3, 2012, 05:11 PM   #81
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,425
Quote:
Murder to me....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Looks to me like the shooter was a coward afraid to take a beating. The worst person to fight is a coward as they will shoot you to avoid taking a beating. This looks like murder to me. If the other guy had a gun or a knife ok shoot him.
Right, what you think in regard to the case doesn't matter.

Oh I get it. The other guy was about to do great bodily harm to the intended victim but because he was smarter than the attacker and had a gun for protection, you are saying he is a coward.

Many people carry a gun so as to protect themselves from significant assaults. That makes them cowards?

Fight smarter, not harder, if you can't avoid the fight.

Quote:
fiddletown It did matter what I think. We had the same situation in my family. My nephew was carrying his gun due to the same type of situation. His girl friend had an x that had confronted him. I talked him out of carrying the gun as it is not legal in the state of IL

They did end up in a fight but both walked away.
If it was legal for your nephew to carry a gun, would you have been so quick to talking him out of carrying protection so that he could get a proper beating to show he isn't a coward?

Just because your nephew got a beating doesn't mean that other people should get a beating. You are naive to think that such confrontations are only limited to simple beatings. It isn't exactly uncommon for jilted lovers to deliver life changing injuries or even to commit murder.

Your situation isn't anything like the case being discussed except for the fact that in both, you weren't the one who was apt to get harmed.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old March 4, 2012, 10:26 AM   #82
ltc444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2011
Location: Vernon AZ
Posts: 1,195
After reviewing the video there are some things I noticed.

1. the shooter did everything we talk about in a variety of threads.
a.He attempted to avoid the confrontation by driving away from his pursurer.
b. He went to a safe place. The Police Station.
c. His line of retreat was blocked.


2. He faced multiple attackers.

a. The Video shows two figures charging his car. In my reading I did not see any comments on the second figure which charged the shooter.
b. The second attacker fled the scene.

3. Given the fact that the shooter had fled from his attackers and he faced multiple attackers. There was a clear disparity of force.

This a good shoot.
ltc444 is offline  
Old March 4, 2012, 11:13 AM   #83
m&p45acp10+1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 3,310
There was no second attacker in the video. Maybe the girlfriend trying to stop him. I am still having trouble with the fact that Waller was charged with murder. Regardless of preexisting circumstances it was a clear cut case of self defense.

The attacker saw that he was armed, and continued to charge at him. I would have shot him too. Not only was he charging to assualt a man in front of the police station. He saw the gun and charged anyway. Unfortunately he did not live to learn a lesson.
__________________
No matter how many times you do it and nothing happens it only takes something going wrong one time to kill you.
m&p45acp10+1 is offline  
Old March 4, 2012, 11:33 AM   #84
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 5,675
The second person out of the vehicle in the video is the girl in the middle of said triangle.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old March 4, 2012, 11:52 AM   #85
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,425
Quote:
I am still having trouble with the fact that Waller was charged with murder. Regardless of preexisting circumstances it was a clear cut case of self defense.
I don't think anyone was arguing that it wasn't a case of self defense. The issue at hand was whether the use of lethal force was warranted/justified in this case of self defense. Was it reasonable that the shooter felt that his life was at risk for significant bodily injury or death such that his use of lethal force would be justified.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old March 4, 2012, 12:16 PM   #86
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryH
If the dude didn't display a weapon then the killer murdered someone because he was afraid of an ass whooping. I didn't see or hear all of the evidence, but when is it acceptable to gun someone down on a city street?
In most states, it is acceptable (i.e. legal) any time the defendant believes he or she is in immediate danger of death or serous bodily injury from an assailant. The law does not require you to suck it up and take an ass-whuppin' "like a man."

In this case, I don't think the defendant was guilty of anything (other than maybe sleeping with the wrong woman). Even adulterers have a Constitutional right to self defense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GlockNLoaded32
still even though Childress boxed Waller in and approached in a threatening manner he was still unarmed...that doesn't give Waller the right to kill a defenseless man
Actually, yes it does. "Unarmed" does not equal "defenseless." Childress chose to pursue Waller and initiate an attack. Waller had every right to defend himself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk
What if he had this or that, it changes the facts as we know them and is irrelevant. I am not saying the jury was wrong. I am saying that the shooter was rightfully arrested and charged with murder. If his attorney was able to interject reasonable doubt and get him acquitted, great, thats his job.
But a charge of murder requires premeditation. Absent premeditation, it isn't murder. Murder means the killer set out with the intention of taking the other person's life. In this case, the shooter was trying to escape from the decedent. The shooter was attempting to "retreat" to the perceived safety of a POLICE STATION and the decedent pursued him there and initiated an assault ... RIGHT IN FRONT OF A POLICE STATION.

No way was it murder.

Last edited by Aguila Blanca; March 4, 2012 at 12:48 PM.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 5, 2012, 12:06 PM   #87
Marty Hayes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 16, 1999
Posts: 244
Here is the deal. ANYTIME an armed man uses a gun against an unarmed man, he is very likely to be charged with a crime. Courts do not universally recognize the right to shoot unarmed people. It is only at trial where the armed man gets to explain to the jury why he shot the unarmed man. That is why there was a trial, and apparently the jury decided that the armed man was justified in the shooting. Add in the history of the parties involved, I would have been extremely surprised if he hadn't been charged.

As far as not taking a beating, I will not take a beating either. The level of force I use to prevent that beating depends on the circumstances of the event.
__________________
Marty Hayes, President
The Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network, LLC.
www.armedcitizensnetwork.org
Marty Hayes is offline  
Old March 5, 2012, 12:43 PM   #88
TexasJustice7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2011
Posts: 213
Quote:
AquillaBlanca: But a charge of murder requires premeditation. Absent premeditation, it isn't murder. Murder means the killer set out with the intention of taking the other person's life. In this case, the shooter was trying to escape from the decedent. The shooter was attempting to "retreat" to the perceived safety of a POLICE STATION and the decedent pursued him there and initiated an assault ... RIGHT IN FRONT OF A POLICE STATION.

No way was it murder
.

I certainly agree with your view that it was not murder. I think that the fact that this was right in front of a police station strongly convinced the jury that
the defendant was certainly in fear for his life. Any time someone allows an unarmed assailant to assault them physically they very likely may get shot with their own gun. If one is not safe when arriving at a police station where else could they possibly run to?
TexasJustice7 is offline  
Old March 6, 2012, 09:35 AM   #89
lincoln5
Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2012
Posts: 27
It's clearly not murder, but the fact remains that a man is dead as
the result of a long running "scumbag soap-opera" that could have been
avoided by any one of the parties involved simply "walking away". It's
too bad that Waller and the woman can't both be held partially responsible
for the incident.
lincoln5 is offline  
Old March 6, 2012, 09:42 AM   #90
lincoln5
Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2012
Posts: 27
Just for the record:
"Murder" does not require premeditation.
First Degree murder requires premeditation.
Second and third degree murder do not require any premeditation.
lincoln5 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

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 -5. The time now is 10:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09403 seconds with 9 queries