|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 3, 2012, 01:38 PM | #76 |
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.
|
March 3, 2012, 02:27 PM | #77 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
|
|
March 3, 2012, 04:12 PM | #78 | ||
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,815
|
Quote:
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:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
||
March 3, 2012, 04:29 PM | #79 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 9, 2011
Location: Land of the Free
Posts: 2,834
|
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. |
March 3, 2012, 04:51 PM | #80 |
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 |
March 3, 2012, 05:11 PM | #81 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,712
|
Quote:
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:
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 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
||
March 4, 2012, 10:26 AM | #82 |
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. |
March 4, 2012, 11:13 AM | #83 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 3, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 3,930
|
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. |
March 4, 2012, 11:33 AM | #84 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
The second person out of the vehicle in the video is the girl in the middle of said triangle.
|
March 4, 2012, 11:52 AM | #85 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,712
|
Quote:
__________________
"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 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
|
March 4, 2012, 12:16 PM | #86 | |||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
Quote:
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:
Quote:
No way was it murder. Last edited by Aguila Blanca; March 4, 2012 at 12:48 PM. |
|||
March 5, 2012, 12:06 PM | #87 |
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 |
March 5, 2012, 12:43 PM | #88 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 10, 2011
Posts: 213
|
Quote:
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? |
|
March 6, 2012, 09:35 AM | #89 |
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. |
March 6, 2012, 09:42 AM | #90 |
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. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|