Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Self defense shooting - victim faces death penalty

  1. #1
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881

    Self defense shooting - victim faces death penalty

    On Friday, May 9, 2014, just after 5:30am in Killeen, Texas, Marvin Louis Guy was the target of a no knock raid.

    The officers were looking for drugs, yet none were found in the home. There was some questionable paraphernalia, but nothing indicative of drug dealing- or anything damning enough for a reasonable person to feel the need to take an officers life.......Likely alarmed by the men climbing through his windows at 5:30 in the morning, Guy and his wife sought to protect themselves and their property and fired on the intruders- in self defense.


    Any more info on this?


    http://thefreethoughtproject.com/pro...b3jtWwSYel5.99
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Until people just stop convicting people for anything until the laws are changed to protect citizens and not govt officials, the outrageous behavior of DAs across the country will continue.

    I will not find anyone guilty of any crime until the law is set right.

  3. #3
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Until people just stop convicting people for anything until the laws are changed to protect citizens and not govt officials, the outrageous behavior of DAs across the country will continue.

    I will not find anyone guilty of any crime until the law is set right.
    well..... as far as the 2A the matter is settled. There are no legal restrictions on the bearing of arms. I've said this for months. As far as other things the courts can and do make valid and legal rulings and criminals are put where they belong - in prison.
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    well..... as far as the 2A the matter is settled. There are no legal restrictions on the bearing of arms. I've said this for months. As far as other things the courts can and do make valid and legal rulings and criminals are put where they belong - in prison.
    Unfortunately, that's the viewpoint that the govt counts on.

    If all were to not convict anyone of any crime until the gun laws are repealed and self defense laws are changed, the laws would be changed very quickly.

    Make the environment like this: respect our rights ! Your laws that you think make you safer will make you more unsafe.

  5. #5
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Unfortunately, that's the viewpoint that the govt counts on.

    If all were to not convict anyone of any crime until the gun laws are repealed and self defense laws are changed, the laws would be changed very quickly.

    Make the environment like this: respect our rights ! Your laws that you think make you safer will make you more unsafe.
    You've lost me. The government certainly doesnt want armed citizens. Why else would they bully, intimidate and commit crimes against legally armed citizens?
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    You've lost me. The government certainly doesnt want armed citizens. Why else would they bully, intimidate and commit crimes against legally armed citizens?
    Maybe I misunderstood. Do you support that if you are a jurist to find everyone not guilty (not just gun crime cases) until the gun laws are repealed?

  7. #7
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Maybe I misunderstood. Do you support that if you are a jurist to find everyone not guilty (not just gun crime cases) until the gun laws are repealed?
    Of course not. While I don't even recognise unconstitutional non-laws, it would be very very wrong to acquit a rapist for example, just because some fool judge decides to make an illegal ruling on gun control
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  8. #8
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...olice-officer/
    even the WP seems to agree
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Until people just stop convicting people for anything until the laws are changed to protect citizens and not govt officials, the outrageous behavior of DAs across the country will continue.

    I will not find anyone guilty of any crime until the law is set right.
    It's laughable to believe you will be allowed to be on a jury. As laughable as me being allowed to be on a jury.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  9. #9
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Maybe I misunderstood. Do you support that if you are a jurist to find everyone not guilty (not just gun crime cases) until the gun laws are repealed?
    I don't understand your view point. I agree with the concept of voting not guilty in cases where someone is guilty of a crime you do not believe should be a crime.
    But if someone has actually hurt someone else I can't imagine purposely letting them escape punishment if I can help it.
    Let's say (just a random crime) Some cop videos himself raping and killing a child then sends the DVD to to the child's parents...
    I don't think I would be able to set him free no matter what political point I was trying to make.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,151

    More info, sure, but why make us do your reasearch?

    https://news.google.com/news?ned=us&...nG=Search+News 5 Articles recently, in the last two weeks.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Vote to acquit any citizen charged with victimless crimes.

    Qualified immunity must be eliminated. Exigent circumstances as a justification must be eliminated.

    When cops fear making a mistake then they will be more diligent. SWAT must be disbanded.

    A cop must witness a misdemeanor or infraction before he may act. Felonies that have a victim can be sorted out by a judge.

    Cops are quick to call for civil remedies as a redress for the acts of nitwit/thug cops...BS, criminal charges, every time, and let a judge sort it out. Mandate that a cop pay his own legal defense, not some thug cop union paying.

    Eliminate cop unions.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  12. #12
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Vote to acquit any citizen charged with victimless crimes.

    Qualified immunity must be eliminated. Exigent circumstances as a justification must be eliminated.

    When cops fear making a mistake then they will be more diligent. SWAT must be disbanded.

    A cop must witness a misdemeanor or infraction before he may act. Felonies that have a victim can be sorted out by a judge.

    Cops are quick to call for civil remedies as a redress for the acts of nitwit/thug cops...BS, criminal charges, every time, and let a judge sort it out. Mandate that a cop pay his own legal defense, not some thug cop union paying.

    Eliminate cop unions.
    +1 This is the best post I have ever read... well since the last time reading one of my own.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    I don't understand your view point. I agree with the concept of voting not guilty in cases where someone is guilty of a crime you do not believe should be a crime.
    But if someone has actually hurt someone else I can't imagine purposely letting them escape punishment if I can help it.
    Let's say (just a random crime) Some cop videos himself raping and killing a child then sends the DVD to to the child's parents...
    I don't think I would be able to set him free no matter what political point I was trying to make.
    Well, if rapist after rapist and murderer after murderer are set free just because of unconstitutional gun laws being on the books then the gov't will be forced to decide: a) keep the guns laws and continue on with everyone being found not guilty of any crime or b) repeal the gun laws


    I see it as letting one murderer go free so that the people can prevent the gov't from killing millions in the future.

    Any future atrocities made by the people set free will be upon the hands of the gov't...they have a choice--repeal the gun laws !

    People want to be safe, then make the choice perfectly clear to the people: repeal gun laws or no convictions going forward. Which is a safer alternative?

    The gov't expects you not to use jury nullification....even though its legal.

    To pass a law it requires 50% of a vote. To convict, 1 outta 12 is all that is required to negate a conviction (8.3 % of a "vote" of the people).

    Assume that every gun owner refused to convict anyone starting today. How long would it take before gun laws start getting repealed?
    Not long....

    As we have seen on the forum recently, judges do not follow the law, cops don't follow the law, the gov't does not care about your rights. Only WE can take steps to insure that laws are force-ably repealed.

    In my state, SB1160 was passed although a huge majority of people who contacted their legislators (about 85% from the records I obtained through FOIA requests) did not want the law passed. And next session they will be talking about mandatory mental health exams for every gun owner to be performed by state-sanctioned quacks.

    At what point are gun owners going to do what is necessary? Yes its not nice to let a killer go free .. but if that is what is needed to insure our RKBA and our children's and their children's RKBA, its an easy choice.

  14. #14
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Well, if rapist after rapist and murderer after murderer are set free just because of unconstitutional gun laws being on the books then the gov't will be forced to decide: a) keep the guns laws and continue on with everyone being found not guilty of any crime or b) repeal the gun laws


    I see it as letting one murderer go free so that the people can prevent the gov't from killing millions in the future.

    Any future atrocities made by the people set free will be upon the hands of the gov't...they have a choice--repeal the gun laws !

    People want to be safe, then make the choice perfectly clear to the people: repeal gun laws or no convictions going forward. Which is a safer alternative?

    The gov't expects you not to use jury nullification....even though its legal.

    To pass a law it requires 50% of a vote. To convict, 1 outta 12 is all that is required to negate a conviction (8.3 % of a "vote" of the people).

    Assume that every gun owner refused to convict anyone starting today. How long would it take before gun laws start getting repealed?
    Not long....

    As we have seen on the forum recently, judges do not follow the law, cops don't follow the law, the gov't does not care about your rights. Only WE can take steps to insure that laws are force-ably repealed.

    In my state, SB1160 was passed although a huge majority of people who contacted their legislators (about 85% from the records I obtained through FOIA requests) did not want the law passed. And next session they will be talking about mandatory mental health exams for every gun owner to be performed by state-sanctioned quacks.

    At what point are gun owners going to do what is necessary? Yes its not nice to let a killer go free .. but if that is what is needed to insure our RKBA and our children's and their children's RKBA, its an easy choice.
    I understand your point and will consider it for a while. Your right about things getting worse with no real hope in sight.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    pottsboro,texas
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    ok ...now if the guy is found innocent then that means the fuzz broke the law now here is the twist if a citizen has partners in robbery and one of them gets killed then the states now will charge the others with murder even if it was the victim that killed the robber . the dead robbers partners get charge with murder.... so shouldn't all the other cops there be charged with capitol murder of the dead cop?
    Our ancesters, veterens, and people of the service gave and are giving their time and sacrifice to preserve and defend our rights . it''s up to us the people to show appreciation by not sacrificing but investing time to exercise and preserve those rights.......the bushwacker...

  16. #16
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by bushwacker View Post
    ok ...now if the guy is found innocent then that means the fuzz broke the law now here is the twist if a citizen has partners in robbery and one of them gets killed then the states now will charge the others with murder even if it was the victim that killed the robber . the dead robbers partners get charge with murder.... so shouldn't all the other cops there be charged with capitol murder of the dead cop?
    In the real world, maybe, but not this world.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  17. #17
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by bushwacker View Post
    ok ...now if the guy is found innocent then that means the fuzz broke the law now here is the twist if a citizen has partners in robbery and one of them gets killed then the states now will charge the others with murder even if it was the victim that killed the robber . the dead robbers partners get charge with murder.... so shouldn't all the other cops there be charged with capitol murder of the dead cop?
    I don't think the victim being found not guilty necessarily establishes guilt on the police's part. It makes sense, yes, I understand what you're saying, but the law and sense aren't relatives. Sometimes they hang out together, sometimes they don't.
    Advocate freedom please

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •