My Self Defense Nightmare

imported post

Looks like he copped a plea bargain and accepted second degree murder. I feel badly for the original poster but he may not have demonstrated the best judgment and now suffers the penalty.

Why did he not just leave? I would have gotten in my car and solved the problem.

Why run for a gun, when he is an old drunk & there is a lot of land to cover ?

"If" I read Your story right, which was hard to read as it seamed kind of chopped up.

WARNING: This is armchair lawyer at it's best and only one guys opinion.

If I read you right you were in a physical place and had the opportunity to run or get plenty of distance as You seam to not be cornered by that older fat non athlete drunk, then why didn't You just run like a ricochet rabbit away from the old buffalo ???

Why run to a gun ? when you can run in any direction if You want just to get distance ?

You were out in a field when he started to turn on you, right ?

A wounded coyote will limp back to the pack in order to get the family dog that is chasing it into an ambush, I think you are a Wiley Coyote, and the Road Runner Law just dropped a brick on Your head.

Why did you allow this confrontation to take place in the 1st place, because as You stated you knew all about him and knew he was coming over with an armed man with him, so it seams to me that you could have evacuated the premises , or called the cops to "preserve the peace" and that would not be a cowardly thing to do, and it seams that he has never burned down a house he is only a run of the mill red neck pot bellied deep fried cow kicker bully punk who confronts weak people bullies them and hits them in a drunk rage, he ain't Brock Lesner UFC heavy weight champ

Crafty cowards allow the bully to abuse them in order to flip the script on the bully and look like the abused victim all the time. it's evil vs evil only one is over ( uncle ) and thee other is covert ( you )

There was no "surprise" here !

You had plenty of time to ward off a confrontation with an unruly aggressive drunk but you didn't !

You state that you are a sort of "Casper milk toast" and not up to any kind of physical confrontation with a beast of a man in this sort of large aggressive mean drunk so it begs the question > why did you put Yourself "and" your mom in this situation.

He did not just show up un-announced out of thin air and suddenly corner you in a room or corral , right ?

Your an education rational adult , adult enough to own a home, hold a job and own a gun, yet you are not adult enough to avoid an obvious bad situation ? Hummm.


Every thing you say has an odd duality about it, it's like your smart but dumb, calculating but naive, your weak but crafty, your a coward but brave enough to stay in his face, your desperate but calculating, you don't think strait but your sober ?

I think you calculated up to an hour or more ahead of time that you will speak to him and act like your his bar tender, take him into your confidence and talk him into an ambush with a crappy but crafty ( what you thought was crafty ) legal way of killing him.

Sorry, but looking at it from what I would have done, juxtaposing against the way you did what you did and it is 180 degrees away from what you did, and i too cannot fight a heavy weight drunk and so I think You pre-meditated killing him with a slowly unfolding baited confrontation ( knowing his disposition).


I think you did a flimsy legal scape goat type of a linear entrapment and you perpetrated a shoddy criminally amateurish alibi in a set up to shoot him down because after all your justification is the truth, the truth used to commit a crime, it is a lie and a crime !

Truth: he "is" an evil mean creep ( if his background is what you say it is ) and You thought you would rid the family and world of this cancer in your life and be a bit of a hero and do a brave ( sorry sad dirty ) deed.


Look, everyone wants to do a serious "attitude adjustment" to all the bad guy's, the wife beaters, the punks like Your uncle, but I live in a world that is not of my own making and so of you do the dirty deed you must face the law.

I must be wise and not fall to temptation to avenge all the beat down women in the world by killing these monsters in what I think is a set up.

You took the law into your own hands because you "allowed" the situation to happen , then allowed it to escalate, then you play the victim because you were sober when you entered the ring and tried to run with the bulls and got your balls gored and now you blame the bull for charging you when you waved a red flag at him.

It don't wash.

I may stand corrected, I could be wrong, if you wish to take apart my argument and accusations I will welcome Your rebuttal.

PS: I am not trying to cause a flame war or be contrary, but as an old TX Ranger said " Somthin here don't smell right to me boy"

Added after writing the rest of this post: I'm sorry if it's disjointed. But to be frank, Steve's reply pissed me off. If the following is hard to read, I apologize. Maybe I'll come back and tidy it up later, but no promises. IMHO, things tend to be best in their first draft, at least for something like this.

@Steve

I can think of so many holes in that argument that, quite frankly, I don't know where to start.

Why were he and his mother there? Because they lived there, and were waiting for the house to be built.

Why did he run to the gun rather than away? Why the F*CK do you think!?!:cuss:

He could have run, and his uncle could have chased him. Maybe the uncle didn't have much of a chance of keeping up, but what if he had tripped and fallen, or one of a thousand other possible scenarios where his uncle could have gained a real advantage? Furthermore, why should he have had to run from his own home? The simple fact is that there are too many potential scenarios, and he didn't have time to run through them all in his head. He had to make a decision-immediately.

Therefore he made the logical (both in the situation, and after, when we have time to pick it apart carefully) decision. He went for his primary means of protection. Was shooting his uncle ideal? No. Was it necessary? Yes. His uncle, unarmed, charged him, armed. As he pointed out previously, the only reason to do this is to attempt to disarm. If the uncle had just turned and walked away no one would have been shot.

Allow me to refresh your memory:

Dangime said:

I made it to the kitchen before he caught up with me, the small distance of 20 feet or so had been completely closed. I felt something slide up my leg, then a strong upward force. I had been caught square between the legs by my uncle’s kick and I rose up in the air, my stride broken. I remember looking down and seeing the huge work boot split my legs. I was shocked, scared to death, running away, and attacked from behind. I had no time left, and escape was impossible, the other exits were blocked, having towels shoved under them due to the winter cold, and I was already under attack. I had no more time.

Click to expand...

If you'll recall, his uncle had already brandished a weapon at him and verbally threatened him twice.
Should we take it in a little more detail? AFTER he grabbed the rifle, went downstairs, and was running from his uncle, what were his options? Should he have tried to hit his uncle with the rifle, running the (significant) risk that it could be taken away and used against him? The only way he could have fought would have been to attack with the rifle as a club (making it easier to take by placing it closer to the assailant) releasing one hand to fight (making it easier to take by loosening his grip) or putting the gun down completely (making it easier to take by...well, duh.)

However, your main argument was that he should have run away. From his own home. When his legitimate means of protection against his previously established violent, drunk uncle who had already terrified OP's mother and drunk uncle's OWN FRIEND to the point that they left. Tell you what, sell all your guns and invest in a nice pair of trainers, as*hat.:cuss::cuss:

Too late...

I've read your story and there is a lot for all of us to learn from it, so thank you for posting.

Unfortunately for yourself and your uncle the damage is already done and I am very sorry for the both of you.

First, thinking in terms of "self-defense" is a load of sheer nonsense that can get one into a lot of trouble, as in your case, or it can get you killed. The anti-social violence you were engaged in should have been walked away from in the first place. Always. Even if you have to walk away from biting remarks and insults and look like a complete coward--you should have walked away--and stayed walked away.

Asocial violence, on the other hand, is another matter entirely. In that scenario, one has no choice but to attack, to "kill or be killed", as the saying goes.

One must study and understand the difference between the two types of violence. It calms the nerves and clears the brain of confusion on the matter.

This is where the understanding all begins. One must know these things before proceeding with anything else in the realm of violence...

sniff, sniff, what's that smell?

ixtow said:

sniff, sniff, what's that smell?

Click to expand...

I don't know. What?

RE: To My Devils Advocate Argument

sultan62 said:

Added after writing the rest of this post: I'm sorry if it's disjointed. But to be frank, Steve's reply pissed me off. If the following is hard to read, I apologize. Maybe I'll come back and tidy it up later, but no promises. IMHO, things tend to be best in their first draft, at least for something like this.

@Steve

I can think of so many holes in that argument that, quite frankly, I don't know where to start.

Why were he and his mother there? Because they lived there, and were waiting for the house to be built.

Why did he run to the gun rather than away? Why the F*CK do you think!?!:cuss:

He could have run, and his uncle could have chased him. Maybe the uncle didn't have much of a chance of keeping up, but what if he had tripped and fallen, or one of a thousand other possible scenarios where his uncle could have gained a real advantage? Furthermore, why should he have had to run from his own home? The simple fact is that there are too many potential scenarios, and he didn't have time to run through them all in his head. He had to make a decision-immediately.

Therefore he made the logical (both in the situation, and after, when we have time to pick it apart carefully) decision. He went for his primary means of protection. Was shooting his uncle ideal? No. Was it necessary? Yes. His uncle, unarmed, charged him, armed. As he pointed out previously, the only reason to do this is to attempt to disarm. If the uncle had just turned and walked away no one would have been shot.

Allow me to refresh your memory:


If you'll recall, his uncle had already brandished a weapon at him and verbally threatened him twice.
Should we take it in a little more detail? AFTER he grabbed the rifle, went downstairs, and was running from his uncle, what were his options? Should he have tried to hit his uncle with the rifle, running the (significant) risk that it could be taken away and used against him? The only way he could have fought would have been to attack with the rifle as a club (making it easier to take by placing it closer to the assailant) releasing one hand to fight (making it easier to take by loosening his grip) or putting the gun down completely (making it easier to take by...well, duh.)

However, your main argument was that he should have run away. From his own home. When his legitimate means of protection against his previously established violent, drunk uncle who had already terrified OP's mother and drunk uncle's OWN FRIEND to the point that they left. Tell you what, sell all your guns and invest in a nice pair of trainers, as*hat.:cuss::cuss:

Click to expand...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
My Reply: Don't take it personally your not thee accused nor victim

My motive is to put some pressure on him to see if his story stands a good adversarial test.

Myself I have been in 1 full blown fire fight, also shot two different times in two shootings, and more than that, so I am not un-familiar with evil guys with guns and drunks with attitude. I have been on the receiving end of extreme violence and have empathy for the good guy's.

More than that I have avoided being in situations like the shooters , I have avoided so many of these situations that I loose count.

Personally I have had many opportunities to kill very bad guys like the dead drunk wife beater "and" do it legally, but I have an inner conscience / law that will not allow me to kill a bad guy just because he is in my world being an a-hole.


Preface: To let you know that I am not an anti gun-trolling a-hole> I have empathy for the old man who shot the burglars in TX who were robbing his neighbors house as he was on 911 saying he will shoot them if they come to his yard ( and he did ) I would NOT convict him.


I have no dog in this hunt, again I assure You I am NOT trying to start a flame war or pick on someone in a very bad situation.


He may be innocent there could be things that are not recounted and not written here.


Remember this is just a cyber forum full of arm chair quarterbacks ( me included ), I am not a troll. in fact I read 90% of the stories here and comment on only 1 or 2 ever 6 months or so and even then I rarely if ever take an adversarial position .


You and I were not there.

We only have 1 side of the story, and the dead man was a dad guy so he get's a couple check marks against him to start.

I will re-read it to make sure I am not a lisdexic ( disleaxic ) idiot shooting my mouth off , jumping to conclusions and leaving out key facts.

I do know it was his and his mother "castle" , and the state-federal and God's preordained law is that You can stand and fight-defend Your castle > "cool".


I also know that if I were to "know a forethought" that an intoxicated man who was coming over to more than likely start trouble and I being the sober , younger , more physically fit & fast ( tho much smaller ) one, then I would be at a distinct and obvious advantage.

The shooter says he closed the 20 ft, "but" he was in a cattle pasture, then to the house then to the porch , then front room then up stairs, so the 20 ft is really 200 or more ft, "and" did you notice that he is sighting the 20 foot rule of offensive gun draw as noted by Mosad Ayoob, that in itself make me even more suspicious to use this 20 ft reference. it says to me that the shoort is an educated gun guy and not a naive roob.

The 20 ft rule is for a fit and or fast assailant not for a big fat deep fried mashed potatoes and Budweiser drunk wearing **** kicker boots.

If I feed a bear and it attacks me then I am at fault, if I am a hooker and get in a car with a serial killer than I am at fault because serial killers, bears and wife beater drunks do what they do, I am responsible for my life God gave me a higher insight and intuition and I can use it or loose it, it's up to me to not put myself and my family in harms way.

I am "above" the drunk I am so far advanced, clear headed and objective as to make it shooting a duck in a pond !

That being the case confronting him fully knowing his past and his present state, so then trying to do a Rodney King a "get along" is folly at best and makes me suspect there was another motive.


I have a problem, and that is I tend to think and see situations in terms of what "I" would do.


Here is more armchair quarterbacking > I would think through a few scenarios such as 1) stop him at the gate shotgun in hand, 2) Sit on the front porch shotgun in hand, 3) Call the Sheriff and ask them to come and "keep the peace", or 4) leave and let him tend to his cattle and come back when he is gone. or mixture of all of that.

To me all of these seem logical , but I cant wrap my head around walking out into the pasture to work along side with a mean big strong evil wife beater drunk and then "expect" him to be Mr Nice Guy , then it seamed crazy to let him get close enough to shove a hat down around my head and then "allow" I say allow him to follow close while I retreat slow enough to allow him to gain on me while I jog back to the house to go inside and get a rifle .

Its my pasture I know that there are pot holes, because I am sober so I wont go out there in the evening with pissed off drunk at least un-armed.

It's kind of like the "shooter" is a 12 year old boy and not a rational level headed man who has developed instincts .

I could not be that dumb, as dumb as as the shooter, ahhhhhh but I could "act" that dumb and probably get away with manslaughter or even murder because all I have to do is get him over on my property, piss him off and let him run after me and then shoot him, "simple". case closed, or is it.

A sober sane rational man does no allow things to escalate like this specially with loved ones on premises , he preempts or at least stops things like this in there tracks.


So perhaps the shooter really is a dummy ( its not against the law to be a dummy ) a hard workiing moral dummy !.

Perhaps there is a certain sympathy from the court for morons who put them self into positions like this were they allow things to get out of hand and then they have to resort to emergency measures to save the situation and so stuff like this happens.


All I can ad now is that if I were to shoot that drunk on my property, after personally engaging him in close physical conversation / confrontation knowing all the while he was coming, that he is drunk, and up to no good I may not be legally convicted but I would be convicted by God.

Lastly, I am not really interested in your response, I am interested in the shooters response, if he has the truth then he will blow holes in my assumptions right away and buttress his argument with more truth.

So "peace" I will go re-read it and then back out and not spend time posting my "ass-umptions" lol.

Steve in Ashland, it appears that for some reason you have had more than your share of incidents and are well experienced in it. You have brough up some very valid points and about alternatives of what could or should have been done in this case and as we say sitting here calmly assessing the situation what we would have done. We weren't there so we really don't know. I do see on this board and many others that many people rather than needing a reason to have to use their gun are looking for an excuse to be able use their gun. I see a lot of posts about can I shoot in such and such a situation. This may have been a case where the young man thought he was justified in shooting legally but we see that there were other options for him. It is now up to the courts to determine if he had a reason or and excuse.

Dangime said:

The jury went so long that I went with a deal. Talking to jury members it was clear nothing was going to be reached.Despite what someone else said...there's no probation for murder in Texas. Our motion to consider it to the judge was denied. By taking the deal the judge can give me deferred and I can avoid a conviction. Either way...the costs in money and energy at too great to go through more trials. I will know monday. I have reason to believe in the judge.

Click to expand...

If you felt your were innocent, and there was a hung jury, why would you accept a plea deal?! A hung jury = mistrial = good for you. I've never understood pleading guilty when we have a system setup to (in theory) allow the innocent to go free.

I have no idea if his story is legitimate. His post here, as far as I can tell, has no effect on the outcome of the trial. Therefore, getting us 'on his side' would serve no potential purpose. We have no need to challenge his story, because he has no motivation outside of informing us of the details of the case. I'm sure he faced all the direct challenges he ever cared to during the trial. My post was specifically against your arguments.

We do know that the incident happened. The news stories have been linked.

Of course, we are getting the story from one POV.

My post was poorly worded. Yes, we know it happened. By legitimate, I meant if things happened the way OP said they did. As you said, only one POV.

sultan62 said:

My post was poorly worded. Yes, we know it happened. By legitimate, I meant if things happened the way OP said they did. As you said, only one POV.

Click to expand...

Sorry that I misunderstood your point. It is quite valid.

millard52english said:

These situations are no win situations. dnt know how true it sounds...

Click to expand...

Once again, news articles of the event have been posted. It happened. The only question is how one-sided the OP was in his presentation of the story.

1_Lacey_Pl_Southport said:

i think u probably shouldnt have gone back downstairs after u got ur rifle bc u were going into the threat. i know i probably would end up doing the same but it was a bad idea and now the lawyers are using it against u.



maybe ushould have stayed in ur bedroom with ur rifle and called the police?

Click to expand...

^THIS

You remember that old man that shot 2 robbers robbing his NEIGHBORS house on the lawn?! He dialed 911 and talked with them before he ended up shooting the guys, then he came back and said "I had no choice, they were coming at me!" You have to call 911 if you think you might be getting into a self defense situation, at least you have a recording of what is happening.