We should all have neighbors like this

[theNoseBleedKid]

Uh.......dude. Once again you fail at reading and comprehension.

Clearly, you are emotionally charged and not in complete control of yourself right now, which is, by the way greatly raising the entertainment value of this thread.

The irony, its delicious.

Please regain some form of reason, I will try to explain to you how an iron crowbar could be used as a deadly weapon. I will also explain the US laws regarding "disparity of force".

Here we have two young men, larger physically, and one old man....

The "disparity of force" in this case is:
Two against one.
Physical size and ability to do harm based on that disparity.
Presence of a deadly weapon. (the crowbar)

Now, the disparity of force is only one element of this case. The aggravating factors are that there was intent or threat to do bodily harm by the two, that in itself according to US law is a felony assault. Also there was another felony being committed at the time......

If it's only one factor in the case it;s unreasonable to isolate it

So in the end, you have a weaker, smaller man being criminally assaulted with a deadly weapon by two people of superior physical ability and size, during the commission of a felony....the end result of the legal process is not at all a surprise.

He wasn't assaulted!!!!! Not even close!

Next will come the civil lawsuits. If I were the shooter, I would sue those two and their families for causing me the emotional stress of having to use deadly force to defend myself and kill one of them in the process. Of course, the two felons will try to sue the shooter for wrongful death or some sort of negligency. Both the original lawsuit and the counter-suit will be dropped and the only people making money will be the lawyers.

You'd sue THEIR FAMILIES for their actions? Why?

Interesting side note: If this would have happened in Arizona, the surviving felon would be arrested for murder. We have a law that states you can be charged if anyone is killed in the commission of your felony!

No surprise to me Arizone has the highest crime rates of 2004-2005 combined (according to http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/ ... 8s0301.pdf), so your holding a person thats a completely autonomous unit from another responsible for a thirs parties actions. That fails life.

 

[Odin]

Interesting side note: If this would have happened in Arizona, the surviving felon would be arrested for murder. We have a law that states you can be charged if anyone is killed in the commission of your felony!

We have this law in Texas also. If any person dies as a result of the commission of a felony the person(s) responsible for the felony can be sentenced to death.

That means that if all you did was drive the getaway car for a bank robbery and an old man in the bank falls over and has a heart attack and dies when he sees the robbers then the getaway car driver can be sentenced to death for his role in the crime that caused the death.

The bottom line is if you don't want to be held responsible and possibly sentenced to death then don't commit felonies.

Likewise, citizens are often armed in Texas and have the right to defend life and property. If you don't want a citizen deciding your fate with his gun then don't victimize any citizens.

It's really a very simple to understand and follow system that works very well for non-felons.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Which explains why Texas has the 12th highest rate of crime (given by a conservative government statstics as quoted previous) why?


Hey, maybe you'd like to come up with some facts to prove the stuff your saying?

 

[Copperhead]

Threatening with a deadly weapon IS an assault, according to the law, which I explained and you missed, again....... and does not surpise me, considering your lack reading, writing, grammar and communication skills. Your rebuttles are random and disconnected.
Obviously my earlier observation is correct as you continue to display sociopathic tendencies. Were you being investigated for a serious crime when you fled the States?

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Threatening with a deadly weapon IS an assault, according to the law, which I explained and you missed, again....... and does not surpise me, considering your lack reading, writing, grammar and communication skills. Your rebuttles are random and disconnected.
Obviously my earlier observation is correct as you continue to display sociopathic tendencies. Were you being investigated for a serious crime when you fled the States?

Oh I'm sorry, I got Disparity of force mixed up with assault, I know laws tricky with all those specific phrases, and being the awesome lawyer you are I should take everything you say without any grain of salt!!!! Oh wait Joe Horn was threatening someone with a deadly weapon too, funny how things are never black and white.

Whichd egree of assault do you give for a unsuccesful attempt, is it aggravated. OMG LAW ISSUES WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGH, PLEASE GUIDE MY O LAW MASTER COPPERHEAD!!!!

Wow attacking grammar on the net, great comeback. Welcome to the place langauge dies.

How are random rebuttals sociopathic? I'd say possessing many guns and waiting to shoot people and happily accepting so is more sociopathic.

Yes, I was being logical, smart and objective. Everytime I go back I'm reminded how little those values mean in America.

 

[Copperhead]

Oh I'm sorry, I got Disparity of force mixed up with assault, I know laws tricky with all those specific phrases, and being the awesome lawyer you are I should take everything you say without any grain of salt!!!!

WTF!!?!?

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Some people are too easy to please these days

Maybe you seek clarification?

If your going to talk about disparity of force in regards to this particular example your completely wrong.

Shotgun + range > 1 crow bar and distance. As this murder proved. Thus making that a completely moot point if your attempting to debate assault and the consequences derived from that.

 

[Odin]

Which explains why Texas has the 12th highest rate of crime (given by a conservative government statstics as quoted previous) why?


Hey, maybe you'd like to come up with some facts to prove the stuff your saying?

One major reason that Texas has a higher than typical crime rate is because we border on a third world nation and we have an open border. Note that the criminals in the case in question were illegal aliens.

 

[Odin]

At the end of the day all that matter is this - the homeowners who were burglarized have their property back, the neighbor who intervened is not charged, and the violent felons are no longer a threat to anyone. 100% of the responsibility for their deaths lies with them, as they made the free will decision to commit felonies.

 

[Marshall Freak]

At the end of the day all that matter is this - the homeowners who were burglarized have their property back, the neighbor who intervened is not charged, and the violent felons are no longer a threat to anyone. 100% of the responsibility for their deaths lies with them, as they made the free will decision to commit felonies.

 

[Copperhead]

If your going to talk about disparity of force in regards to this particular example your completely wrong.

Shotgun + range > 1 crow bar and distance. As this murder proved. Thus making that a completely moot point if your attempting to debate assault and the consequences derived from that.

Oh - just keep being you. You are so entertaining!!

First, AZ has the highest crime rate whatever whatever, then I'm a sociopath for being armed??

Also, here is a factoid for you to investigate:
As a basis of law, the FBI has studied and concluded that the range of deadly use of a knife or striking weapon is 21 feet. It has been accepted that a determined attacker can charge and inflict a fatal wound from that distance quicker than a police officer can draw and fire accurately.
Therefor the rule of law in that instance is about 21 feet. This is universally accepted at police academies across the US and US police are trained accordingly. Want to get shot by the cops? Raise a knife from 21 feet away and you're dead. It's already been argued in the courts.
Google "21 foot rule"
I don't know the distance in the Texas case, but obviously the court was satisfied.



edit: oops - spelling

 

[Copperhead]

One major reason that Texas has a higher than typical crime rate is because we border on a third world nation and we have an open border. Note that the criminals in the case in question were illegal aliens.

I was going to explain that to him in regards to the AZ crime rate, but everything else in this thread is so far beyond his comprehension I thought "why bother?"




edit: html quotes

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Which explains why Texas has the 12th highest rate of crime (given by a conservative government statstics as quoted previous) why?


Hey, maybe you'd like to come up with some facts to prove the stuff your saying?

One major reason that Texas has a higher than typical crime rate is because we border on a third world nation and we have an open border. Note that the criminals in the case in question were illegal aliens.

So your laws don't really protect you at all? I think that was my point! I think crime rates on the rise is anything BUT good news for "non felons", wouldn't you agree?

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Oh - just keep being you. You are so entertaining!!

Why would I want to be anyone else?

First, AZ has the highest crime rate whatever whatever, then I'm a sociopath for being armed??

Savage lack of insight on your behalf. I could address this but it isn't worth my time, and I have no doubt the sophistication of what I'd say would go right over your head.

Also, here is a factoid for you to investigate:
As a basis of law, the FBI has studied and concluded that the range of deadly use of a knife or striking weapon is 21 feet. It has been accepted that a determined attacker can charge and inflict a fatal wound from that distance quicker than a police officer can draw and fire accurately.
Therefor the rule of law in that instance is about 21 feet. This is universally accepted at police academies across the US and US police are trained accordingly. Want to get shot by the cops? Raise a knife from 21 feet away and you're dead. It's already been argued in the courts.
Google "21 foot rule"
I don't know the distance in the Texas case, but obviously the court was satisfied.

But the dude had his gun drawn and aimed, so how is that rule actually relevant? Let alone the fact that the distances are unknown, so it's even more irrelevant.

Since the Texan Grand Jury deliberated for 2 weeks I'd say the picture is no where near as clear as your making it out to be.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

I was going to explain that to him in regards to the AZ crime rate, but everything else in this thread is so far beyond his comprehension I thought "why bother?"

That was my point though. your claiming your "safe" when the exact opposite is true. Clearly falling back on your tired mantra of kill em all isn't working since your srime rates aren't dropping, they are rising.

Again, the irony here is delicious. But I guess you can't understand that. But hey, I've grown to expect you to miss fantastic nuances in conversation and how you often defeast your own arguments. It happens so often my sociopathic complex craves it.

 

[Odin]

If your going to talk about disparity of force in regards to this particular example your completely wrong.

Shotgun + range > 1 crow bar and distance. As this murder proved. Thus making that a completely moot point if your attempting to debate assault and the consequences derived from that.

Oh - just keep being you. You are so entertaining!!

First, AZ has the highest crime rate whatever whatever, then I'm a sociopath for being armed??

Also, here is a factoid for you to investigate:
As a basis of law, the FBI has studied and concluded that the range of deadly use of a knife or striking weapon is 21 feet. It has been accepted that a determined attacker can charge and inflict a fatal wound from that distance quicker than a police officer can draw and fire accurately.
Therefor the rule of law in that instance is about 21 feet. This is universally accepted at police academies across the US and US police are trained accordingly. Want to get shot by the cops? Raise a knife from 21 feet away and you're dead. It's already been argued in the courts.
Google "21 foot rule"
I don't know the distance in the Texas case, but obviously the court was satisfied.



edit: oops - spelling

Correct, it's called the "Tueller drill" and we practiced drawing our weapons while another person charged us with a weapon and nobody, including instructors, was able to reliably draw and aim their firearm before a person could cover 7 yards charging them. Even if you could you would still be beaten or stabbed as you shot the offender due to the momentum the offender has when advancing.

The bottom line is that it is not safe to weild a crowbar and charge at a man who is pointing a shotgun at you, as this case proved.

 

[Copperhead]

......... sophistication of what I'd say ........

Haha!
You're about as sophisticated as a cat turd on my lawn.

Once again, you fail to comprehend the difference between law abiding citizen and career criminal, probably because you don't know what a law-abiding citizen is.

I've got too much work to continue with this nonsense today. I have to do my part to build a safe, law-abiding society, and this workweek is a day short due to Friday's celebration of the Declaration of Independence of

THE GREATEST NATION ON THE PLANET!!!!

 

[Odin]

Which explains why Texas has the 12th highest rate of crime (given by a conservative government statstics as quoted previous) why?


Hey, maybe you'd like to come up with some facts to prove the stuff your saying?

One major reason that Texas has a higher than typical crime rate is because we border on a third world nation and we have an open border. Note that the criminals in the case in question were illegal aliens.

So your laws don't really protect you at all? I think that was my point! I think crime rates on the rise is anything BUT good news for "non felons", wouldn't you agree?

Our laws don't protect us only because our laws are not enforced. Our increasingly liberal government has declared that states are not permitted to enforce federal immigration laws while also flatly refusing to enforce those same laws at the federal level. In essence, we have no laws regarding immigration.

If we enforced the laws that we have this case would not have ever happened, as both of the suspects were illegal aliens and had been previously deported and then allowed to illegally reenter the US and commit more crimes. Laws are only effective when they are enforced.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Haha!
You're about as sophisticated as a cat turd on my lawn.

Once again, you fail to comprehend the difference between law abiding citizen and career criminal, probably because you don't know what a law-abiding citizen is.

This made my day. Judging sophistication from the internet! Aren't we feeling awfully high and mighty.

OH wait, your american. It's ok, the international community understands your problem, though we wish you wouldn't keep making it ours.

Did you understand any of that or too busy "working"?

 

[Odin]

Since the Texan Grand Jury deliberated for 2 weeks I'd say the picture is no where near as clear as your making it out to be.

I would agree that this case was not clear cut, and the case was problematic. In the end, the grand jury gave the benefit of the doubt to the law abiding tax paying citizen instead of the felonious illegal aliens who threatened the citizen when caught in the middle of a crime. While the system may not be perfect I think the grand jury made the best decision they could based on the circumstances.