Self-defense or murder? (video) Ruger PC carbine used in Texas on front porch
- Thread starter Suck My Glock
- Start date
Welcome to ArizonaShooting.org!
Join today!
Welcome! You have been invited by superdrag67 to join our community. Please click here to register.
Crippledtrigger
Member
xerts1191 said:
Asking or saying?
That's not what the conclusion of the article is. The article concludes its looks like manslaughter over murder based on the dead guys actions as mitigation.
C172 Heavy
Member
I view what some are calling the negligent discharge as a deliberate warning shot, actually an overt act of intimidation. Look at his face as he pulls the trigger and the manner in which he does. To me it shows he meant to fire a round. Sucks that the PCC was suppressed so that the warning shot lacked the auditory requirement of a historical warning shot. The suppressed shot made people think it was a BB gun, at least I saw the new wife thought as much. Hence her reaction to the shooting, it took time to sink in that he had been shot by a centerfire cartridge.
In my view he goes for a ride on a murder charge.
1. He brought a rifle into a loud disturbance where no threat of violence had been made.
2. When confronted he fires a warning shot, not legally justifiable, and hence has now committed assault with a deadly weapon.
3. After having been assaulted the Dad tries to stop a further assault.
4. The scuffle breaks up, boyfriend is creating distance, and he fires.
In each of these acts the boyfriend escalated the the interaction.
Just my $0.02
In my view he goes for a ride on a murder charge.
1. He brought a rifle into a loud disturbance where no threat of violence had been made.
2. When confronted he fires a warning shot, not legally justifiable, and hence has now committed assault with a deadly weapon.
3. After having been assaulted the Dad tries to stop a further assault.
4. The scuffle breaks up, boyfriend is creating distance, and he fires.
In each of these acts the boyfriend escalated the the interaction.
Just my $0.02
Cubiclerevolt
Member
C172 Heavy said:
You're thinking AZ misconduct with weapons. You have to think of what the law is in TX.
Still no charges? That really surprises me. What are they waiting for?
Rock Hardson
Member
YNOTAZ said:
Yes, sir. Go inside and call the cops and stay inside. There shouldn't have been a gun put into play at all.
This fight was between the husband and ex-wife. Hard and costly lesson for the boyfriend.
No winners here. Kids will pay the price of everyone's stupidity
DoubleAlpha
Member
As much as bringing a carbine in the middle of a domestic dispute was as idiotic as it gets, why in the world did he make it worse by firing center of mass? Even as temper and emotions got the best of him and prompted him to fire, had he only fired at the legs or feet he would be much better off today.
Crippledtrigger
Member
Regarding shooting to wound in general.
Never fire at extremities. Never shoot to wound.
The movies arent reality.
Regarding similar cases to this one.
Never try to justify firing at extremities by saying it would make a murder not so bad.
Either you are justified to stop a deadly threat or your not.
The reasons are many. You are probably gonna miss, hit something or someone unintended, not stop the threat and have a person you think intent on killing you in your lap fighting over your weapon, have it used against you to show the need wasnt immediate and on and on.
Remedial study required.
Never fire at extremities. Never shoot to wound.
The movies arent reality.
Regarding similar cases to this one.
Never try to justify firing at extremities by saying it would make a murder not so bad.
Either you are justified to stop a deadly threat or your not.
The reasons are many. You are probably gonna miss, hit something or someone unintended, not stop the threat and have a person you think intent on killing you in your lap fighting over your weapon, have it used against you to show the need wasnt immediate and on and on.
Remedial study required.
^^^
But, but, the President* said! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX_U59Ekpe0
But, but, the President* said! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX_U59Ekpe0
Cubiclerevolt
Member
DoubleAlpha said:
Tell me you are from cali, without telling me you're from cali.
DoubleAlpha
Member
I trained force on force (with laser "bullets") extensively. Running aggressor wielding knife or bat (rubber of course) against laser bullet training gun firing at the legs. Most of the time the aggressor could not reach the good guy before getting pelted with red dots in the femur, multiple times. I was surprised myself at how even a green trainee, when given the basics and the focus, can put that red dot on a kneecap on the first attempt with a double action revolver, repeatedly. You're only letting the shot go at 5 yards on average, while retreating. I often played the guy with the knife. I can close 7 yards in a little over a second, and I can tell you it's not easy to close that distance without being hit at the legs. And I have a multi year background in bladed weapon manipulation, including teaching classes to the armed forces. Try that with an airsoft gun. You'll get your legs full of bb blisters before you can put your rubber knife in the belly of your airsoft buddy once. The target area in a femur is the size of a 2 liter. If you can't hit a 2 liter with a carbine in a second at 7 yards you should not have the carbine. All the discussions about "too dangerous to miss if you aim for the legs" deal with an aggressor shooting at you. Yes, but this guy was not shooting at him, was not even wielding a bat. In fact, it's arguable he was even posing a threat. He was just standing there. So he should have not shot. And I am not from California, never been. But I can tell manslaughter from self defence. He shot someone he was having an argument with. Good luck arguing that was self defence. So what could he have done instead? Shoot him at the legs. The second stupidiest mistake, but one that carry lighter sentences. Advantages? Having a chance to argue he did not intend to use lethal force, A much, much shorter sentence for causing bodily injury rather than death if the jury is not convinced of his case, etc.
I don't need to tell you the avery case shows bringing a long weapon into a brawl is a recipe for disaster. You are only handing the other party your gun to contend. This is why short stocking is thaught for close quarters and home defense.
But if you have done something that stupid and you still can, shoot for the legs and deal with the consequences. Shooting an unarmed man standing in front of you in the belly is just lazy. And that's why shooter has got a few sleepless night ahead of him now.
I don't need to tell you the avery case shows bringing a long weapon into a brawl is a recipe for disaster. You are only handing the other party your gun to contend. This is why short stocking is thaught for close quarters and home defense.
But if you have done something that stupid and you still can, shoot for the legs and deal with the consequences. Shooting an unarmed man standing in front of you in the belly is just lazy. And that's why shooter has got a few sleepless night ahead of him now.
Crippledtrigger
Member
Well, laser bullets...
DoubleAlpha
Member
Not that laser but the laser used in training systems (of which various brands exist today) that have been found to have a near 100% skill-transfer on "first shot from the draw" drills.
As a number USPSA shooters have discovered during the ammo crunch and/or when ranges were closed (and particularly IPSC shooters in Europe where ranges closed for nearly a year during covid), your first-shot times (and point score) from the draw with a laser are nearly identical to the times and points you score with the actual ammo on the same gun (recoil happens after you pull the trigger). Not only that, but as one improves so will the others. Which means, and this is well known, that if you have trained to hit the A zone regularly in 1.5 seconds at 30 yards from the draw with the laser trainer, you'll do that time and score almost exactly when you load the same gun with an actual bullet at the range. And if it's the A zone on a mini target that you can hit regularly with the laser trainer, then you'll do on the range. Which in itself should be a good reason to buy a laser bullet and do drills rather than downloading Austin Powers another time (save if you are a pro backed by an ammo sponsorship deal, maybe).
As a number USPSA shooters have discovered during the ammo crunch and/or when ranges were closed (and particularly IPSC shooters in Europe where ranges closed for nearly a year during covid), your first-shot times (and point score) from the draw with a laser are nearly identical to the times and points you score with the actual ammo on the same gun (recoil happens after you pull the trigger). Not only that, but as one improves so will the others. Which means, and this is well known, that if you have trained to hit the A zone regularly in 1.5 seconds at 30 yards from the draw with the laser trainer, you'll do that time and score almost exactly when you load the same gun with an actual bullet at the range. And if it's the A zone on a mini target that you can hit regularly with the laser trainer, then you'll do on the range. Which in itself should be a good reason to buy a laser bullet and do drills rather than downloading Austin Powers another time (save if you are a pro backed by an ammo sponsorship deal, maybe).
Unbelievable.
Suck My Glock
Member
Wow. I am truly amazed.
Similar threads
