TexasCHLforum.com

The point I was making, a life was taken without cause. He was not chased
to his truck. He could have left. And if more people in this world tended to their own business
a lot of people would be a lot better off and many people would still be alive. Having a CHL and a gun
shouldn't give you cause to go
looking for someone to help so you can draw your gun. There are times to
help and times not to. The crusader bit sounds good but isn't logical.
I'm done, this will probably go nowhere.

Tote 9:

If you don’t mind, I’ll throw in my two cents (and that’s about all it’s worth…actually fair market value is lower ).

“The point I was making, a life was taken without cause.� Actually, I don’t know that. Regardless of how the shooter ended up in the situation, and whether he should have retreated in the first place (a different discussion), once the situation evolved into a robbery the shooting might be justified legally. If the shooter felt he was in imminent risk of serious harm, firing his weapon is justified. The “shiny� item could have been a knife or a stainless pistol.

“He was not chased to his truck. He could have left.� Absolutely true! Whether he should have left or not…was he morally right in grabbing his weapon and investigating, is of course open to debate and I suspect we will have strong opinions on both sides on this forum. But your statement is accurate as stated, he could have left.

“And if more people in this world tended to their own business a lot of people would be a lot better off and many people would still be alive.� Now there’s the center piece of the discussion. Do you get involved, or do you not? For me personally, the only truthful answer I’ve come up with is it depends on the situation. In this particular situation, I don’t know how I would have responded since I wasn’t there. I know in vaguely similar situations I have sometimes left, and sometimes become involved, but maybe more on that later.

“Having a CHL and a gun shouldn't give you cause to go looking for someone to help so you can draw your gun.� I couldn’t agree with you more . The person’s mindset…their intent, is critical to me in determining the morality of their actions. Notice I didn’t say the legality of their actions. Folks can be perfectly legal, and morally wrong, and the opposite is also true. If their intent is to get in a gunfight, to me that’s wrong. If their intent is to help others, then I will side with them.

“There are times to help and times not to.� Can’t disagree with that! The trick is to know when each action is applicable and that will depend more on your interpretations of your moral obligations then on anything else.

“I'm done, this will probably go nowhere.� Personally, for me I hope you’re not done. I feel these types of discussions are valuable. This thread alone has been read 266 times as of this morning, but only 15 responses. That means a lot of folks are following the discussion, but staying silent. Some probably don’t care, some have seen their stance already stated and see no reason to add, but some probably have not made up their minds. Those folks need, and deserve to hear all sides to the discussion. Open and civil discourse on critical subjects such as when to engage are always timely and useful. Are you going to change the mind of someone whose ideas are firmly entrenched, of course not. But remember, 266 reads but only 15 posts…

As I said above, I don’t know what I would have done in this particular case since I wasn’t there, but I know how I’ve responded to similar cases.

There’s a little store my wife and I stop in often to get coffee on the way to work, bread on the way home, maybe a deli sandwich on the weekend. The owner and the lady that work the day shift are exceedingly friendly to us, always a “hello� when we enter, some quick banter while we pay for our stuff, then out the door.

One day after we had left and entered our car, I noticed a rather rough looking character lurking around outside. I decided to sit a few moments longer. The store emptied of customers, and then the guy entered and was walking around (pacing would be a better word) at the front by the registers. I got out of the car and entered the store. After a quick comment about forgetting something, I moved towards the back, and stayed behind the guy. He kept turning and looking for me, and I stayed put. After maybe 2-3 minutes of this, he just turned and walked rapidly out of the store, got in his car, and left. The lady behind the counter thanked me for coming back in stating the guy “made me feel cornered…I was worried�. Was he going to rob them, I have no idea. Could it have turned out bad, absolutely! But I like to think it turned out good with all sides living to see another day.

You can what if things to death, but; What if the actor had left, as Tote9 suggested, and the BG went on and accosted someone inside the bar with the tool, and yes a tool can be a very deadly weapon as discussed in another thread here about weapons on airplanes.

Said BG could use said tool to rob, rape or murder someone IF the actor hadn't intervened... Only God knows what would have occurred, as the BG could have left also.

As many here know, there is always at least two sides to a story, and we have but one. The other side(s) will come out in the investigation and if needs be a trial for twelve to hear and decide on.

Everything we say here is simply a conjecture upon our part but I think that, as moral humans, that we are morally responsible to help our fellow man, and if that means we should "get involved" then so be it.

To not get involved equals sheep and we once again become just one of the masses.

Russ

Yes TX I agree with what you said. I'm all for helping and giving aid to
anyone in certain situations but not all. But to intervene as this guy did,
outside, was without cause. Had he left maby the BG would have too,who
knows. I still say a life was taken when it could have been avoided. To
me life is precious whether it's mine or someone elses. I would never
shoot someone over Stuff unless a life was thretened. I would have a hard
time living knowing I killed a man over Stuff. I had rather they take what
they wanted and leave. Stuff can be replaced, life can't. Again I'm talking
about a situation where my life or someone elses is not thretened.

There's been a great deal of focus on the shooting here, and the motivations the shooter had in looking into the suspicious activity, but I think some of you are overlooking a little bit of info that was mentioned in the story. I agree that his motivations in checking out the activity are subject to question, so I felt an alternative viewpoint is in order.

The shooter in this story was a regular patron of the bar.

"So what?" you say? Well, like the store in TX Rancher's response, the bar patron may have felt a need to investigate something obviously out of the ordinary in one of his preferred stores. Yes, I know it's a bar, but I am from a different part of the country than many of you here (I grew up in Wisconsin). Where I grew up, bars are the primary location for much socialization and where many people go to visit with friends over a few sodas (gasp! sodas! ) or beers. Many of the regulars feel very proprietary about "their" establishment and get quite protective of it. If I were at my favorite hangout back there and someone started acting suspicious, it's quite possible that I would investigate as well.

Now moving back here, if I had migrated to TX from a part of the country where bars don't enjoy the negative reputation they appear to with many of you here, then it's quite possible that I might have a protective attitude towards the place I had adopted as "my" hangout. If I witnessed something I considred suspicious, I would probably investigate. Knowing it was supicious, I would probably also want an equalizer of some sort, and would take my weapon with me.

In this case, it looks to me like this is what happened. It may be a very good thing the shooter DID investigate, but we can't know that. What we can say for sure is that he checked out something he felt was suspicious (he's said as much) and the shootee pulled something that looked to him like a weapon, so he fired at the shootee.

Hello all,
I guess I'll jump in with my take on this subject.
Since we are going off of very limited info on this shooting, it is hard to state concretly just what the circumstances were before the shot.
In my book, a suspicious person is indeed a red flag that needs attention. Did the shooter know the owner, the patrons, and how well ?
Since when is it ok to duck your head and run off with your tail between your legs at the first sign of trouble?
Was the shooter looking for someone to shoot? Highly doubtful.
Was the shooter taking good defensive steps by grabbing a weapon in what he percieved as a threatning situation? How many of you carry a weapon daily just in case something goes south? If you use it is that murder??
How many of you grab a weapon at night when you hear a suspicious noise or see a suspicious person around your house? If you use it is that murder??

I say its the suspicious person that started and maintained the sequence of events in this case, and I dont see where the shooter is at fault for any thing, with one caveat, if he was legally drunk. Was he??

As far as shooting someone for stuff goes, its the theif that makes the choice to put himself/herself in that position, not me. I work darn hard to buy the vehicles and tools and "stuff" in and around my house and you can bet your last bullet that I will put up a fight to keep what is mine, and not just run and hide and give some punk what ever they want.
Don't want to get hurt? Then keep your hands off of my "stuff". Pretty darn simple. So simply even low lifes can understand.

Dan

Hey TX Rancher
I agree with alot of your observations.

kw5kw wrote:
You can what if things to death, but; What if the actor had left, as Tote9 suggested, and the BG went on and accosted someone inside the bar with the tool.....

Said BG could use said tool to rob, rape or murder someone IF the actor hadn't intervened... Only God knows what would have occurred, as the BG could have left also.

I think that in the year 2007, everyone knows that there are several elements in this world that do not follow the laws of the land. Does that make us feel like, as some have said, that we should personally investigate everything suspicious we have an issue with. I personally feel that is why my taxes are involuntarily paid to maintain a police force for such occasions. We can't pick and choose injustices, if we supposedly have some sort of moral clause. So how do you sleep good at night without feeling you should have done something about it?
JUST CALL THE HIRED GUN!!! Police!!!

My personal stance is that my "firebreather" is for my personal defense. If I can escape without anyone seeing "my pet dragon," then the myth would live on. No need to play hero.


P.S. I think that word "HERO" is being used to much by the public when it does not apply.

What is the name of the LEO that follows you around everywhere you go?

There have been good points raised but what you have here is a bunch of "holier then thou" types trying to make this look bad because it is a BAR patron. If the same situation happened but the actor was a parishioner at his church I'm sure those same people would be seeing things differently.

Hey, Lucky45,

They don't DO anything here!

So what's left to us then?

-- John D.

Websters Dictionary quote:

PARANOIA

par·a·noi·a Pronunciation[par-uh-noi-uh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. Psychiatry. a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, which are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others, sometimes progressing to disturbances of consciousness and aggressive acts believed to be performed in self-defense or as a mission.

2. baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.

[Origin: 1805–15; < NL < Greek paránoia = madness.

I think that is the problem with some of the people in the world that are ALWAYS INCLINED to investigate situations. I have been reading this forum for months and you can tell which members fit in that category. NOTE I SAID ALWAYS. Meaning at the drop of a hat. 30 degrees below Zero or SAHARA desert heat.

What mindset are you? Do you go looking for danger or lay in wait and let it come to you? I'm the latter. It is the reason why I bought a 2 storey home, any univited guests have to run through and up the maze before they get to meet ME OR THEIR MAKER. No need for me to go search, I'm taking up sniper position. Samething in public, i'm securing (some barricade, ie, wall,vehicle, etc) and protecting my position.


To think that I need LEO with me all day is ridiculous. But to think that everyone has an ulterior motive means you have some sort of paranoia. Today they call it PROFILING. Think about it for a second.

Hasn't having a CHL instilled in you that now you are supposed to have higher restraint on your action? Just like martial arts, SELF DISCIPLINE, grasshopper. No need to show off your power, just because you have a gun.

It has changed me, just look at the law and all the penalties and all the benefits you loose if you use you power in error, grasshopper.

Freedom4All wrote:There have been good points raised but what you have here is a bunch of "holier then thou" types trying to make this look bad because it is a BAR patron. If the same situation happened but the actor was a parishioner at his church I'm sure those same people would be seeing things differently.

I don't see any of that.

Freedom4All wrote:There have been good points raised but what you have here is a bunch of "holier then thou" types trying to make this look bad because it is a BAR patron.

I don't know if you were refering to me, but I'm not here to preach. I alway look for topics which would help me to better handle a situation if I'm faced with it.
I need to see it from all angles, and because it happened in a bar doesn't have anything to do with. We all have to follow the CHL law, so their rules do apply. So at the end of the day, you and I go away with something from the discussion and we handle it according your beliefs.
Believe me, I'm not holier than thou and would draw quicker than a heartbeat, whenever I decide to.

txinvestigator wrote:

Freedom4All wrote:There have been good points raised but what you have here is a bunch of "holier then thou" types trying to make this look bad because it is a BAR patron. If the same situation happened but the actor was a parishioner at his church I'm sure those same people would be seeing things differently.

I don't see any of that.

I don't either, any remarks I made had nothing to do with where it took place
and if you have "hollier then thou" thoughts then their your thoughts not owrs.

1. The original post does not indicate how long the man was at his truck, getting his gun, before the shooting. If he reached in for the pistol and the BG came at him right away, that's very different than if he got the pistol and "went hunting."

2.

Guess they didnt say what his BAC was at the time of the shooting?

If he wasn't behind the wheel, WHY would he submit to a BAC test?

3. We don't know what kind of "tool" was displayed, we don't know if the two were known to one another, we don't know if words were exchanged . . . based only on what I've read, I wouldn't even hazard a guess as to whether or not this shooting was justified.