TexasCHLforum.com

With a twenty minute delay in police response the police need all the help they can get. Thank Texas we have are allowed to carry here. If he would have had a gun and gotten in it could have been tragic. Heck, he could have done a lot of damage with a sledge hammer to the ladies in side.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9c7_1179314637

What can you say about this one? We need more BG's like him.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cdc34_4207

neal6325 wrote:What can you say about this one? We need more BG's like him.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cdc34_4207

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!


Man, this is some scary stuff my friends. What is the world coming to?

govnor wrote:

neal6325 wrote:What can you say about this one? We need more BG's like him.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cdc34_4207

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!


Man, this is some scary stuff my friends. What is the world coming to?

This happens every day in the US. Most of it doesn't even make it to the News, unless something big happens.

Here another one with a store owner defending herself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8xKLnv8 ... ed&search=

NguyenVanDon wrote:Here another one with a store owner defending herself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8xKLnv8 ... ed&search=

Yeah, that's a heck of a time to shoot a gun for the very first time.

No kidding....I would not want to learn about fireams that way. Additionally, most of us would have likely double or triple tapped and been in big trouble. I wonder if the DA or police would have treated the shooter any different had it been a man. It seem the justice system interprets you ability to defend yourself without lethal force with a double standard.

Neal, I realize that you guys have a tougher time defending yourselves legally, but remember that we ladies often have more to worry about than our wallets.
This lady apparently feared rape and/or abduction and possibly murder.

No doubt, I did not intend to make light of the fact that women face many more challenges to their safety including the fact that many women could consider an unarmed man a lethal threat.

My only point is that their is a double standard applied in determining justification.

A threat that implies the perp may have a weapon should be handled the same regardless.

I agree with you on that point.

NguyenVanDon wrote:

govnor wrote:

neal6325 wrote:What can you say about this one? We need more BG's like him.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cdc34_4207

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!


Man, this is some scary stuff my friends. What is the world coming to?

This happens every day in the US. Most of it doesn't even make it to the News, unless something big happens.

Yeah, it's weird how much stuff goes on that you never see on the news. After working security downtown Dallas and working with the cops, and living in the lower Greenville/M street area of Dallas, I've seen and heard a lot of crazy stuff that never made the news. There's shootings and stabbings going on almost every day.

neal6325 wrote:A threat that implies the perp may have a weapon should be handled the same regardless.

I think it should be handled as a no bill. It's sketchy, but if a person is unarmed or not shouldn't matter if they are threatening you or making it appear that they have a weapon. They recently made it illegal to sell real looking, fake guns off of ice cream trucks in South Dallas for the same type of reason. I guess too many thugs in training were pointing them around and getting shot at.

govnor wrote:

neal6325 wrote:A threat that implies the perp may have a weapon should be handled the same regardless.

I think it should be handled as a no bill. It's sketchy, but if a person is unarmed or not shouldn't matter if they are threatening you or making it appear that they have a weapon. They recently made it illegal to sell real looking, fake guns off of ice cream trucks in South Dallas for the same type of reason. I guess too many thugs in training were pointing them around and getting shot at.

I've seen a few cases of this general type in the news here in TX (BG threatens to use deadly force but has no means to actually do so - for example has a BB gun with the orange tip removed, etc.) and it has been handled as if they actually DID have a real gun - that is, the threat was intended by the BG to be taken as real, so the deadly force response was considered to be reasonable.

That is the way I would see it. Are you supposed to wait until you are shot to determine whether it is real or not and then return fire. IMO you do not have to even see the weapon if someone has a hand in a pocket and verbally states they have a weapon and I were on the Jury you going home.

neal6325 wrote:That is the way I would see it. Are you supposed to wait until you are shot to determine whether it is real or not and then return fire. IMO you do not have to even see the weapon if someone has a hand in a pocket and verbally states they have a weapon and I were on the Jury you going home.

This is the problem with the liberal gun haters. In court somehow they'd show that you were somehow a racist or "out to kill" someone. I mean, if someone came up to me with their hand in their pocket and told me they have a gun...I'm going to shoot them if I can. Unfortunately, if they didn't have a gun then it's just me in court telling what happened. I just shot some poor unfortunate, unarmed guy that was minding his own business. There's no proof. So I'm pretty screwed. Luckily for this woman, it was on video.

So what if it happened in an alley somewhere? I've told my fiance that if I ever have to kill anyone and there's any question about self defense...we're leaving them there if there are no witnesses. Yeah, that means I'm not calling the cops and I'm going home and destroying whatever weapon I was using. You might find a piece in Joe Pool lake, you might find a piece in the Trinity river...you might even find a piece in the gulf of Mexico. Don't worry, the barrel would be flattened first.