TexasCHLforum.com

mamabearCali wrote:In VA you can stop the threat if it is a lethal threat on your life (or the lives of others) if you go beyond that count on spending a few years considering your action in a not so pleasant place.

That sums it up. And 17 is old enough to be tried as an adult in Texas.

sjfcontrol wrote:

Hoosier Daddy wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:As long as my attacker is able to get up, me giving up the advantage and allowing them up may cost me my life. I have no choice other than to continue until the threat is rendered harmless.

Don't try that in Oklahoma. http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmac ... le/3571542" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And Texas law is much the same.

Seriously??? You folks don't understand the difference in my comment and this guy in Oklahoma continuing the attack AFTER his attacker was rendered incapacitated??? What the guy in Oklahoma did was take it to the point of revenge. What I said was that I have the right to make sure my attacker is no longer a threat. At that point, I will stop defending myself.

At the very least... try to use examples that fit the comments I made. What I said in my post was EXACTLY correct and I never supported taking it further than necessary to end the threat. As a matter of fact, I am pretty sure I made a post on the thread concerning that situation, stating I thought it was wrong to "finish the bg off". Secondly... We are now posting links to stories of a guy trying to rob a pharmacy in a thread about a guy following a different guy around the neighborhood for no other reason than he didn't like the way the guy was dressed.

Maybe we should post up the thread a guy made speaking of dropping his laser on two dudes in a parking lot. simply because they walked in his general direction? Maybe a link to the thread where the poster was going to draw down on a Christian who was approaching with a cd about Jesus. How about the motorcycle guy with the "evil looking" ski mask waiting to use the air hose at the gas station.

Sorry folks... You can't have it both ways. If everyone is going to give kudos to the folks freaking out in the above situations, don't try to act like trayvon was wrong to think Zimmerman was a threat to him. Yep...Zimmerman had every legal right to stalk trayvon.. That does not mean it was a good idea. Anyone who has ever been in a real fight for their lives knows there is no such thing as a fair fight. Are you going to wait for the bad guy to shoot you before you fire at him? Zimmerman probably won't go to jail for acting stupid... But it doesn't change that what he did lead to the situation at hand.

This argument some of you want to make about what is justified is inconciquential to whether or not Zimmerman should have been acting in a way to cause a situation to get escalated. That is like me intentionally ramming a person who runs a red light when I could have stopped and pretending my actions didn't cause the collision.

I realize many of you have never been in a situation where defending your life might have been necessary. I wish I could say the same thing. Have any of you been in a battle for your life while a person is pounding you in the head with a ball bat?
Show of hands.... How many have had a gun put in their back and had all their money stolen because they were aware that the guy with the gun had the jump on them? Anyone here been chased down the freeway by a guy trying to line you up for a blast from a shotgun... While your child was sitting in the seat beside you? How about all of the above?

Maybe your perspective of having a person following you around late at night will change slightly. Maybe your thoughts about following someone around at night will take a different perspective. The problem gentlemen.... Is that both guys are thinking the other guy is the bad guy.

In situations like this one... Neither guy thinks they are the bad guy. Both are concerned the other is up to no good. Don't go on a Tiger hunt, corner a tiger and act surprised when the tiger tries to eat you!

You can't have it both ways folks. You notice someone stalking you while you are all alone at night and you are a fool if you walk up to them like one of the kids from Southpark and ask... Wad Up fella? Most of you know this. I have been around this forum long enough to watch many of you congratulate people for situational awareness in far less threatening situations.


The very problem with trying to intervene in possible criminal situations is that if the guy you are stalking isn't up to anything illegal, they are going to think THEY are the good guy.

I realize I got off the original topic but since the thread and the op has taken it this direction I figured it would be OK for me to defend myself when a post is made in an attempt to discredit a comment I made earlier.

03Lightningrocks wrote:
This argument some of you want to make about what is justified is inconciquential to whether or not Zimmerman should have been acting in a way to cause a situation to get escalated. That is like me intentionally ramming a person who runs a red light when I could have stopped and pretending my actions didn't cause the collision.

Umm no that would be assault. You would have committed a crime and as far as we know Zimmerman did not.

03Lightningrocks wrote: I realize many of you have never been in a situation where defending your life might have been necessary. I wish I could say the same thing. Have any of you been in a battle for your life while a person is pounding you in the head with a ball bat?
Show of hands.... How many have had a gun put in their back and had all their money stolen because they were aware that the guy with the gun had the jump on them? Anyone here been chased down the freeway by a guy trying to line you up for a blast from a shotgun... While your child was sitting in the seat beside you? How about all of the above?

Actually I have been where Martin was twice. I went to a college that had less than nice parts of town anywhere outside it. Two times I was chased down a road by people (not followed--person walking quietly behind and watching--chased). One of the times I don't know if the people meant any harm (they were only throwing paper cups at me and laughing) but I ran as fast as I could to a Chinese food restaurant and called the police. The second time I know I was in mortal danger. The person following me kept calling to me for me to come and talk with him. I took off to a subway just across the path. A week or so later he raped and murdered a girl close to that street. Now that happened before I had children--heck before I was even married. After that if I had to go somewhere after dark I carried my keys in an offensive manner and got the school escorts to come and take me to my dorm, and as I was still scared of guns at the time I got some pepper spray. However, at no time would I have been justified in attacking the people following me--telling them to go away certainly, but beating their heads into the ground--nope. Now if they had gotten closer and said more threatening things or tried to grab me then I would have been justified in using some force on them. Again that would have been me a 5 foot 4 inch 20 year old girl who at the time was around 120 lbs against a car full of men/a very large man. I do not believe for one minute that a 6 foot 2 inch athlete had attacked Zimmerman being in fear for his life.

I find it much more likely that he felt "disrespected" and decided to teach Zimmerman a lesson. Not realizing that the old adage still stands..never pick a fight with an older man..he does not have time to beat you he will just kill you.

03Lightningrocks wrote: Maybe your perspective of having a person following you around late at night will change slightly. Maybe your thoughts about following someone around at night will take a different perspective. The problem gentlemen.... Is that both guys are thinking the other guy is the bad guy.

In situations like this one... Neither guy thinks they are the bad guy. Both are concerned the other is up to no good. Don't go on a Tiger hunt, corner a tiger and act surprised when the tiger tries to eat you!

You can't have it both ways folks. You notice someone stalking you while you are all alone at night and you are a fool if you walk up to them like one of the kids from Southpark and ask... Wad Up fella? Most of you know this. I have been around this forum long enough to watch many of you congratulate people for situational awareness in far less threatening situations.


The very problem with trying to intervene in possible criminal situations is that if the guy you are stalking isn't up to anything illegal, they are going to think THEY are the good guy.

I realize I got off the original topic but since the thread and the op has taken it this direction I figured it would be OK for me to defend myself when a post is made in an attempt to discredit a comment I made earlier.

We have been going round and round and round this. You are convinced that Zimmerman's actions caused the death of Trayvon. I say Martin's lethal use of force on Zimmerman caused his own death as Zimmerman defended his life. You mentioned going on a tiger hunt and getting caught by a tiger.....Well that goes more to saying that Zimmerman was justified in his suspicion of Martin. Nothing comes of a tiger hunt that has no tiger in it.

Lets say that Martin had never jumped Zimmerman that night--what would have happened? Two guys would have been walking around the neighborhood suspicious of one another. No lethal action occurs until Martin (according to all evidence we have) jumped on Zimmerman and attacked him with lethal force, then after Zimmerman is on his back being beaten he responds with lethal force.

What would you have done if a man you saw sneaking around your neighborhood, and you have already asked for him to be on his way was beating your head into the ground--sit there and die because you have already asked him to leave. I don't think so.

03Lightningrocks wrote:
Maybe we should post up the thread a guy made speaking of dropping his laser on two dudes in a parking lot. simply because they walked in his general direction?

Been done, not many seemed interested in responding ...

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=53890" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A-R wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:
Maybe we should post up the thread a guy made speaking of dropping his laser on two dudes in a parking lot. simply because they walked in his general direction?

Been done, not many seemed interested in responding ...

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=53890" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I saw the thread after I made my post. I would have responded but my "fan base" can be quite emotional at times. I didn't see much point in bringing them on you and your thread.

I have decided to just stay off the Zimmerman threads. I will lurk them and leave it at that. My only point in posting that was to get folks to realize trayvon had no way of knowing if Zimmerman was a good guy or a bad guy. In the thug world, which Zimmerman is as much a part of as trayvon, it is known that the game is survival of the fittest.

On this thread I will tell you that if I spot someone stalking me, I will attempt to get away by turning here and there. If I see that they are determined to stalk me... I will hide and if they get close to being on me... I will get the drop on them if possible. Since I am not cop, apprehension is not one of my options. Since I believe in survival... It might get real nasty.

The part that stinks and makes playing cop a problem... Is neither guy thinks he is the bg and both guys think the other one is up to no good. Lesson...let the cops do the stalking.... That is what we pay them for.

I don't think the situation meets the requirements for stalking.

MeMelYup wrote:I don't think the situation meets the requirements for stalking.

Cool... Then you would have no reason to be concerned. Me... I call it stalking the minute I realize they are watching my every move and even going so far as to follow me around.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stalking is a term commonly used to refer to unwanted and obsessive attention by an individual or group to another person. Stalking behaviors are related to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person and/or monitoring them. The word stalking is used, with some differing meanings, in psychology and psychiatry and also in some legal jurisdictions as a term for a criminal offense.

According to a 2002 report by the National Center for Victims of Crime, "Virtually any unwanted contact between two people that directly or indirectly communicates a threat or places the victim in fear can be considered stalking."[1]

we are back to semantics.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

MeMelYup wrote:I don't think the situation meets the requirements for stalking.

Cool... Then you would have no reason to be concerned. Me... I call it stalking the minute I realize they are watching my every move and even going so far as to follow me around.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stalking is a term commonly used to refer to unwanted and obsessive attention by an individual or group to another person. Stalking behaviors are related to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person and/or monitoring them. The word stalking is used, with some differing meanings, in psychology and psychiatry and also in some legal jurisdictions as a term for a criminal offense.

According to a 2002 report by the National Center for Victims of Crime, "Virtually any unwanted contact between two people that directly or indirectly communicates a threat or places the victim in fear can be considered stalking."[1]

Be careful what you do, FBI and LEOs can stalk your tail and bug your car with a tracking device with impunity.

Beiruty wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

MeMelYup wrote:I don't think the situation meets the requirements for stalking.

Cool... Then you would have no reason to be concerned. Me... I call it stalking the minute I realize they are watching my every move and even going so far as to follow me around.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stalking is a term commonly used to refer to unwanted and obsessive attention by an individual or group to another person. Stalking behaviors are related to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person and/or monitoring them. The word stalking is used, with some differing meanings, in psychology and psychiatry and also in some legal jurisdictions as a term for a criminal offense.

According to a 2002 report by the National Center for Victims of Crime, "Virtually any unwanted contact between two people that directly or indirectly communicates a threat or places the victim in fear can be considered stalking."[1]

Be careful what you do, FBI and LEOs can stalk your tail and bug your car with a tracking device with impunity.

I would laugh if it weren't true! But when law enforcement does it, they call it "surveillance" and they do it in a way as to not cause a violent episode.

Good lord!! It is all over fox news as well! At least fox news is not convicting Zimmerman without a trial. He has to be wishing he had just stayed in the car at this point. The usual "activists" are milking the racial angle for everything they can get out of it.

The question we should all be asking now is, who or what is going to be the politicians "sacrificial lamb"? Politicians can't resist a good tragedy.

Maybe instead of attacking me for saying Zimmerman and other CHLers should not attempt to be police officers, you folks may want to figure out how we can all keep the dogs from taking away our right to defend ourselves.

Keith B wrote:You guys bring up a very good point that I have always said; While we LEGALLY do not have a requirement to retreat, it may be a better option. Not only may it prevent you from having to enter into a defense situation, it will for darn sure look a lot better for you in the investigation, GJ and or trial if you have witensses that say you tried to deescalate the situation by backing away but were forced into having to defend yourself as you had no other option.

What's the adage? "The only sure way to win a fight is not to be in one," IIRC. I am disinclined to live in fear of going certain places just to avoid any possibility of confrontation, otherwise I would never have gone the places I have to study with people. That said, I would hope that my SA would have me alert to a problem long before it becomes one and I will avoid/retreat if at all possible. There are conceivable situations where these options are neither practical or even possible.

In this exercise we do know that GZ was the first to call 911, which we all agree plays in his favor. And it appears that he reconsidered the "wisdom" of what he was doing and moved to return to his vehicle. So under the PC citations we are considering, it appears TM was not justified in using force, much less deadly force against GZ. OTOH GZ appears to be perfectly justified in the use of deadly force.

TAM: In your scenario on verbal exchanges, unless I misread it, if we are giving GZ the benefit of the doubt we should assume the former instead of the latter.

Edit:

03lightningrocks wrote:Good lord!! It is all over fox news as well! At least fox news is not convicting Zimmerman without a trial. He has to be wishing he had just stayed in the car at this point. The usual "activists" are milking the racial angle for everything they can get out of it.

-em added

Initially they were, it was disgusting and Shepard Smith is the worst, most sanctimonious one of them all.

...Shepard Smith makes Giraldo Rivera look like a professional, unbiased reporter, by comparison...and that's grading on the curve...his coverage of the Joe Horn event was idiocy...

Heck... Bill O. Isn't sounding very fair and balanced about it all either. They are about to try and use this to take our self defense rights down a notch. I sure hope and pray the rest of the country see's it for what it is... An isolated situation that is not reflective of the majority of gun owners.

speedsix wrote:...Shepard Smith makes Giraldo Rivera look like a professional, unbiased reporter, by comparison...and that's grading on the curve...his coverage of the Joe Horn event was idiocy...