Wyoming

[Tone Deft]

The Texas Penal Code allows the use of deadly force if the “actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary.” Deadly force can also be used to protect property when “the other is fleeing immediately after committing burglary.”


The California Penal Code allows the use of a really mean look if the "actor reasonably believes that a really mean look is immediately necessary." A really mean look can also be used to protect property when "“the other is fleeing immediately after committing burglary."


Did you prevent these crimes with the Really Mean Look, or threaten to lecture them to death?

...

that's not the CA law.

Texas law says it's OK to use the death penalty on the mentally retarded, doesn't mean that it's OK.

I hope that in my lifetime I will never be the direct or even indirect cause of anyone's death (OK, my government sucks, but ya know what I mean), that sick fuck was eager to kill two people. he owns a gun, it's for shooting people, he's literally a danger to society and should be locked up.

gun control means more than using two hands, how about a shot below the waist? how about a warning shot? FFS it was pre-meditated murder. give me the gun in that situation, I'd shoot low, the asshole had time to kill TWO people, he had time to take aim and shoot low.


Moody - what?

[landrvr1]

Tone, when you're out crimefighting do you find that matching your Utility Belt with your boots works best, or do you try and match the belt to the cape?

the one thing that pisses me off about the freaking fundamentalist Islamists is that for all their talk and chest pumping they can't put a bullet into a few skulls.

Ouch. So much for that sanctity of human life bullshit you were spouting off about, you fucking douche.

And it's probably hard to shoot low when you've had a couple of six packs.

...

[Tone Deft]

Tone, when you're out crimefighting do you find that matching your Utility Belt with your boots works best, or do you try and match the belt to the cape?

I went with the unitard.

the one thing that pisses me off about the freaking fundamentalist Islamists is that for all their talk and chest pumping they can't put a bullet into a few skulls.

Ouch. So much for that sanctity of human life bullshit you were spouting off about, you fucking douche.

yes, I have a hard on for Bush's long slow painful death. sanctity of life when it comes to a person responsible for the deaths of thousands of people compared to two people shot dead over a few hundred bucks is a red herring.

I can't say I'm against the death penalty and still pick and choose who goes, it's the old "what about Charles Manson" argument. I believe that the government is incapable of being 100% correct on the death penalty, therefore, it's bullshit.

Conservatives are pro-life and pro death penalty, figure that one out.

[Moody]

The Texas Penal Code allows the use of deadly force if the “actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary.” Deadly force can also be used to protect property when “the other is fleeing immediately after committing burglary.”


The California Penal Code allows the use of a really mean look if the "actor reasonably believes that a really mean look is immediately necessary." A really mean look can also be used to protect property when "“the other is fleeing immediately after committing burglary."


Did you prevent these crimes with the Really Mean Look, or threaten to lecture them to death?

...

that's not the CA law.

Texas law says it's OK to use the death penalty on the mentally retarded, doesn't mean that it's OK.

I hope that in my lifetime I will never be the direct or even indirect cause of anyone's death (OK, my government sucks, but ya know what I mean), that sick fuck was eager to kill two people. he owns a gun, it's for shooting people, he's literally a danger to society and should be locked up.

gun control means more than using two hands, how about a shot below the waist? how about a warning shot? FFS it was pre-meditated murder. give me the gun in that situation, I'd shoot low, the asshole had time to kill TWO people, he had time to take aim and shoot low.


Moody - what?

You obviously know little to nothing about gun ownership or the laws surrounding them. There is no such thing as a warning shot in todays society. You shoot someone it damn well be for stopping a threat and the man you are slamming was charged at by one of the robbers. So, he defended himself and the property of a neighbor. Clearly under protection of the law.

Answer here... don't steal other peoples shit or you make take a bullet to the chest.

[Moody]

Tone, when you're out crimefighting do you find that matching your Utility Belt with your boots works best, or do you try and match the belt to the cape?

I went with the unitard.

the one thing that pisses me off about the freaking fundamentalist Islamists is that for all their talk and chest pumping they can't put a bullet into a few skulls.

Ouch. So much for that sanctity of human life bullshit you were spouting off about, you fucking douche.

yes, I have a hard on for Bush's long slow painful death. sanctity of life when it comes to a person responsible for the deaths of thousands of people compared to two people shot dead over a few hundred bucks is a red herring.

I can't say I'm against the death penalty and still pick and choose who goes, it's the old "what about Charles Manson" argument. I believe that the government is incapable of being 100% correct on the death penalty, therefore, it's bullshit.

Conservatives are pro-life and pro death penalty, figure that one out.

You are speaking about Neo-Cons. Of course they don't make sense, they are a political construction. It is a double-think standard just as Orwell warned us about.

[Tone Deft]

You obviously know little to nothing about gun ownership or the laws surrounding them. There is no such thing as a warning shot in todays society. You shoot someone it damn well be for stopping a threat and the man you are slamming was charged at by one of the robbers. So, he defended himself and the property of a neighbor. Clearly under protection of the law.

Answer here... don't steal other peoples shit or you make take a bullet to the chest.

you obviously know little to nothing about reading, they were shot in the back, the guy announced he was 'going to kill them', you can use a gun to slow someone down, you don't have to kill people. you've seen too many movies.

[Tone Deft]

You are speaking about Neo-Cons. Of course they don't make sense, they are a political construction. It is a double-think standard just as Orwell warned us about.

GTFO. that's the Republican party's platform.

[landrvr1]

yes, I have a hard on for Bush's long slow painful death.

I'd settle for jail time but, you know, me being a lover of life and all.


...

[Moody]

You obviously know little to nothing about gun ownership or the laws surrounding them. There is no such thing as a warning shot in todays society. You shoot someone it damn well be for stopping a threat and the man you are slamming was charged at by one of the robbers. So, he defended himself and the property of a neighbor. Clearly under protection of the law.

Answer here... don't steal other peoples shit or you make take a bullet to the chest.

you obviously know little to nothing about reading, they were shot in the back, the guy announced he was 'going to kill them', you can use a gun to slow someone down, you don't have to kill people. you've seen too many movies.

Read more articles; Or how about looking into the court documents. Quit believing the biased media bullshit. Again, learn about a law or two surrounding the use of deadly force. Shooting someone to disable them is far outside the law. Either you're defending yourself and property or you are not. This constitutes deadly force and dead people do not testify. Talk to a police officer or something. Jesus Christ man!

[Moody]

You are speaking about Neo-Cons. Of course they don't make sense, they are a political construction. It is a double-think standard just as Orwell warned us about.

GTFO. that's the Republican party's platform.

And? Both sides are the fucking same; quit kidding yourself. How many times have the current runners flopped? It is a double standar put in place to shape a nation; baffle them with bullshit while we rob them of everything.

[Moody]

yes, I have a hard on for Bush's long slow painful death.

I'd settle for jail time but, you know, me being a lover of life and all.


...

[Tone Deft]

You obviously know little to nothing about gun ownership or the laws surrounding them. There is no such thing as a warning shot in todays society. You shoot someone it damn well be for stopping a threat and the man you are slamming was charged at by one of the robbers. So, he defended himself and the property of a neighbor. Clearly under protection of the law.

Answer here... don't steal other peoples shit or you make take a bullet to the chest.

you obviously know little to nothing about reading, they were shot in the back, the guy announced he was 'going to kill them', you can use a gun to slow someone down, you don't have to kill people. you've seen too many movies.

Read more articles; Or how about looking into the court documents. Quit believing the biased media bullshit. Again, learn about a law or two surrounding the use of deadly force. Shooting someone to disable them is far outside the law. Either you're defending yourself and property or you are not. This constitutes deadly force and dead people do not testify. Talk to a police officer or something. Jesus Christ man!

sources, what have you looked into before you shot off your opinion?

wow you're an asshole, "dead men don't testify" holy fuck that's really messed up.

this guy shot two men in the back after saying he was going to kill them. that's pre meditated murder. if you can only use a gun in this situation to kill then you're irresponsible. again, you can use a gun in other ways than to just kill people.

given the choice of having to kill someone or have all my studio gear stolen, take the gear FFS. you guys are sick.

[Tone Deft]

You are speaking about Neo-Cons. Of course they don't make sense, they are a political construction. It is a double-think standard just as Orwell warned us about.

GTFO. that's the Republican party's platform.

And? Both sides are the fucking same; quit kidding yourself. How many times have the current runners flopped? It is a double standar put in place to shape a nation; baffle them with bullshit while we rob them of everything.

you're so off topic now it's embarrassing.

[Moody]

you obviously know little to nothing about reading, they were shot in the back, the guy announced he was 'going to kill them', you can use a gun to slow someone down, you don't have to kill people. you've seen too many movies.

Read more articles; Or how about looking into the court documents. Quit believing the biased media bullshit. Again, learn about a law or two surrounding the use of deadly force. Shooting someone to disable them is far outside the law. Either you're defending yourself and property or you are not. This constitutes deadly force and dead people do not testify. Talk to a police officer or something. Jesus Christ man!

sources, what have you looked into before you shot off your opinion?

wow you're an asshole, "dead men don't testify" holy fuck that's really messed up.

this guy shot two men in the back after saying he was going to kill them. that's pre meditated murder. if you can only use a gun in this situation to kill then you're irresponsible. again, you can use a gun in other ways than to just kill people.

given the choice of having to kill someone or have all my studio gear stolen, take the gear FFS. you guys are sick.

It is reality. Simple real solution. Don't rob houses.

Texas Code

§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third
person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he
uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent,
or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.

As for this case I have followed it very close reading all kinds of articles and I have communicated with people in the area. There is more to the story then what the media is letting on although I surely thought his call into 911 would have landed him with some kind of charge.

[Moody]

GTFO. that's the Republican party's platform.

And? Both sides are the fucking same; quit kidding yourself. How many times have the current runners flopped? It is a double standar put in place to shape a nation; baffle them with bullshit while we rob them of everything.

you're so off topic now it's embarrassing.

Whoops!