RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!!

RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:20:49 PM)
We agree without let or hinderance. Stick a fork in the fuckhead, he is done.

mnottertail -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:23:21 PM)
Where is the SYG defender's outrage?

Yachtie -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:27:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail We agree without let or hinderance. Stick a fork in the fuckhead, he is done. Besides, who in their right mind would use a 9mm to defend anything? [8\|] [;)]

DomKen -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:34:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: Do you think we could wait until he claims SYG and a court finds in his favor instead of trying to milk a dry tit? I guess the point I am making is these type of laws, whether used in his defense or not, make these types of tragedies more likely to happen. There is a growing attitude in rural Missouri I believe that guns are the way to solve problems of this type. Bible belt rural Missouri and their legislatures are the driving force for the liberal guns laws and stand your ground legislation in Missouri. Butch I'd keep an eye on this story, crazy, paranoid and violent often means a meth head. Wouldn't shock me if they find a trailer hidden away in the woods on this guys property.

mnottertail -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:36:10 PM)
OH, christ. Yanno, back when Obama was gonna take your guns away, every fuckin swinging dick and his gash went out and bought them those hi-point and star and low end fuckin nine mils. Personally, I think 9mils suck, but once you have owned a 1911a1 or 1911a2 the rest is ........... well................scrap. With the exception of the wartime walthers, which I love on GP, which werent terribly accurate either but I think that every ppk model that smith and wesson made recall was not good for the 9 mm genre. Brought alot of bad taste to the whole thing.

Yachtie -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:41:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail OH, christ. Yanno, back when Obama was gonna take your guns away, every fuckin swinging dick and his gash went out and bought them those hi-point and star and low end fuckin nine mils. Personally, I think 9mils suck, but once you have owned a 1911a1 or 1911a2 the rest is ........... well................scrap. Not to derail, but I did once have a Browning 9mm HiPower, made in Portugal which could handle the +P rounds.[:)] is it time for another gun thread?

mnottertail -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:45:51 PM)
They are all gun threads, but yeah, maybe one just dedicated to talking about them rather than shooting at people pissing.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:48:46 PM)
You do realize that none of these laws have anything to do with guns, don't you? They are about the right defend yourself, period. quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: Do you think we could wait until he claims SYG and a court finds in his favor instead of trying to milk a dry tit? I guess the point I am making is these type of laws, whether used in his defense or not, make these types of tragedies more likely to happen. There is a growing attitude in rural Missouri I believe that guns are the way to solve problems of this type. Bible belt rural Missouri and their legislatures are the driving force for the liberal guns laws and stand your ground legislation in Missouri. Butch

BamaD -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:50:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub We are blessed in Missouri to have some wonderful spring fed rock bottom float streams. This weekend a group of floaters were floating a popular section of the Meramec river around Steelville Mo. The group had been drinking soda and beer…nothing new on the river I do it myself. One of the men need to urinate so the grouped pulled over to a gravel bar for a pit stop. The young man went to the edge of the bar and as he was preparing to go a man stepped out of the woods yelling …shooting a pistol in the air and at the foot of the man pissing on himself I’m sure. He demanded they get off his property. At least three other men came running to the shots and an argument ensued over property rights. One of the men picked up rock from the bar and another stepped in front trying to defuse the situation. The man trying to defuse the fight put his arm out to push the gun aside. The property owner then stepped back and shot him in the face killing him. He claims he felt threatened and had a right to defend his property… He was arrested and is still in custody but I am wondering if he will use the Missouri version of SYG as a defense… I would not be surprised. I wonder how long it will take people to realize these laws are too vague and easily abused. HERE is the story Butch One guy threatened him with a rock another tried to grab his gun, this may not be a slam dunk for murder. Manslaughter on the other hand.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:51:21 PM)
If a jury believes his version of the story, i.e. multiple attackers holding at least one deadly weapon on his property, he's got every bit as much of a defense as anyone else. quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail That is getting far afield, criminal trespass is not a domestic violence crime, as of yet. True, as to criminal trespass. This was mere tangential; to taking a pee. The trespass was limited and of no criminal nature. The shooter says he was defending his property. From what? He's toast.[:D]

kdsub -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:53:27 PM)
quote: You do realize that none of these laws have anything to do with guns, don't you? They are about the right defend yourself, period Perhaps but what else are people using to defend themselves in these cases? Butch

kdsub -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:57:58 PM)
I don't know... maybe a bit more Crocker told police the shooting came as the culmination of a dispute over whether the group was trespassing or not, and he fired after a man approached him with rocks in his hands. Paul Dart wasn’t the one with the rocks. “I just shot the one closest to me,” Crocker said, according to police.

Yachtie -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 2:59:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD One guy threatened him with a rock another tried to grab his gun One guy was holding a rock, the other tried to push the gun hand away - so says the article. You give it a whole different slant.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 3:03:40 PM)
Sticks, stones, knives, MMA? quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: You do realize that none of these laws have anything to do with guns, don't you? They are about the right defend yourself, period Perhaps but what else are people using to defend themselves in these cases? Butch

kdsub -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 3:05:09 PM)
I just thought this incident paralleled Zimmerman's in some ways. Just as Trayvon Martin could have walked away so could this group. I do have an idea their judgment was impaired by alcohol otherwise why would they have continued to argue with a man with a gun that had already proven he would use it. They should have just got back in the raft then called the police....Just as Martin should have called the police when he saw Zimmerman following him. Butch

Powergamz1 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 3:06:04 PM)
Unless they can prove that they were geologists at work, picking up a rock, and putting their hands on the property owner are going to portrayed as acts of aggression by any competent defense lawyer. quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD One guy threatened him with a rock another tried to grab his gun One guy was holding a rock, the other tried to push the gun hand away - so says the article. You give it a whole different slant.

kdsub -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 3:06:34 PM)
If they only would...but we both know that is not what happens.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 3:10:43 PM)
On what planet do people not get into fights using those things? Not commit crimes? quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub If they only would...but we both know that is not what happens.

kdsub -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 3:21:46 PM)
quote: One guy was holding a rock, the other tried to push the gun hand away - so says the article The guy had rocks in his hands but not arms up to throw...The man shot in the middle was trying to stop the man with the rocks from getting shot not attacking the shooter...all this on the gravel bar NOT his exclusive land..So I do not see where it changes anything but murder. The shooter himself said he stepped back away and was free and not being attacked then he shot the guy in the face. But at least unlike the Zimmerman case there were witnesses. I still think he will use the STG law in Missouri and I still think this very law enabled the shooter in the same way the SYG law enabled Zimmerman...Guns and laws giving the OK to use them without proper safeguards are a prescription for more murders. Butch

Yachtie -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/23/2013 3:22:34 PM)
One thing I find disturbing is the total lack of any logic applied to situations such as these. The only info anyone has to go on is that in the OP. Yet, we go from pushing the gun hand away to trying to grab the gun. From one guy holding a rock, perhaps, and not inconceivably, because a man with an un-holstered firearm enters the scene, to threatening with a rock. The players are a float group and a landowner who is stated to be tired of the floaters. This is not a new activity the landowner is unfamiliar with. The floaters were within what is so far understood to be lawful access, though one guy went into the near woods to pee (a technical trespass which itself does not rise to deadly force repelling of an invasion force; the pee'er was not trying to make off with the landowner's prize hen). No, it's not about guns. It's about sensibility within the context of the circumstances. Only one party was unreasonable within the OP, the shooter.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.2148438