kid gets beat with bat..
Originally Posted by antarius
When do fights have to be fair? Why does it matter if he had "no chance" or not?
That's like saying you shouldn't use your, uh, Juijitsu skills when fighting someone, because it's just unfair and he has no chance.
If the guy didn't want to get into an altercation, he should'nt have been trying to rob these people. Simple as that.
That's like saying you shouldn't use your, uh, Juijitsu skills when fighting someone, because it's just unfair and he has no chance.
If the guy didn't want to get into an altercation, he should'nt have been trying to rob these people. Simple as that.
the best is that supposedly the victim had no clue as to where they were going.
They didnt discuss the plan to steal a car with him...lol
Originally Posted by antarius
Remember, in this country, our property is allowed to be protected with as much vigor and pride as our lives are; And rightfully so.
You had a good point about the name calling, though. If someone had tried to steal my stuff I'd be calling them all sorts of stuff, too.
Originally Posted by cowanpp
Woops, no it isn't. The use of deadly force to protect property is only authorized in Texas and in any state you are only allowed to use force required to prevent the robbery. Since these kids had already given up their attempt, moved somewhere else and started acting like they were waiting for the bus, the attempted theft had already been prevented. Since the theft had been prevented and was not imminent there was no privilege to use force against them.
You had a good point about the name calling, though. If someone had tried to steal my stuff I'd be calling them all sorts of stuff, too.
You had a good point about the name calling, though. If someone had tried to steal my stuff I'd be calling them all sorts of stuff, too.
Even in commiefornia, if someone tried to carjack me and I fired a round into his face as he leaned into my window to tell me he was trying to rob me -- it'd be a legal shoot. The only difference is it wouldn't such a cut and dry case as it is in Texas, and you do have to have some sort of personal harm to be threatened as well -- or at least reasonably believe that it could happen.
But yeah, you are right, you can't just shoot anyone for stealing your car stereo -- except in Texas after dark.
Maybe I should read the whole article huh? Thanks for the clarification.
Nonetheless, the kid deserved an ass whooping and name calling.
Originally Posted by antarius
Nonetheless, the kid deserved an ass whooping and name calling.
The other thing I didn't like about the article was how they kept referring/comparing to the actual hate crime that happened in the neighborhood many years ago. I didn't think this crime was a pure hate crime in the same way that the previous one was and think that using a term like "hate crime" every time people of different races get into it weakens the term and laws meant to prevent hate crimes.
Originally Posted by antarius
When do fights have to be fair? Why does it matter if he had "no chance" or not?
That's like saying you shouldn't use your, uh, Juijitsu skills when fighting someone, because it's just unfair and he has no chance.
If the guy didn't want to get into an altercation, he should'nt have been trying to rob these people. Simple as that.
That's like saying you shouldn't use your, uh, Juijitsu skills when fighting someone, because it's just unfair and he has no chance.
If the guy didn't want to get into an altercation, he should'nt have been trying to rob these people. Simple as that.
Originally Posted by Tankard
Wonder if that big black dude that beat the hell out of that white guy in a pizza parlor was charged with a hate crime?


