Home Main Category Personal Defense

Self Defense? Texas argument over child custody

JKPJKP Senior MemberPosts: 2,567 Senior Member

Replies

  • JKPJKP Senior Member Posts: 2,567 Senior Member
    The lady capturing the video doesn't seem all that alarmed after her husband(?) is shot. Seems content carrying on the argument while he's laying there motionless.
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 25,045 Senior Member
    Typical smartphone owner. Not only unconcerned about somebody getting shot in front of her, but doesn't have the brains to turn the **** phone sideways to get better video.
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
    )O(
  • mitdr774mitdr774 Member Posts: 1,772 Senior Member
    Would need more details, but it sounds to me like the shooter is in the wrong here based on what little I could gather.  I don't know the laws in the area either though.
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 12,085 Senior Member
    I watched that video a day or so ago.  Everyone was in the wrong- and especially the shooter and ex-wife.  If they were violating a court order to provide the child for visitation, then they were the first one to be wrong.  

    But yeah- dude should have walked away and gotten the constable to force the custody issue.  Not walking down on an idiot with a gun.

    Not a justified shoot, in my opinion.  
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Posts: 3,244 Senior Member
    That dude died from a severe case of the stupids…. That being said the dude with the gun became the aggressor when he brought a gun into a non-violent war of words, ESPECIALLY if the dead guy was only trying to assert/demand his lawful parental rights. He’s going to jail…
    I’m baaaaaaaaack… 😬
  • JustsomedudeJustsomedude Posts: 1,323 Senior Member
    I despise when women weaponize their children. Shame she didn't get it.
    We've been conditioned to believe that obedience is virtuous and voting is freedom- 
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Posts: 3,244 Senior Member
    In the state of NC the escalation of force can turn the “victim” into the aggressor if they jump force to an “excessive” level.  

    For example:  If I shove you, I “started it” and I’m the aggressor.  If in response you pull a gun and try to shoot me the role of the aggressor goes to you and I’m allowed to use deadly force to defend myself.  This is pretty common across the USA.
    I’m baaaaaaaaack… 😬
  • JustsomedudeJustsomedude Posts: 1,323 Senior Member
    Did the guy also shoot at the other guys feet shortly before killing him?
    We've been conditioned to believe that obedience is virtuous and voting is freedom- 
  • mitdr774mitdr774 Member Posts: 1,772 Senior Member
    It looked like that was the first shot.  Last I knew "warning shots" were not allowed in a self defense situation.  I could be mistaken though.
  • Some_MookSome_Mook Posts: 603 Senior Member
    mitdr774 said:
      I could be mistaken though.
    You are not mistaken
    "If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." - Thomas Paine
    "I know my place in the world and it ain’t standing next to Jerry Miculek" - Zee
  • JKPJKP Senior Member Posts: 2,567 Senior Member
    Not sure if the round into the deck was a "warning shot" or negligent discharge due to poor trigger discipline. Seems like the big guy should have done a lot better job controlling the smaller man at that point...
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Posts: 3,244 Senior Member
    edited December 2021 #13
    Poor understanding of the law leads to time behind bars...  The biggest question most investigators/prosecutors will want satisfied in a SD case is "Was it necessary for you to use deadly force?".  "Necessary" means you had NO other way of dealing with the encounter in order to save yourself (or others) from death, great bodily harm or criminal sexual assault.  

    Your answer better be a resounding and convincing YES!

    And it's not JUST you, the burden falls on you to convince the legal system that ANY other person of ordinary firmness that faced with the same facts and circumstances would have done the same.  That was one of the main points the prosecution was desperately trying to work into the narrative in the KR trial.
    I’m baaaaaaaaack… 😬
  • JustsomedudeJustsomedude Posts: 1,323 Senior Member
    JKP said:
    Not sure if the round into the deck was a "warning shot" or negligent discharge due to poor trigger discipline. Seems like the big guy should have done a lot better job controlling the smaller man at that point...
    I thought I saw/heard a shot into the deck too.
    We've been conditioned to believe that obedience is virtuous and voting is freedom- 
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,894 Senior Member
    Warning shot legality varies by state. In FL, it's legal.

    Might not be prudent, but it's legal.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • LinefinderLinefinder Moderator Posts: 7,762 Senior Member
    edited December 2021 #16
    I don't think this is going to go well for the shooter. 

    Mike
    "Walking away seems to be a lost art form."
    N454casull
  • SpkSpk Senior Member Posts: 4,746 Senior Member
    edited December 2021 #17
    It's not gonna go good for the shooter.
    As far as I'm aware, you can't provoke someone then shoot them and claim self-defense.
    The shooter didn't try to de-escalate, he demanded that the other hot-head leave or else (I didn't see an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm). Apparently, he wasn't Man enough to force compliance on his own so he goes inside and gets his gun. Clearly, that's an escalation.
    From what little there is of the video, I would have suggested that guy grab his girlfriend/wife (whichever) and drag her inside and lock the door then call the cops. If hot-head tries to force entry, now you have a better self-defense position. If hot-head grabs his ex-wife and won't let her go inside and a scuffle breaks out, well, you have a better case. But casually walking inside and grabbing your gun then casually walking back outside is not likely to fly in court unless hot-head was throwing around death threats earlier and threatening to kill everyone, and then you have to be able to prove that in court.
    I don't see this ending well for the shooter. Too much dumbassery all around.
    Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience -- Mark Twain
    How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and [how] hard it is to undo that work again! -- Mark Twain

  • Some_MookSome_Mook Posts: 603 Senior Member
    edited December 2021 #18
    Warning shot legality varies by state. In FL, it's legal.

    Might not be prudent, but it's legal.
    If you live in Florida, you might want to review Statute 776.012.  The media labelled this the "Warning Shot" law, but nowhere in this law is the term 'Warning Shot' used or specified.  The law was codified to address the issue where Marissa Alexander was sentenced to 20 years in prison for firing a "warning shot" after the judge disallowed her 'stand your ground' defense.  The 10-20-Life law sentencing guideline that was used to sentence Alexander was deemed by the legislature to not have been the intent of how it was applied, and so they modified the 776.012 Sec. 1 slightly so that Alexander could have used that law to support her claim of using deadly force in self defense even though she did not actually shoot her ex-husband.  Florida Courts still consider FIRING a gun in self defense to be a use of deadly force, so one would have to be legally using deadly force to get away with a warning shot.
    "If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." - Thomas Paine
    "I know my place in the world and it ain’t standing next to Jerry Miculek" - Zee
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,894 Senior Member
    You are correct. 

    BUT, when the bill was passed, the legislature and governor were acting as though it allowed warning shots. 

    Side note: the folks who passed and approved this legislation said that it was done in part to correct oversights in the law so Alexander wouldn't have gotten into trouble, none seem to have done anything to help her after the trial....
    I'm just here for snark.
  • Some_MookSome_Mook Posts: 603 Senior Member
    edited December 2021 #20
    Once the media frenzy died down, there was no further incentive to help Alexander.  The crazy part was that if she had the gun in her possession when the confrontation began, she would probably have been allowed to use a Stand Your Ground defense, and the discharge of the firearm would have been a lawful use of deadly force.   The fact that she left the scene to retrieve the gun and then came back led the judge to disallow a stand your ground argument which made her use of deadly force unlawful. 

    Had she actually shot and killed her opponent, she most likely would have gotten off scott-free, as she was in her own home and hers would have been the only narrative of the event unless her kids mentioned to the investigator that mom went out to her car in the garage to get her gun.

    The simple truth is that no one should consider a 'Warning shot' to ever be legal, anywhere.  If you fire a gun in the vicinity of someone with the intent to alter that person's actions or behavior,  you are using deadly force.  If it is a legal use and you miss and the situation is resolved, great, no harm no foul.  If the use of deadly force was not legal, a miss is just as illegal as a hit would have been.

     Even firing a gun to scare off an animal runs the risk of being charged with unlawful discharge of a firearm in many localities, unless you are using blanks.  Even then you could get charged with disturbing the peace, or depending on the circumstances, assault, if your action caused another person to fear they were in danger of being injured.


    "If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." - Thomas Paine
    "I know my place in the world and it ain’t standing next to Jerry Miculek" - Zee
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,894 Senior Member
    Agreed on all counts: warning shots, shooting attackers, and especially that the politicians don't care.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 8,004 Senior Member
    edited December 2021 #22
     

    But yeah- dude should have walked away and gotten the constable to force the custody issue.   
      Women get away with pretty much whatever they want to in custody cases. Constables cost money and take time and even if it does work for next week, the week after she will do the same thing with no repercussions because it is to much trouble for the courts to enforce the laws, except of course child support against a man.
    One of the best things about gay marriage is that when there are 2 men getting divorced, the court and Mother Protective Services dont have a go to to shaft one of the parties. It has helped change family law.

    If we had a justice system, the person committing the illegal act should be charged with the death as in other cases. If hood A and hood B rob a store and hood C is in the car when A+B shoot a guy, hood C is charged. In this case the mother is committing the initial unlawful act and should be charged with murder as well.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 12,085 Senior Member
    That is the damn truth.  After being in a front row seat in my brother’s divorce in which we proved his soon to be ex violated court orders, was sleeping around, destroyed financial records, admitted she suffering from depression that affected the care she could give the daughter…..

    Well, the Birkenstock wearing female family court judge did not care.  Everything went to the mom.   My brother had been the primary caregiver for his daughter, and the ex was the primary breadwinner.  BUT… my brother still lost custody and had to pay child support.

    The deck is 100% stacked against men in family court.  But that does not mean you should not play the hand you are dealt.  Report the violation of the court order to the court.  Keep doing it.  At a certain point, the judge will finally let ego override the way the deck is stacked and come down on the mom for defying the judges orders.

    It’s the only way to do it legally.  It also has a much lower chance of getting shot dead on some crappy front porch.
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 8,004 Senior Member
      At a certain point, the judge will finally let ego override the way the deck is stacked and come down on the mom for defying the judges orders.


    No, they wont. Until the family court system is changed, the crack ho unemployed deadbeat mom who has violated the court orders, state and federal laws, will win over any guy who is the equal in virtue of a knight of the round table because its easy.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • JustsomedudeJustsomedude Posts: 1,323 Senior Member
    The only saving grace for many men today is if the mother gets hooked on hard drugs and it's STILL an uphill battle and boat load of money for dad to get the kids. Theres nothing shared about shared parenting either.
    We've been conditioned to believe that obedience is virtuous and voting is freedom- 
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement