If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Man tells police he was "standing his ground" after he showed up to his neighbor's house with a gun because the party was too loud   (foxnews.com) divider line 246
    More: Dumbass, Houston, unincorporated areas, concealed handgun, Baytown, Grant Scheiner  
•       •       •

8384 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jun 2012 at 6:07 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



246 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-09 06:31:07 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: jbuist: Tigger: So if Martin assaulted Zimmerman wasn't he standing his ground?

No. You can't shoot somebody for following you. That does not warrant deadly force. Likewise you can't beat up on somebody for following you.

Zimmerman following Martin was foolish. Martin beating on Zimmerman took it from foolish to rodeo and that's where deadly force became permissible. That is, assuming all the evidence I've seen stacks up in court.

I don't find it credible that Martin ran away from Zimmerman, clean out of his sight, and then returned just to start beating on Zimmerman. Makes no sense. The kid was scared, ran from his stalker, and was only 70 yards from home. Why come back? Why just walk up to an older, heavier dude and punch him in the nose?

I think it's much more likely that Zimmerman pursued Martin, caught up to him, and tried to detain him for the cops. That's more consistent with Zimmerman's behavior up to that point. Then Martin lashed out in self-defense and got shot. In this scenario, Zimmerman provoked the attack and the SYG defense is precluded by law.

But we don't have any independent evidence or witnesses to what happened between the time Martin ran from Zimmerman and the time Martin was seen on top of Zimmerman.

Much as I would like to convict Zimmerman upon my presumption that he pursued and accosted Martin, I just couldn't do it if I sat on that jury. I would need some evidence to support my presumption.

Does that make me a bad juror?


No it makes you a good one. No matter what your personal feelings are on the case you have to put them aside and decide entirely on the evidence presented. From what I have seen of this case other than Zimmerman's account there is almost nothing to indicate what happened. We have a witness that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman assaulting him. The problem is we don't know what lead up to that. Did Martin jump Zimmerman? Did Zimmerman jump Martin? Did Martin approach Zimmerman and Zimmerman start a physical altercation? Did Zimmerman approach Martin and Martin start a physical altercation?

So many questions and no clear answers that, in my opinion, are well supported by real evidence.

Of coarse Zimmerman will blame it all on Martin. So you gotta take that with a huge grain of salt. But from what I have seen there is no way to prove that what he said isn't true.
 
2012-06-09 06:31:53 PM  
If someone barged onto my property and knocked on the door with a firearm, I would consider them a hostile intruder on my property and promptly call 911 and retrieve my own firearm. Seems like Rodriguez is the one who should have gotten shot in this situation, he deserves major jail time.
 
2012-06-09 06:32:54 PM  
Rodriguez needs to be convicted of murder. The idea that you can go over to someone else's property armed, deliberately confront them, and "stand your ground" has no support under the law.

I should also not that Texas has a "Castle Law" not a "Stand Your Ground" law. You need to be defending your home, business, or automobile for the Castle Law to apply in Texas. Rodriguez attempting to claim any type of rights under Texas law is absurd.

Let me say that "Castle Laws" and "Stand Your Ground" laws are needed. Until North Carolina passed the Castle Law a few months back, if someone broke into my house and I shot them then I would be charged by the District Attorney and also open for obscene civil suits from the criminals family.
 
2012-06-09 06:33:32 PM  
Just can't understand people, as a multiple gun owner I hope and pray that I never have to shoot, or worse yet kill another human being. This dickweed looks like that's what he was out for.
 
2012-06-09 06:35:13 PM  
These Hispanic vigilantes are out of control. This isn't Pancho Villas March to the Border for god sakes.
 
2012-06-09 06:36:06 PM  
This guy has no chance of getting out of this one, he went to someone elses private property with a gun and looking for a fight and he ended up killing the homeowner. Seems that they would have the right to stand their ground, not him.
 
2012-06-09 06:36:14 PM  
The moral of the story must be to stand your ground before someone else stands theirs.
 
2012-06-09 06:36:52 PM  

BarkingUnicorn:
This case is pretty clear-cut to me. The Texas law shields you only when you are in your home, place of business, or vehicle. It also says you must not provoke the attack or be committing a crime. This defendant was way out of all bounds.


The defendant entered another person's home without permission, with his gun drawn. Isn't he already guilty of trespassing, breaking and entering, and assault with a deadly weapon?

/has a GED in Law
 
2012-06-09 06:38:03 PM  
I like it when we take some wombat-farking-retard story and use it to define the argument for the other 99% non-wombat-farking-retard instances when the law works just fine.

Dude sounds like a douchebag. Douchebag + Gun = Someone's ass is getting capped.

Grist for the mill I guess.
 
2012-06-09 06:39:32 PM  

jbuist: Even if somebody is illegally detaining you you can't jump to lethal force unless you fear for your life or great bodily harm.


Illegal detention usually results in, or at least a person would be reasonable to fear that it results in, serious bodily injury.

If Martin was being illegally detained, he had every right to fight back with whatever amount of force he felt was necessary to stop the unlawful detention.
 
2012-06-09 06:40:06 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: jbuist: Tigger: So if Martin assaulted Zimmerman wasn't he standing his ground?

No. You can't shoot somebody for following you. That does not warrant deadly force. Likewise you can't beat up on somebody for following you.

Zimmerman following Martin was foolish. Martin beating on Zimmerman took it from foolish to rodeo and that's where deadly force became permissible. That is, assuming all the evidence I've seen stacks up in court.

I don't find it credible that Martin ran away from Zimmerman, clean out of his sight, and then returned just to start beating on Zimmerman. Makes no sense. The kid was scared, ran from his stalker, and was only 70 yards from home. Why come back? Why just walk up to an older, heavier dude and punch him in the nose?

I think it's much more likely that Zimmerman pursued Martin, caught up to him, and tried to detain him for the cops. That's more consistent with Zimmerman's behavior up to that point. Then Martin lashed out in self-defense and got shot. In this scenario, Zimmerman provoked the attack and the SYG defense is precluded by law.

But we don't have any independent evidence or witnesses to what happened between the time Martin ran from Zimmerman and the time Martin was seen on top of Zimmerman.

Much as I would like to convict Zimmerman upon my presumption that he pursued and accosted Martin, I just couldn't do it if I sat on that jury. I would need some evidence to support my presumption.

Does that make me a bad juror?


Yes. So many people feel so superior playing the 'even though its obviously true, I would have to vote not guilty due to whatever' l, but in reality its just accepting the brokenness of the system. Like the Casey Anthony trial where its quite obvious she killed her daughter yet everyone who thinks they're so much more evolved than everyone else thinks letting her getting away with it was the right thing to do.

Common sense has no place in our legal system
 
2012-06-09 06:40:36 PM  

gblive: Rodriguez needs to be convicted of murder. The idea that you can go over to someone else's property armed, deliberately confront them, and "stand your ground" has no support under the law.

I should also not that Texas has a "Castle Law" not a "Stand Your Ground" law. You need to be defending your home, business, or automobile for the Castle Law to apply in Texas. Rodriguez attempting to claim any type of rights under Texas law is absurd.

Let me say that "Castle Laws" and "Stand Your Ground" laws are needed. Until North Carolina passed the Castle Law a few months back, if someone broke into my house and I shot them then I would be charged by the District Attorney and also open for obscene civil suits from the criminals family.


gblive: Rodriguez needs to be convicted of murder. The idea that you can go over to someone else's property armed, deliberately confront them, and "stand your ground" has no support under the law.

I should also not that Texas has a "Castle Law" not a "Stand Your Ground" law. You need to be defending your home, business, or automobile for the Castle Law to apply in Texas. Rodriguez attempting to claim any type of rights under Texas law is absurd.

Let me say that "Castle Laws" and "Stand Your Ground" laws are needed. Until North Carolina passed the Castle Law a few months back, if someone broke into my house and I shot them then I would be charged by the District Attorney and also open for obscene civil suits from the criminals family.


Also live in NC, glad they passed that law, before we had to retreat to the furthest point in the house before you could shoot. I was recently told that now if they are kicking on your door, it's OK to shoot through the door (?)!
 
2012-06-09 06:42:41 PM  

nekom: elffster: Yes SYG is a horrible law and I dont see the logic behind it.

Its made a number of folks get killed. What a horrible law.

I agree. I'm all for a self-defense statute but it MUST include a duty to retreat if you are reasonably able to do so.

Honestly, who WANTS to shoot someone anyway? I have a shotgun, and if someone is breaking into my house, you'd better believe they are going to see it. I would pray to whatever deity I could think of that I would not have to use it, that the mere sight of it would be enough to send them running. I would hate to live with that guilt, even if I absolutely had to do it, and if I absolutely had to, I would to protect my family. My gun exists to hopefully diffuse any such situation with its mere presence, using it would be an absolute last resort and I sincerely hope that never comes up. I'm quite happy with running a potential burglar off, I don't want to kill them.


The problem occurs when you insert the word reasonably. Everyone can define that differently. Is it reasonable for me to climb out my bedroom window and leave my kids in the house with whoever is breaking in? What if I run into the intruder and shoot him on my way to their bedrooms? Will I got to prison because I didn't climb out the window? If the law doesn't make an exception for me going to get my kids then by the law I have just murdered him and will go to prison.

I don't want some prosecutor that's trying to make a name for themselves putting me in prison or making me spend every dime I have ever earned to defend myself because I refused to abandon my kids to an intruder.

I have a pump shotgun as well and I keep it with no shell in the chamber. Hopefully if someone is in my house the sound of me chambering the first one will change their mind about being there.
 
2012-06-09 06:43:39 PM  

JonPace: BarkingUnicorn: jbuist: Tigger: So if Martin assaulted Zimmerman wasn't he standing his ground?

No. You can't shoot somebody for following you. That does not warrant deadly force. Likewise you can't beat up on somebody for following you.

Zimmerman following Martin was foolish. Martin beating on Zimmerman took it from foolish to rodeo and that's where deadly force became permissible. That is, assuming all the evidence I've seen stacks up in court.

I don't find it credible that Martin ran away from Zimmerman, clean out of his sight, and then returned just to start beating on Zimmerman. Makes no sense. The kid was scared, ran from his stalker, and was only 70 yards from home. Why come back? Why just walk up to an older, heavier dude and punch him in the nose?

I think it's much more likely that Zimmerman pursued Martin, caught up to him, and tried to detain him for the cops. That's more consistent with Zimmerman's behavior up to that point. Then Martin lashed out in self-defense and got shot. In this scenario, Zimmerman provoked the attack and the SYG defense is precluded by law.

But we don't have any independent evidence or witnesses to what happened between the time Martin ran from Zimmerman and the time Martin was seen on top of Zimmerman.

Much as I would like to convict Zimmerman upon my presumption that he pursued and accosted Martin, I just couldn't do it if I sat on that jury. I would need some evidence to support my presumption.

Does that make me a bad juror?

Yes. So many people feel so superior playing the 'even though its obviously true, I would have to vote not guilty due to whatever' l, but in reality its just accepting the brokenness of the system. Like the Casey Anthony trial where its quite obvious she killed her daughter yet everyone who thinks they're so much more evolved than everyone else thinks letting her getting away with it was the right thing to do.

Common sense has no place in our legal system

I was told to never confuse the law with justice. They are not the same.
 
2012-06-09 06:45:13 PM  
Sounds like guy needs a bullet in the brain, and the neighbors need to STFU.


Taking an ax to their power meter would have solved the issue without bloodshed.
 
2012-06-09 06:45:21 PM  

gblive: Let me say that "Castle Laws" and "Stand Your Ground" laws are needed. Until North Carolina passed the Castle Law a few months back, if someone broke into my house and I shot them then I would be charged by the District Attorney and also open for obscene civil suits from the criminals family.


I knew I was forgetting something in my earlier post. Until Castle Law/Doctrine & SYG started being passed by various states (one of the common parts of it being that the homeowner can't be sued by someone/his estate if the person was at the time committing an illegal act) it was generally somewhat common for the homeowner to be sued by the robber for the "grievous bodily injury" inflicted upon him. Naturally most juries laughed him out of court but the homeowner was still out many many thousands of dollars defending himself.

For the most part they are very good laws with sound reasoning behind them. As with many things though, the media reports/sensationalizes upon those instances that either don't apply to begin with or, as in this case, massively quote some nutjob who doesn't know what he's talking about. The end result being that, as evidenced here, people think that SYG means you can go out hunting.

In this case though, this asshat needs to be tossed onto Texas' busy death row awaiting his turn on the gurney.
 
2012-06-09 06:46:58 PM  

jbuist: elffster: Yes SYG is a horrible law and I dont see the logic behind it.

Without it prosecutors get to fall back on forcing the defendant to show they had no ability to retreat. Leads to some not fun Monday morning quarterbacking.

- You COULD have jumped out of the 2nd story window
- You COULD have bailed out of the car after they jacked it

Etc.

Plus the whole "duty retreat" stuff only has an exception for you being in your home. Somebody breaks into your hunting cabin while you're sleeping. Different rules than your house. I don't see the logic in that. Same went for motor homes and campers and such.

So, basically SYG laws are in place because prosecutors have tried some real BS in the past.


I think you're confused about what the Castle Doctrine means in terms of "home" . If you're legally occupying your hunting cabin, it's your "home" as far as the law is concerned. It doesn't have "different rules" than your house. In most states with the Castle Doctrine, the same holds for an office, a vehicle, etc.
 
2012-06-09 06:47:52 PM  
FTA: "The clear trend in American law is to expand the rights of people to protect themselves by using deadly force", said Houston criminal defense attorney Grant Scheiner. "

If by "protect themselves" he means "kill everyone and everything that slightly annoys them", then he's spot on.

Texas tag, please.

/Texan
 
2012-06-09 06:48:16 PM  

cig-mkr: gblive: Rodriguez needs to be convicted of murder. The idea that you can go over to someone else's property armed, deliberately confront them, and "stand your ground" has no support under the law.

I should also not that Texas has a "Castle Law" not a "Stand Your Ground" law. You need to be defending your home, business, or automobile for the Castle Law to apply in Texas. Rodriguez attempting to claim any type of rights under Texas law is absurd.

Let me say that "Castle Laws" and "Stand Your Ground" laws are needed. Until North Carolina passed the Castle Law a few months back, if someone broke into my house and I shot them then I would be charged by the District Attorney and also open for obscene civil suits from the criminals family.

Also live in NC, glad they passed that law, before we had to retreat to the furthest point in the house before you could shoot. I was recently told that now if they are kicking on your door, it's OK to shoot through the door (?)!


I don't know if you can shoot through the door if they are kicking it in North Carolina under the Castle Law. I don't think this is a question that I have ever heard asked.

I certainly hope that I am never placed in a position of needing to use the law in order to defend my family in my home.
 
2012-06-09 06:48:29 PM  
I'm as pro-gun rights as somebody can be without turning into an NRA whacko, but Stand Your Ground laws not only go too far, they do it while shooting several unarmed people in the farking face.
 
2012-06-09 06:49:05 PM  

Richard Roma: Texas tag, please.


If you give Texas a tag, then California and Arizona should get one too. I think Florida is the only state the deserves one at this point.
 
2012-06-09 06:49:49 PM  

VictoryCabal: I understand the reasoning behind SYG laws, and I'm sympathetic to them. But I'm frustrated by the very sloppy way in which they're crafted. It seems that the people who craft these laws have a very limited paradigm for how people interact. They only seem to foresee scenarios where the innocent, well-meaning citizen reluctantly defends themselves and their family from the ruthless, thug, super-predator criminal. It's like they believe that's the only possible situation.

But other scenarios are not only predictable, but it's 100% certain that they'll happen. Situations like this, where people use SYG to shield their own aggressive behavior and instigation. Or like Martin & Zimmerman, which is looking more and more like two hot-heads worked themselves up to a fight where when one guy starts getting his ass beat, he pusses out and pulls a gun.

And of course, we have seen multiple stories here on Fark where it seems that the ability of someone to successfully claim SYG protections in some Southern states very much depends on the race of the shooter and the race of the shootee.

So once again, State governments pass laws with very little forethought, and leave it to the courts to establish all the case law on how these laws are actually implemented. Meanwhile, bodies pile up.


If it makes votes then make it so.
 
2012-06-09 06:50:44 PM  
FTFA: "the retired Houston-area firefighter told a police dispatcher by phone that he feared for his life"....One of the wounded men, a Houston firefighter named Ricky Johnson, told jurors Friday that he and his friends were not at fault, saying Rodriguez "started the process by coming with a gun."
-- why are firefighters fighting other firefighters??????? I didn't even know that happened. that's like a cop rolling up on another cop, but worse. they're supposed to be firefighters.


FTFA: One of the men, who had apparently seen Rodriguez's gun, cursed at Rodriguez and suggested that he was going to go inside Danaher's home and retrieve his own weapon. "Look, I will defend myself, sir. ... It's about to get out of hand, sir. Please help me. Please help me, sir. My life is in danger now," Rodriguez can be heard saying on the recording, which was played for jurors this week...."I'm standing my ground here. Now these people are going to go try and kill me."
-- that's sad, that's like out of a movie. 'oh no, don't hurt me' says the bad guy while attacking the good guy (I mean, really, didn't that shiat happen in 'Oz'? Yeah, it did )
 
2012-06-09 06:53:08 PM  
This is me not giving any farks. The party goers started it with their loud shiat music. They escalated it by not turning it down, and then they sealed their own death warrant by saying "I'm gonna get my gun and shoot you back!"

If you cant turn down the farking music when someone comes out of their house with a gun and tells you to turn it the fark down, you deserve to be shot.

You know how you resolve those situations? "Woah dude! put away the gun and We'll turn down the music. Cool? Cool."

Problem farking over.

But we all know that's not what happened. These assholes were partying till balls o clock in the morning, playing shiatty rap music hooting and hollering and being obnoxious farking drunks. No doubt this is a regular occurrence for them, and there is no doubt in my mind that they haven't done this in the past.

Some people are only capable of learning through high velocity lead poisoning.

How many of those loud ass farks are going to throw another party any time soon? hmm?
 
2012-06-09 06:53:37 PM  
You know, this is really sad, people will complain loudly about teenagers playing their music too loud, or partying or whatnot, but they will absolutely refuse to get involved. I'm a member of my local Citizens Group Patrol and we will get calls over the scanner on this all the time. We can usually show up before the LEO and assess the situation and try to get it under control before manpower from the local PD needs to get involved by entering the house directly and removing the power source for the music, whether it be a fuse or batteries or a power cord. We find that once the music is under control, the party will settle down and disperse.
 
2012-06-09 06:54:25 PM  

Fluorescent Testicle: I'm as pro-gun rights as somebody can be without turning into an NRA whacko, but Stand Your Ground laws not only go too far, they do it while shooting several unarmed people in the farking face.


Same here. the spirit of the laws is spot on the execution has been piss poor.

I will never agree with a duty to retreat law.
 
2012-06-09 06:54:26 PM  

fluffy2097: You know how you resolve those situations? "Woah dude! put away the gun and We'll turn down the music. Cool? Cool."


You might be surprised to hear this, but many of us don't like "The guy with the gun gets his way" as a philosophy.
 
2012-06-09 06:54:50 PM  

ExperianScaresCthulhu: -- why are firefighters fighting other firefighters??????? I didn't even know that happened. that's like a cop rolling up on another cop, but worse. they're supposed to be firefighters.


Because the one who is on trial is an asshole. Seriously, what type of person goes over to someones house uninvited, starts shiat, screams that he is in danger of his life, and then kills somebody? An asshole that's who.
 
2012-06-09 06:55:20 PM  

Callous: The problem occurs when you insert the word reasonably. Everyone can define that differently. Is it reasonable for me to climb out my bedroom window and leave my kids in the house with whoever is breaking in? What if I run into the intruder and shoot him on my way to their bedrooms? Will I got to prison because I didn't climb out the window? If the law doesn't make an exception for me going to get my kids then by the law I have just murdered him and will go to prison.


I guess that's up to a jury. I would find it quite reasonable to stay if you were protecting your children, even if you could yourself retreat. It's not unreasonable to protect others. No jury in the world would convict you if you were protecting your child. What is reasonable, though, would be to let a burglar who sees the gun and wants to run go ahead and run. Call the cops and let them sort it all out. Shooting them in the back while they are running and posing no threat is NOT reasonable. I agree everyone has different standards, but with the jury system that we have here, I think people would generally agree for the most part on what is reasonable and what isn't.
 
2012-06-09 06:56:17 PM  

fluffy2097: How many of those loud ass farks are going to throw another party any time soon? hmm?


Hopefully all your neighbors.
 
2012-06-09 06:56:49 PM  
I'm a fan of the castle doctrine, but this guy went well beyond that. He went into someones house, started a fight where he was clearly outmatched, and when he couldn't win by those means, just decided to start killing. That's not defending yourself, that's just plain out killing for killing.
 
2012-06-09 06:57:21 PM  

LasersHurt: fluffy2097: You know how you resolve those situations? "Woah dude! put away the gun and We'll turn down the music. Cool? Cool."

You might be surprised to hear this, but many of us don't like "The guy with the gun gets his way" as a philosophy.


You might not want to hear this, but the guy who taunts a man with a gun gets bullet in the brain pan.

/You turn down the music, he goes inside, you call the police and say you were assaulted with a deadly weapon, gun nut goes to jail. Let the cops deal with potentially getting shot your moron.
 
2012-06-09 06:57:57 PM  

fluffy2097: LasersHurt: fluffy2097: You know how you resolve those situations? "Woah dude! put away the gun and We'll turn down the music. Cool? Cool."

You might be surprised to hear this, but many of us don't like "The guy with the gun gets his way" as a philosophy.

You might not want to hear this, but the guy who taunts a man with a gun gets bullet in the brain pan.

/You turn down the music, he goes inside, you call the police and say you were assaulted with a deadly weapon, gun nut goes to jail. Let the cops deal with potentially getting shot your moron.


I feel like you're treating the symptoms and not the cause.
 
2012-06-09 06:58:15 PM  
An armed society is only a polite society if you get to shoot darkies playing music too loud who didn't invite you to the party.

/They're coming right at us!
 
2012-06-09 06:58:32 PM  

jayphat: I'm a fan of the castle doctrine, but this guy went well beyond that. He went into someones house, started a fight where he was clearly outmatched, and when he couldn't win by those means, just decided to start killing. That's not defending yourself, that's just plain out killing for killing.


He never went inside the house, He went to the property to ask them to turn down the music.
 
2012-06-09 06:59:10 PM  

fluffy2097: is, but the guy who taunts a man with a gun gets bullet in the brain pan.


So it's cool to kill people when they taunt you? If the guy didn't like the music being so loud, he could've called the cops.
 
2012-06-09 07:01:00 PM  

skylabdown: I like it when we take some wombat-farking-retard story and use it to define the argument for the other 99% non-wombat-farking-retard instances when the law works just fine.

Dude sounds like a douchebag. Douchebag + Gun = Someone's ass is getting capped.

Grist for the mill I guess.


I'll remember that when some asshole guns me down after a fender-bender because he panicked when I reached for my insurance card.
 
2012-06-09 07:01:01 PM  

fluffy2097: jayphat: I'm a fan of the castle doctrine, but this guy went well beyond that. He went into someones house, started a fight where he was clearly outmatched, and when he couldn't win by those means, just decided to start killing. That's not defending yourself, that's just plain out killing for killing.

He never went inside the house, He went to the property to ask them to turn down the music.


So he was standing on their ground?
 
2012-06-09 07:01:38 PM  

LasersHurt: I feel like you're treating the symptoms and not the cause.


The cause is human retardation. Party dudes had no respect for gun guy and wouldn't turn it down until he pulled out his piece. Once gun guy showed his gun and told them to turn down the farking music, party dudes said "No way, We're kicking your ass and my buddy is gonna go get his shotgun"

Gun guy shot first.

So the root cause is people being unable to turn down their farking stereo.
 
2012-06-09 07:01:39 PM  

fluffy2097: This is me not giving any farks. The party goers started it with their loud shiat music. They escalated it by not turning it down, and then they sealed their own death warrant by saying "I'm gonna get my gun and shoot you back!"

If you cant turn down the farking music when someone comes out of their house with a gun and tells you to turn it the fark down, you deserve to be shot.

You know how you resolve those situations? "Woah dude! put away the gun and We'll turn down the music. Cool? Cool."

Problem farking over.

But we all know that's not what happened. These assholes were partying till balls o clock in the morning, playing shiatty rap music hooting and hollering and being obnoxious farking drunks. No doubt this is a regular occurrence for them, and there is no doubt in my mind that they haven't done this in the past.

Some people are only capable of learning through high velocity lead poisoning.

How many of those loud ass farks are going to throw another party any time soon? hmm?


Maybe you missed all the earlier press about Rodriguez regularly threatening everyone in the neighborhood with a gun. He threatened one homeowner over his grass being too long.... and others for many other perceived reasons. Unfortunately the trial judge is not allowing evidence from over 20 neighbors about their previous run-ins with the armed nutcase Rodriguez.

I can only gather that the entire neighborhood will be glad to see Rodriguez locked up permanently.

// Do you think that it is proper for my neighbor to come to my door pointing a gun at me demanding that I mow my lawn because it is 4 inches high and the town law says it can only be 3.5 inches high? Well in your case - I guess you would simply view this as a lesson I should learn through "high velocity lead poisoning".
 
2012-06-09 07:01:48 PM  

WhyteRaven74: fluffy2097: is, but the guy who taunts a man with a gun gets bullet in the brain pan.

So it's cool to kill people when they taunt you? If the guy didn't like the music being so loud, he could've called the cops.


That wouldn't have given him the chance to kill people for playing music too loud. IT'S IN THE BIBLE, MAN!
 
2012-06-09 07:02:37 PM  

fluffy2097: LasersHurt: I feel like you're treating the symptoms and not the cause.

The cause is human retardation. Party dudes had no respect for gun guy and wouldn't turn it down until he pulled out his piece. Once gun guy showed his gun and told them to turn down the farking music, party dudes said "No way, We're kicking your ass and my buddy is gonna go get his shotgun"

Gun guy shot first.

So the root cause is people being unable to turn down their farking stereo.


No, no it's not.
 
2012-06-09 07:04:16 PM  

gblive: Unfortunately the trial judge is not allowing evidence from over 20 neighbors about their previous run-ins with the armed nutcase Rodriguez.


Evidence that is not allowed is probably not allowed because it is in no way documented.

"Yeah, that asshole has been waving guns at us for years.'
"And have you ever called the cops on him?"
"No, we'd have to prove he was actually doing it then and he never did."
"I think we're done here."
 
2012-06-09 07:04:20 PM  

fluffy2097: So the root cause is people being unable to turn down their farking stereo.


Could this possibly be the alt of a certain other SYG troll?
 
2012-06-09 07:05:14 PM  

Professor Science: That one was a separate issue, totally unrelated to self-defense laws. Texas law allows the use of deadly force to protect property.


Only after dark.

Besides, it wasn't his property, but his neighbors.

Plus, he shot one of the guys in the back as he was running away.
 
2012-06-09 07:05:30 PM  

fluffy2097: jayphat: I'm a fan of the castle doctrine, but this guy went well beyond that. He went into someones house, started a fight where he was clearly outmatched, and when he couldn't win by those means, just decided to start killing. That's not defending yourself, that's just plain out killing for killing.

He never went inside the house, He went to the property to ask them to turn down the music.


He was standing on their property in their driveway. He was asked to leave. Rodriguez was trespassing and breaking the law.
 
2012-06-09 07:05:39 PM  

LasersHurt: No, no it's not.


yeah. It is. The man may be mentally ill, but what set him shooting was people not turning the radio down.
 
2012-06-09 07:06:37 PM  

gblive: He was standing on their property in their driveway. He was asked to leave. Rodriguez was trespassing and breaking the law.


How do you ask someone to turn down the music without knocking on their front door?
 
2012-06-09 07:06:39 PM  

WhyteRaven74: fluffy2097: is, but the guy who taunts a man with a gun gets bullet in the brain pan.

So it's cool to kill people when they taunt you? If the guy didn't like the music being so loud, he could've called the cops.


He did call the cops. He was on the phone with the cops when the confrontation that ended with three people getting shot started. The bottom line is he just wanted to shoot somebody. He escalated a non-violent situation into a violent one and he used 911 to establish that he "feared for his life" so that he could. What he did was truly sick.
 
2012-06-09 07:06:40 PM  
fluffy2097: I'm asking you very nicely to stop posting.
 
Displayed 50 of 246 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report