Avoid stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things. The best fight — yes indeed — is the one you avoid. Another “meme” that was worth sharing even if it isn’t funny.
On a related note, y’all may have noticed that one of our advertisers at TTAG here is U.S. LawShield. They’re one of the largest and best services in the country providing legal defense for self-defense. “Concealed carry insurance,” if you will, where you pay a small monthly subscription fee and, should you need it, they in return take care of your legal defense. The peace of mind alone is worth the price.
“The best fight — yes indeed — is the one you avoid.”
Much wisdom in that.
For proof, see the pathetic flailings of my mentally-ill demented troll.
There’s something just not right with that little boy… 😉
What did you guys think of this shoot:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10245799/Horrifying-moment-gun-wielding-Texas-man-shoots-dead-partners-ex-furious-child-custody-row.html
I didn’t feel the shoot was justified. If he stayed in his home and waited for the guy to try to break the door down, sure. But for him to come outside and do the chest bump with his firearm, followed by the gun wrestle and throw, and then after is seemed like it might be over, then he shoots the guy.
Without knowing any more about the case than is in the article and video you linked, it sounds like an almighty clusterfuck to me. I think it boils down to the dead was told multiple times to leave the property and so was committing what would be “Defiant Trespass” under Pennsylvania law. I am not sure of the particulars of Texas trespass law, but have a vague notion that they are less strict about shooting people. After not leaving following being told to he then threatens to take the other mans gun, and then apparently makes the attempt. So I’m going to say legally justified.
But I think everyone involved is an idiot as they were all escalating the situation. Also, this makes me question the shooter eagerness; “She has said Carruth was already married to Judge Ann-Marie Carruth, who is the judge of the 72nd District Court in Crosby and Lubbock counties, and that Chad Read had threatened to expose the affair.”
Contrast this with the Arberry case. If he had said “Use it! Use it! I’m going to take it away from you!” as he came around the truck and if it had been recorded there likely would have been an acquittal in that case.
He’s not trespassing, if he was directed there by the mother and her new BF to pick up their child there. The new BF, tells him he is trespassing and to leave. The ex wife, tells him he needs to wait there until 6 pm to get his kid.
It’s hard to buy the trespassing routine.
and I will say, Carruth only needed to call the cops have them collect the raging guy on the front lawn. Instead, it appears he purposely escalated it, by fetching a gun, going outside, and chest bumping the guy.
What do we gun guys say when we are carrying? Never be the aggressor. Always withdrawal, de-escalate, and when necessary, drown them in overwhelming force to stop the threat. Carruth didn’t do that.
The father should have retreated the second the boyfriend produced the gun, called 911, and reported that an armed gunman had taken his son hostage. Give the address and hang up. Chances are the new bf and ex wife would be spending the night in jail instead.
That’s a tuff call .
Half of me wants to say justified the other half says not.
Listening to the video it sounds like a chicken in the background laid an egg.
This doesn’t look like a good shoot to me. Chad was not in the house and didn’t seem to be breaking into the house, so Castle Doctrine doesn’t seem to apply. “Get off my lawn” isn’t justification for deadly force, and going outside with a gun isn’t defending your castle. Until the gun was introduced, there were no threats of force from Chad. Kyle should have stayed inside (possibly armed), invited Christina in, and called the cops to remove the trespasser.
I don’t understand why Chad is at Kyle’s. Is it Christina’s residence or place of employment? Where does the court order say to pick up his sons? He claims he sent cops to the ex-mother-in-law’s house, so it seems like he should be there or also calling the police to Kyle’s. It would document Christina’s failure to comply with a court order, and he could use that to get her custody/visitation reduced or removed. The police would have forced her to produce the son or tell where he was, or she could have faced charges.
based upon the video alone if I were on the jury I would be leaning away from self-defense more than towards self-defense.
Legal or not I have no idea but that Texas thing is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever seen.
Texas does not work that way or most the rest of the world for that matter. If you come to my house and I tell you to leave with a gun. Then you try to grab the gun from me on my property expect to get shot. I feel bad for the guy trying to get his kid but you don’t trespass and then grab a gun and expect not to get shot. Shooting was fully justified he choose to mess around and find out.
Legality the shooter looks like a dork all pressed up on the guy holding the rifle like a little kid. He’s lucky the trespasser didn’t get that gun off him. Wonder if he was eager to close the distance because he’s George Adam Yellow? Lot of that in Texas I hear
Rekieta Law and Andrew Branca have done shows on the legal likelihoods in the case. The Rittenhouse trial and listening to those two among others got me to to finally buy self defense insurance. I have in the past been afraid of situations that looked like they could have possibly ended up in me resorting to self-defense and the fear of a trial is the fear that is greatest for me at those times.
she’s been laid off for two months, the previous month her paycheck was $20328 ONLY working at home for a couple of hours each day…
check out… Visit Here
shes a hooker then.
I joined Law Shield when they started as Texas Law Shield. Worth EVERY penny. If you carry, and you must, you NEED to be a member. And, NO, I don’t get a commission for touting them.
Here’s the latest on the new Covid virus, ‘Omicron’.
I think I’ll call this one “The Andromeda Strain” or “Captain Tripps” for its potential to mutate into something even more vaccine-immune :
“… for those who are just now waking up to the global chaos resulting from the B.1.1.529 variant, which today got the Greek letter designation Omicron…”
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/scared-nu-world-heres-what-we-know-about-new-covid-strain
One of those things where there should be a basic competency questionnaire, two questions (maybe three depending on how you count) would suffice.
In your own words describe what BLAST is, how it is that generally applicable to this situation and what E-value means?
Failure to answer in a way suggesting one has passed a basic genetics course should be met with a throat punch and being told to shut the fuck up.
Specifically for politicians, continued protestation after failure should result in summary execution.
For Karens that can’t STFU, a severe beating with a biology textbook such as Janeway’s Immunobiology in a pillow case would be a good jumping off point. Harsher punishments for wanton stupidity can be worked up to as necessary.
Rule # 1: Self-defense is not legal self-defense until a court says its self-defense. Simply being “not charged” does not mean it was legally self-defense. Only a court can adjudicate that its self-defense legally by declaring the homicide justifiable in some fashion, we just witnessed this with the Rittenhouse trial.
Rule # 2: Expect to go to jail or be sued. Just because the cops show up and say “yep, self defense” or the prosecutor does not charge that does not mean you will not go to jail or be sued. Some states give you immunity from lawsuit in the state in a self defense shooting if the court rules a “not guilty” verdict – if you do not have that because the prosecutor didn’t charge and it never went to court you can still be sued and in some cases be charged criminally later.
Rule # 3: Get insurance that covers everything, especially criminal and civil unlimited. U.S. Law Shield is good especially for the price. Costs can run up pretty fast in self-defense, you can hit the $1,000,000 mark or more easy. Also though, what ever insurance you get make sure it also covers property damage too because when you fire and those bullets hit someones car or home they are gonna want you to pay for it and even if you had immunity from lawsuit for the self defense that does not cover property damage.
In my state a Justifiable Shoot is determined by whether or not charges are brought. With Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground. The Burden is placed on the Prosecutor to Prove Otherwise. We also have a Law which Does Not Allow for Civil Suits. If No Charges are Filed or No Conviction is Reached. If Charges are Filed. Votes Matter.
Yeah… you’re not real familiar with all of your states statues are you, especially the ones dealing with double jeopardy and how its applied. There is more to this than simply looking at the states “self defense” statutes.
get insurance.
A note here for law suits from self defense. The fact the jury in the criminal self defense trial said it was self-defense by finding you not guilty does not mean its going to help you out in a civil lawsuit and in some cases it may even work against you.
Civil suits are about liability, who is responsible for what. First, its a fact that you did shoot someone so even if its self-defense, even if a criminal jury said “not guilty”, you are still responsible for shooting that person. The “not guilty” is just basically that you were not responsible for homicide because your shooting was “justified”, it does not absolve you of the personal responsibility for having shot some one.
In a civil trial there is no “beyond reasonable doubt”. Basically there is who is most personally liable and responsible and for how much. The jury in a civil trial although they do have their instructions because “beyond reasonable doubt” does not exist they can fill that void with their conscience based upon their perception of preponderance of the evidence as long as it does not violate the jury instructions.
Yeah, f all that, Imma get a backhoe.
“Rule # 1: Self-defense is not legal self-defense until a court says its self-defense. Simply being “not charged” does not mean it was legally self-defense.”
If the prosecutor elects not to prosecute you, and there is no further evidence brought against you, then for all practical purposes, it was legal self-defense…
No, it isn’t. Not being charged/prosecuted for something is not the same as being found “not guilty” of something. Not being charged/prosecuted for a “self defense” shooting does not mean it was legally self defense for practical purposes or otherwise, it only means you have not been charged/prosecuted and that’s it. Only an acquittal (“not guilty”) verdict can make a “self defense” shooting legally self-defense.
When charges are not bought it is either nol pross or a dismissal or simply no filed, but it does not mean the person is off the hook.
A prosecutor might nol pross (nolle prosequi) or “dismiss” charges for many different reasons, for example:
1. reevaluation of evidence
2. emergence of new evidence
3. failure of witnesses to cooperate
4. desire to give the defendant a second chance.
5. sometimes lack of evidence
If the prosecutor elects not to prosecute you, that’s called nolle prosequi.
nolle prosequi is the same as charges had never been filed thus not yet “accused”, yet not that a person can never be charged. It’s not an acquittal or dismissal of legal responsibility. An acquittal, through double jeopardy, prevents further proceedings against you for the conduct. With nolle prosequi if the prosecution decides to bring charges at a later time they can. There have been many self-defense shootings over the years where charges were not bought or were nolle prosequi initially, then a new prosecutor takes office and years later a person finds themself charged even if there was no new evidence.
Lack of evidence new or otherwise is not the same as no evidence – the fact a bad guy was killed or wounded in a self-defense shooting is evidence in and of its self and enough to bring charges if the prosecution desires to do so. The prosecution proving/substantiating those charges is another matter, but charges can still be bought.
A dismissal with prejudice means the prosecution can’t ever re-file charges. A dismissal without prejudice means the prosecution can re-file charges.
When no charges are filed people think “hey, it was self defense then so I’m good to go.” This is not true. The fact that a “self-defense” case “charges” did not get “filed” (bought against you) does not mean that you will not be charged later. Charges can still be bought any time within the statute of limitations for an offense, and “homicide” by self-defense or not generally has no statute of limitations (some states may vary on this).
If the prosecutor elects not to prosecute you, and there is no further evidence brought against you, then for all practical purposes, it was NOT legal self-defense in anything but your mind and for conversation. You can still be charged later.
For people with “nolle prosequi” on their records, it is not a conviction thus is not disqualifying for gun ownership in terms of federal law but some states even though there was no conviction still treat it as disqualifying under states laws and they can do that. Most states after a period of time, depending on the statute of limitations in the state, will change a “nolle prosequi” on a record to officially “dismissed” if the statute of limitations has run out and no new filings were made. If you have a “nolle prosequi” on your records that has been there for a while you need to get an attorney to look into that and have the charges officially “dismissed” for lack of prosecution. In some states you can do this yourself easily if you can complete the required filings but its still best to have an attorney do it.
Rule 1 isn’t quite true. The police could decide it’s a righteous shoot and not arrest you. The DA could decide your actions were justified and not file charges. You just can’t count on either happening.
Expect the police to take you into custody for questioning. If you don’t have representation, you may say something that gets you arrested and charged. If you don’t have representation, you don’t have someone who can advocate to the DA against filing charges. Even if it’s an obvious case of self defense with many witnesses, physical evidence, and video, the police could be antigun or cowardly, arrest you, and pass the buck to the DA. The DA could similarly decide it’s bad press to let you walk, and it’s safer to let a jury decide. Get the insurance or expect to $10s or $100s of thousands in legal fees.
Not being charged/prosecuted for something is not the same as being found “not guilty” of something. Not being charged/prosecuted for a “self defense” shooting does not mean it was legally self defense for practical purposes or otherwise, it only means you have not been charged/prosecuted and that’s it. Only an acquittal (“not guilty”) verdict can make a “self defense” shooting legally self-defense.
When charges are not bought it is either nol pross or a dismissal or simply no filed, but it does not mean the person is off the hook.
A prosecutor might nol pross (nolle prosequi) or “dismiss” charges for many different reasons, for example:
1. reevaluation of evidence
2. emergence of new evidence
3. failure of witnesses to cooperate
4. desire to give the defendant a second chance.
5. sometimes lack of evidence
If the prosecutor elects not to prosecute you, that’s called nolle prosequi.
nolle prosequi is the same as charges had never been filed thus not yet “accused”, yet not that a person can never be charged. It’s not an acquittal or dismissal of legal responsibility. An acquittal, through double jeopardy, prevents further proceedings against you for the conduct. With nolle prosequi if the prosecution decides to bring charges at a later time they can. There have been many self-defense shootings over the years where charges were not bought or were nolle prosequi initially, then a new prosecutor takes office and years later a person finds themself charged even if there was no new evidence.
Lack of evidence new or otherwise is not the same as no evidence – the fact a bad guy was killed or wounded in a self-defense shooting is evidence in and of its self and enough to bring charges if the prosecution desires to do so. The prosecution proving/substantiating those charges is another matter, but charges can still be bought.
A dismissal with prejudice means the prosecution can’t ever re-file charges. A dismissal without prejudice means the prosecution can re-file charges.
When no charges are filed people think “hey, it was self defense then so I’m good to go.” This is not true. The fact that a “self-defense” case “charges” did not get “filed” (bought against you) does not mean that you will not be charged later. Charges can still be bought any time within the statute of limitations for an offense, and “homicide” by self-defense or not generally has no statute of limitations (some states may vary on this).
If the prosecutor elects not to prosecute you, and there is no further evidence brought against you, then for all practical purposes, it was NOT legal self-defense in anything but your mind and for conversation. You can still be charged later.
Wrong, but thanks for trying.
it is 100% correct. Been there and done that already 3 separate times in the last several years, and 5 times total in my lifetime.
Booger
All states laws are not the same so your blanket statements are irritating at best. If you were an attorney you would never make such comments knowing them to be false. So please stop acting like you are Alan Dershawhos mentor. Your not.
@Tired of the bs
I never said all state laws are the same, but all of them have common elements and one is that its not actually legally self-defense until a court adjudicates it as such by some verdict.
If the law makes (and it does to some degree in all 50 states) self-defense reason a defense against prosecution, then it needs a court to decide if it was legally self defense or not by an adjudication of the court saying or indication you were “not guilty” of (not legally responsible for) an offense the self defense resulted in (e.g. homicide). Period.
Also, all cases of self-defense are able to be bought before a “grand Jury” (or what ever its called in the specific state) in all 50 states. In many cases where self-defense happened the prosecutor doesn’t bring charges because a grand jury to which he/she presented the case did not return a ‘true bill’.
There is “self-defense” and then “legally self-defense”, although both are self-defense (if true self-defense) you can not be absolved of the legal responsibility of the result of applying that self-defense unless a court says you are legally not responsible and unti8l yo8u are absolved of that legal responsibility if was not “legally self-defense”
Ok booger your all knowing legal eagle analysis must be right because you say so. From my personal experience the prosecutor not filing any charges and telling me it was legal self defense must have been a lie. Not that I trust anything that a prosecutor says.
#4 Stop blindly supporting cops.
I’m a member of ACLDN. Have taken Assad Myoob’s class. He’s on the board, as is Tueller. (21′) Guys I want in my corner.
No, I don’t get paid to endorse. Honestly I don’t know which company out there is the best. Don’t want to find out either.
If you are right, it’s going to be an effing-S-storm, so go with one of the well known companies so someone has your back legally. Just make sure you are right.
We all try to avoid stupid people and stupid places, but sometimes the stupid comes to you.
This is excellent advice if you wish to surrender to the ANTIFA BLM mob. It must be understood that the FBI-CRS
(Explanation here:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/11/26/very-interesting-doj-inspector-general-finding-crs-officials-recently-gave-applicants-access-to-main-justice-database/
Has declared open season on White Americans.
Of course if you are out on the street away from your home or business, the shoot, shovel and shut up tactic is a viable option. Of course the Outlaw Jose Wales would point out, “buzzards got to eat, same as worms.”
I would recommend LawSheild. There is USCCA. It’s worth it.
Wonder what insurance Alec Baldwin has!
“Wonder what insurance Alec Baldwin has!”
If the shoot was insured, as a part of the production for the movie, the insurance may go after Baldwin, if liability can be established…
Oooo. What brilliant legal analysis. At which Ivy League Law School did you matriculate?
Just kidding. Wow you’re dumb (and fat).
“Wow you’re dumb (and fat).”
As usual, wrong on both accounts.
Have you cleaned up the bodily fluids in your mom’s basement yet? The stench is getting really bad down there.
BTW, I look nothing like that goober from yesterday, so work on your ESP, it’s woefully lacking… 😉
USCAA is over priced plus its not really “unlimited”
Another thing you want to look at is if the insurance will still pay off if you lose the case. Will they still defend you in a civil case or are they going to send you a bill for their “services” if you lose, will they continue to defend you on appeals?
“Read the fine print” is a phrase you want to pay attention to.
You seem to think you’re throwing shade at USCCA, but they don’t advertise unlimited coverage. There’s a policy limit like any insurance (or prepaid plan or whatever your locality requires that it be called).
You don’t know what I think so don’t pretend you do.
I didn’t think I was “throwing shade”. I just stated fact, that fact is USCAA is over priced plus its not really “unlimited”.
People have a tendency to think they are “unlimited” by the way they advertise – the way they do for a lot of different insurances of this type.
So another fact for you – “Read the fine print” is a phrase you want to pay attention to. That is unless you using your self conceived super powers of knowing what others think will say its just “throwing shade”.
^ that’s what touching a nerve looks like
Yet again you say “it’s not really unlimited” as though they advertise it as such – you’re trying to attack them (that’s what “throw shade” means, BTW) with a straw man.
CCWSafe has specific coverage for church security teams, whether paid or volunteer. I opt for the Ultimate Plan which has no cap on Attorney or Expert Witness fees, paid up front, plus $350 per diem for loss of job or income during trial. And after I reviewed all major insurance companies’ coverages in detail, CCWSafe is the only one that covers church security.
https://ccwsafe.com/page/23779
LawShield.
So you can talk to an attorney on the phone but does Law Shield send one of their lawyers to represent you in court. NO.
LawShield – yes, they send an attorney to represent you in court. They did for me. You call them, tell them what happened, and if its a self-defense case they get you an attorney from their network.
Well I’ll be. That might not be a bad deal then.
All I seen on their write up was , Attorney on the phone.
The NRA/ILA or whatever it was didnt do shit for me and their write up sure made it sound like they’d have your back on an illegal gunm charge. That’s when I quit, I dont mind being lied to but I’m not paying money to be lied to.
Finally, a meme that is a hundred percent true.
Never lost a fight that I could outrun.
7° Black Belt in RunChknRun, it’s all in the feet.
I thought Chkn’s walked on their toes pretty much exclusively?
No they leave foot tracks.
“He who turns and runs away lives to fight another day.”
~Shu Fu
Agree that the shoot in Texas was probably a bad one legally, but the chad in the green shirt was an absolute blowhard and he had it coming. You dont get in peoples’ faces like that. You dont flail your arms around screaming threats. You dont stay on private property after being told to leave. If you present yourself as a threat you will be treated like one.
Meanwhile, the wife needs to be seriously looked at for manipulating both of them. She appears to be a real piece of work.
“Meanwhile, the wife needs to be seriously looked at for manipulating both of them. She appears to be a real piece of work.”
Not to mention that nobody involved seemed concerned about a dude getting shot right in front of them and presumably either being killed or well on the way to it. 0 concern for getting medical attention. The nonchalance is absolutely insane.
Yeah. I remember a friend of mine her brother was drunk and was rampaging about and latched on to me as the object of his anger/upset for no reason.
He was outside raving and I was inside and I heard him yelling and swearing he was gonna get me. So i’m standing there and he’s trying to get the front door open and I had like 2 seconds to decide whether to confront him with my pistol or try to hide and avoid the confrontation.
So I went and hid. I knew I would have to kill him or wound him badly as he was so drunk a bullet wouldn’t even register until too late. His sister was forever grateful for my decision and he never bothered her or me again.
Always think it thru in the time you have on how much a threat exists and whether there’s another way to avoid a fight. Kyle had no choices as he was confronted within striking distance and when given the chance he fled the area and they still tried to hurt him. There’s the difference; he had no choice.
Make sure before you shoot (if you have the luxury of time) that you have no choice.
I’d say that was a wise choice.
As a wisdom bonus; you protected your hearing.
Been using Law Shield for two or three years with the 50 state add on. Hope I never need it, but if ya carry you’re a fool not to have it!
Comments are closed.