Waffle House Shooting
- Thread starter UCFWayne
- Start date
Pretty ballsy of the guy to try to take on the shooter, glad he did and made it out ok.
So does this end with a capture or a long standoff with this guy holed up somewhere for hours?
So does this end with a capture or a long standoff with this guy holed up somewhere for hours?
I think they find him dead. Supposedly the guy previously threatened to kill himself so, knowing that he's going down for this, I think he just takes care of business. If he does get captured then, considering his history, I suspect that his plea will include an insanity defense.
It looks like the father should be arrested as an accomplice. This guy had his gun rights revoked and the dad gave him his guns back anyways.
My type of BLM, putting the literal smack down on Whitey ...'s arm. 
Too bad Waffle Houses are known for kicking out active military if they carry on-site. Their corporate policy is murky, and at most, they only say they allow uniformed, on duty police officers to carry. But they don't put up signs, while being well known for doing this. In Texas, it's actually a statue that they must put up a sign, otherwise concealed carry is allowed.
Too bad Waffle Houses are known for kicking out active military if they carry on-site. Their corporate policy is murky, and at most, they only say they allow uniformed, on duty police officers to carry. But they don't put up signs, while being well known for doing this. In Texas, it's actually a statue that they must put up a sign, otherwise concealed carry is allowed.
WE MUST ELIMINATE THE LOOPHOLE AND BAN PARENTS. BAN FAMILIES. THE CORE NUCLEAR FAMILY IS A RACIST AND OUTDATED CONCEPT.
There was another shooting at a Waffle House in Louisiana
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2018/04/waffle_house_armed_robbery_sus.html
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2018/04/waffle_house_armed_robbery_sus.html
Armed Customer who shot one of the robbers is a HERO! Hope he doesn't get in trouble for saving someone's life.
This is where the firearm knowledgeable, let alone law enforcement, are separated from the firearm and violence illiterate.
Q: Why should you fire at a fleeing suspect?
If the suspect is still holding their gun -- i.e., they can still fire back.
Q: What if it's not loaded?
If a gun is in someone's hand, assume it's loaded.
If a gun is pointed, assume it will be fired.
I literally have to point this out way, way too often to the firearm and violence illiterate.
Holy hell, got to love K_L
unarmed black guy stops a maniac with a gun: K_L's response: crickets
some guy with a gun stops a maniac with a gun: K_L's response: WHAT A HERO!
You've got to be careful with your answer to that first question though. You can only use deadly force in defense of yourself or others if you reasonably believe there is an imminent threat of grave bodily harm to yourself or others. Depending upon your answers under questioning, a zealous prosecutor (Marilyn Mosby, maybe) could convince a jury that a fleeing suspect who was armed but ran rather than shot at anyone was not an imminent threat if you shot them as they were running away.
Depends on the state.
Some states see that someone who already committed a crime, and running away, but still holding a weapon, even pointing it backwards, is a threat. But some do not.
The simple reality is that short of dropping the weapon, or at least putting it away, means they still are very much at threat.
Again, depends on the state. And if one has a good lawyer, they can easily quote many textbook cases of civilians, let alone police, getting shot by people who were "running away."
Again ...
- Assume it's loaded if out, and ...
- Assume they will fire if pointed
From a self-defense aspect, I agree with you. On every point. I’m also a believer in “it’s better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.”
From a legal aspect, every state has the standard of reasonable belief of imminent deadly force or grave bodily harm. The abuse of this ambiguity by prosecutors is why states enact castle doctrine and stand your ground laws and why every state save one has removed their duty to retreat statutes. In Ohio, you have a duty to retreat if at all possible when presented with deadly force. And people get unfairly convicted on that “if at all possible.” As they do in other states because the law is ambiguous, prosecutors are smart and unscrupulous, and juries are subject to emotional appeal and public sentiment.
Point is, if you do end up defending yourself with deadly force, you need to identify yourself and then get a lawyer before you answer anything else. There are a few small exceptions, but you’re more likely to say something that will get you locked up for life than not if you answer questions on the spot. Even in a fully justified defense.
