TexasCHLforum.com

I see kids torturing an animal, I'm going to tell them to stop and give them a lecture on our responsibilities as good stewards of the creation with which God has entrusted us. I would not assume that they would turn their violence on me. If they do, they will find themselves regretting that poor life decision. Regardless, calling the cops first and getting the entire interaction on video are good ideas that might or might not occur to me in the moment of shock that I would experience upon finding children torturing something as defenseless and nonthreatening as a sea turtle. I would most definitely not involve my firearm in the conversation unless attacked.

It's an individual decision as to when we would decide to intervene in something like this. But if I chose to do so, then I would try to be very measured in my response with the goal always being to use the minimum amount of force / intervention necessary to accomplish the goal. In this case, the goal is to stop the attack on the turtle. An initial step would be to make it clear that you are there watching them. If they don't care about that, then start capturing video evidence. Then announce that you have called the police. If the kids make a decision to attack me at any point, then I would defend myself.

The same thing goes for other situations like if a group of kids was harassing an elderly person or bullying another kid, etc. First decide if you want to intervene, and then do so in a measured and intelligent way.

Of course, the first thing I would do is to get my wife and kids as far away from the situation as possible and make sure they were safe.

LucasMcCain wrote:I see kids torturing an animal, I'm going to tell them to stop and give them a lecture on our responsibilities as good stewards of the creation with which God has entrusted us. I would not assume that they would turn their violence on me. If they do, they will find themselves regretting that poor life decision. Regardless, calling the cops first and getting the entire interaction on video are good ideas that might or might not occur to me in the moment of shock that I would experience upon finding children torturing something as defenseless and nonthreatening as a sea turtle. I would most definitely not involve my firearm in the conversation unless attacked.

You're absolutely right when it comes to children. But these perps were 16, 18, and 23. Maybe the 16 year old gets some slack from me, and the 18 year old, if he immediately acknowledges the wrong and stops. But the 23 year old? That's a broken toy with a bent soul, and absolutely a dangerous personality. When my son was 23, he had already bought his first house, was a reliable employee, and got himself married. Now, my son had a stable home life growing up, with two parents committed to their marriage. I'll grant that this guy might have had a rough background or some other excuse, but hey....... at 23, you ARE old enough to know better. If you're torturing animals at age 23, you need a psychiatric evaluation and some meds. That makes you a dangerous person.

That's why after reading the article, I thought about the legalities of drawing first and then ordered them to stop, versus simply having my hand near my gun. I know the legalities would have been at best marginal, but I compare it to stumbling upon a mountain lion in the woods. Maybe the cat backs off and leaves; maybe it stands its ground, bluffs you, and lets you back off and leave; or..... maybe it decides to charge you. I don't want to wait to draw my gun until it begins its charge because then it's too late. That dude was like a wild predatory animal.

I understand what the law says. I was more interested in what y'alls reactions would be......whether your instincts would be the same as mine, or if you would be less "engaged" I guess is the word I'd use.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

LucasMcCain wrote:I see kids torturing an animal, I'm going to tell them to stop and give them a lecture on our responsibilities as good stewards of the creation with which God has entrusted us. I would not assume that they would turn their violence on me. If they do, they will find themselves regretting that poor life decision. Regardless, calling the cops first and getting the entire interaction on video are good ideas that might or might not occur to me in the moment of shock that I would experience upon finding children torturing something as defenseless and nonthreatening as a sea turtle. I would most definitely not involve my firearm in the conversation unless attacked.

You're absolutely right when it comes to children. But these perps were 16, 18, and 23. Maybe the 16 year old gets some slack from me, and the 18 year old, if he immediately acknowledges the wrong and stops. But the 23 year old? That's a broken toy with a bent soul, and absolutely a dangerous personality. When my son was 23, he had already bought his first house, was a reliable employee, and got himself married. Now, my son had a stable home life growing up, with two parents committed to their marriage. I'll grant that this guy might have had a rough background or some other excuse, but hey....... at 23, you ARE old enough to know better. If you're torturing animals at age 23, you need a psychiatric evaluation and some meds. That makes you a dangerous person.

That's why after reading the article, I thought about the legalities of drawing first and then ordered them to stop, versus simply having my hand near my gun. I know the legalities would have been at best marginal, but I compare it to stumbling upon a mountain lion in the woods. Maybe the cat backs off and leaves; maybe it stands its ground, bluffs you, and lets you back off and leave; or..... maybe it decides to charge you. I don't want to wait to draw my gun until it begins its charge because then it's too late. That dude was like a wild predatory animal.

I understand what the law says. I was more interested in what y'alls reactions would be......whether your instincts would be the same as mine, or if you would be less "engaged" I guess is the word I'd use.

I would not draw first, but I would fully appreciate that distance is my friend and would have left as much space and potential obstacles between us as I could. This apparently happened at a community pond. If it isn't too large, the pond itself could be a decent obstacle to any potential charge from these poor misunderstood thugs.

If I recall, part of the prosecution of George Zimmermann was based on the fact that Zimmermann followed Travon BECAUSE Zimmermann was armed and knew he could defend himself if need be. The inference was Zimmermann would not have been so brave if he were not armed. I can see some prosecutor using that tactic to say that no sane person would approach 3 guys UNLESS he was armed, therefore he instigated the event.

howdy wrote:If I recall, part of the prosecution of George Zimmermann was based on the fact that Zimmermann followed Travon BECAUSE Zimmermann was armed and knew he could defend himself if need be. The inference was Zimmermann would not have been so brave if he were not armed. I can see some prosecutor using that tactic to say that no sane person would approach 3 guys UNLESS he was armed, therefore he instigated the event.

I can see that especially if somebody left the safety of their home and stepped off their own property to find and confront the three yuuts. Unless he killed all three of them, I imagine the survivors' story would be that he attacked them out of nowhere. I think the verdict will be less like Zimmerman and more like another Florida man.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

LucasMcCain wrote:I see kids torturing an animal, I'm going to tell them to stop and give them a lecture on our responsibilities as good stewards of the creation with which God has entrusted us. I would not assume that they would turn their violence on me. If they do, they will find themselves regretting that poor life decision. Regardless, calling the cops first and getting the entire interaction on video are good ideas that might or might not occur to me in the moment of shock that I would experience upon finding children torturing something as defenseless and nonthreatening as a sea turtle. I would most definitely not involve my firearm in the conversation unless attacked.

You're absolutely right when it comes to children. But these perps were 16, 18, and 23. Maybe the 16 year old gets some slack from me, and the 18 year old, if he immediately acknowledges the wrong and stops. But the 23 year old? That's a broken toy with a bent soul, and absolutely a dangerous personality. When my son was 23, he had already bought his first house, was a reliable employee, and got himself married. Now, my son had a stable home life growing up, with two parents committed to their marriage. I'll grant that this guy might have had a rough background or some other excuse, but hey....... at 23, you ARE old enough to know better. If you're torturing animals at age 23, you need a psychiatric evaluation and some meds. That makes you a dangerous person.

That's why after reading the article, I thought about the legalities of drawing first and then ordered them to stop, versus simply having my hand near my gun. I know the legalities would have been at best marginal, but I compare it to stumbling upon a mountain lion in the woods. Maybe the cat backs off and leaves; maybe it stands its ground, bluffs you, and lets you back off and leave; or..... maybe it decides to charge you. I don't want to wait to draw my gun until it begins its charge because then it's too late. That dude was like a wild predatory animal.

I understand what the law says. I was more interested in what y'alls reactions would be......whether your instincts would be the same as mine, or if you would be less "engaged" I guess is the word I'd use.

Another point I was trying to make was that it looks like Texas law would not find their torture of the turtle illegal.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:It's an individual decision as to when we would decide to intervene in something like this. But if I chose to do so, then I would try to be very measured in my response with the goal always being to use the minimum amount of force / intervention necessary to accomplish the goal. In this case, the goal is to stop the attack on the turtle. An initial step would be to make it clear that you are there watching them. If they don't care about that, then start capturing video evidence. Then announce that you have called the police. If the kids make a decision to attack me at any point, then I would defend myself.

The same thing goes for other situations like if a group of kids was harassing an elderly person or bullying another kid, etc. First decide if you want to intervene, and then do so in a measured and intelligent way.

Of course, the first thing I would do is to get my wife and kids as far away from the situation as possible and make sure they were safe.

I think this would be the most logical approach if one decides to intervene.

A turtle? A poor defenseless turtle..... wow. I can't see anyway possible that turtle did anything offensive to these punks. If they will torture a defenseless turtle, there will be more dangerous acts coming from these low-lifes. That turtle had just as much right to be on this earth as they do.

[/quote] I can see that especially if somebody left the safety of their home and stepped off their own property to find and confront the three yuuts. [/quote]

Is that MY Cousin Vinny? Good stuff.

Animals like these can never be reasoned with. They have no regard for any life on earth so unless one is prepared to kill all three of them instantly without hesitation over a turtle one should avoid the situation entirely. I go out of my way to avoid thuggish inhuman creatures and the areas where thuggish inhuman creatures gather but if they're killing or torturing another human I would have no hesitation in being forced to kill all three of them instantly, as casually as I would zip up a coat or pat the head of a dog.

These violent animals have zero chance of living a long and prosperous life among a peaceful society...

Ameer wrote:

howdy wrote:If I recall, part of the prosecution of George Zimmermann was based on the fact that Zimmermann followed Travon BECAUSE Zimmermann was armed and knew he could defend himself if need be. The inference was Zimmermann would not have been so brave if he were not armed. I can see some prosecutor using that tactic to say that no sane person would approach 3 guys UNLESS he was armed, therefore he instigated the event.

I can see that especially if somebody left the safety of their home and stepped off their own property to find and confront the three yuuts. Unless he killed all three of them, I imagine the survivors' story would be that he attacked them out of nowhere. I think the verdict will be less like Zimmerman and more like another Florida man.

See, those are the kinds of reasons I posted the story. I know what my gut instinct would be. I'm not sure what the smart thing would be.

A woman was walking her toddler around a pond at Wedgewood Apartments and told police she saw three men torturing a turtle.

I doubt it was a sea turtle if it was living in a pond at an apartment complex, so unlikely to be a federal offense.

Lambda Force wrote:

A woman was walking her toddler around a pond at Wedgewood Apartments and told police she saw three men torturing a turtle.

I doubt it was a sea turtle if it was living in a pond at an apartment complex, so unlikely to be a federal offense.

What difference does that make?

The Annoyed Man wrote: See, those are the kinds of reasons I posted the story. I know what my gut instinct would be. I'm not sure what the smart thing would be.

Smart thing is not to put your attorney's kids thru Yale on your nickel over a turtle. Darwin/Karma will catch up with the trio of terrapin torturists sooner or later, probably sooner based on their apparent life choices.....

WTR wrote:

Lambda Force wrote:

A woman was walking her toddler around a pond at Wedgewood Apartments and told police she saw three men torturing a turtle.

I doubt it was a sea turtle if it was living in a pond at an apartment complex, so unlikely to be a federal offense.

What difference does that make?

It makes no difference to the turtle, but it could make a BIG difference to the defendants, based on whether or not there are federal charges involved for torturing an endangered species.