TexasCHLforum.com

They started the fight. Their victim refused to roll over and turned the tables. If I was on the jury he would walk free. Maybe if more people reacted like him to being attacked by fetid pond scum, the scum would learn some manners.

pcernuch wrote:i'd hire him. if you go looking for trouble, dont be suprised when you find, or when it finds you.

god bless.

you would hire a convicted murderer?

This guy appears to be just as much "fetid pond scum" as those ladies who attacked him. It looked like a fit of rage as he pummeled them over and over again with that metal rod. His coworkers could not even put an end to his fit after the immediate "threat" from those two intoxicated women was over.

Everybody likes to see that those two ladies got the snot kicked out of them and thinks its pretty funny that they didn't get what they expected. I get that. The guys response is insane though. Seeing that video there's no way I would let him off the hook completely. Fracturing a skull is not an appropriate response to a slap across the face.

It wasn't just a slap. One of them JUMPED THE COUNTER and the other went around to flank him. This wasn't their first rodeo. His response was appropriate in the heat of the moment. It wasn't like he tracked them down afterward and attacked them in cold blood like we did with OBL. He used overwhelming force to break an ambush in progress and it was the right response. Overkill never fails.

The good news for you is the thugs survived. Maybe next time they will attack your wife or child. Will you be so sympathetic towards them them?

Tamie wrote: The good news for you is the thugs survived. Maybe next time they will attack your wife or child. Will you be so sympathetic towards them them?

All three responded like animals. Haven't people had discussions about continuing to fire on the BG even when they are already down on the ground and no longer a threat? How is continuing to beat them with a metal rod while they are on the ground any different? The threat is already stopped, this is evidenced by the reaction of his coworkers. Do you really think those two women, who were apparently intoxicated, deserved to DIE for what they were doing? Do you think that guy should have KILLED them?

knotquiteawake wrote:

pcernuch wrote:i'd hire him. if you go looking for trouble, dont be suprised when you find, or when it finds you.

god bless.

you would hire a convicted murderer?

This guy appears to be just as much "fetid pond scum" as those ladies who attacked him. It looked like a fit of rage as he pummeled them over and over again with that metal rod. His coworkers could not even put an end to his fit after the immediate "threat" from those two intoxicated women was over.

Everybody likes to see that those two ladies got the snot kicked out of them and thinks its pretty funny that they didn't get what they expected. I get that. The guys response is insane though. Seeing that video there's no way I would let him off the hook completely. Fracturing a skull is not an appropriate response to a slap across the face.

yes.

he was attacked. he stopped the attack. play stupid games, win stupid prizes. if you feel its fine to go and act like a savage, i dont think you can stop, call time out when someone goes savage on you.

god bless.

Tamie wrote:They started the fight. Their victim refused to roll over and turned the tables. If I was on the jury he would walk free. Maybe if more people reacted like him to being attacked by fetid pond scum, the scum would learn some manners.

So, you are driving down the road like a maniac. You cut off another car and nearly caused an accident. The driver enrage, drives around you forcing you stop stop your car. He get off his car with a bat and proceeds to pummel your brains all over the road. If I was on the jury, he would walk free. After all you were the scum and should have learned your manners while driving a car.

JJVP wrote:

Tamie wrote:They started the fight. Their victim refused to roll over and turned the tables. If I was on the jury he would walk free. Maybe if more people reacted like him to being attacked by fetid pond scum, the scum would learn some manners.

So, you are driving down the road like a maniac. You cut off another car and nearly caused an accident. The driver enrage, drives around you forcing you stop stop your car. He get off his car with a bat and proceeds to pummel your brains all over the road. If I was on the jury, he would walk free. After all you were the scum and should have learned your manners while driving a car.

apples to oranges in my opinion. he was physically assaulted 2 on 1 while doing his job at his place of business. he evened the odds.

god bless.

knotquiteawake wrote: Do you really think those two women, who were apparently intoxicated, deserved to DIE for what they were doing? Do you think that guy should have KILLED them?

just curious how you know what they were doing. They jumped the counter and flanked him. We're they going to rob the place, or perhaps kill him???

Bulldog1911 wrote:

knotquiteawake wrote: Do you really think those two women, who were apparently intoxicated, deserved to DIE for what they were doing? Do you think that guy should have KILLED them?

just curious how you know what they were doing. They jumped the counter and flanked him. We're they going to rob the place, or perhaps kill him???

I base my assumption on the reaction of the other people present watching the interaction first hand and attempting to stop his counter-assault. Also, while the jury won't be able to do this, I am taking into account his criminal history in my assumptions as well. He's a convicted murderer. He's killed somebody before, this indicates to me that he perhaps has a very violent disposition which could have influenced his reaction. The women are clearly in the wrong, the guys reaction seems to go beyond self-defense though. All three should (and it looks like are) have a criminal liability. I do think that those two ladies got off easy criminally, they too should have been charged with felony assault as well.

pcernuch wrote:

JJVP wrote:So, you are driving down the road like a maniac. You cut off another car and nearly caused an accident. The driver enrage, drives around you forcing you stop stop your car. He get off his car with a bat and proceeds to pummel your brains all over the road. If I was on the jury, he would walk free. After all you were the scum and should have learned your manners while driving a car.

apples to oranges in my opinion. he was physically assaulted 2 on 1 while doing his job at his place of business. he evened the odds.

god bless.

You can use force and maybe deadly to defend yourself from a criminal attack but not because someone cut you off in traffic.

It made the radio talk shows this morning in Houston. Some one asked what if the location was a convenience store or what if it was two men on a woman?

philip964 wrote:It made the radio talk shows this morning in Houston. Some one asked what if the location was a convenience store or what if it was two men on a woman?

I don't think it matters what type of business. Women and men are equal in the USA so that doesn't matter either.

Ameer wrote:

philip964 wrote:It made the radio talk shows this morning in Houston. Some one asked what if the location was a convenience store or what if it was two men on a woman?

I don't think it matters what type of business. Women and men are equal in the USA so that doesn't matter either.

I disagree. Just look up disparity of force and you will see that the justification for the amount of force used to stop an attacker is weighed on this, whether in shooting or in a physical confrontation. A woman, elderly person, frail or fragile person due to illness, etc. may be justified in using more force on a person that is not their equal in size vs. a healthy male who used the same amount of force. In this case, the employee may have a hard time justifying his amount of force used, even though it was two attackers, due to them being female and his continued use of force and beating once the actual thereat had been eliminated.

Ameer wrote:

philip964 wrote:It made the radio talk shows this morning in Houston. Some one asked what if the location was a convenience store or what if it was two men on a woman?

I don't think it matters what type of business. Women and men are equal in the USA so that doesn't matter either.

Compared to the mideast for example?

I agree BTW. Sexism is wrong. It's one thing to look at individuals and see who is bigger and stronger. That's different than treating people differently because they're female or dark skinned or Muslim.

JJVP wrote:I'm going to have to disagree. He was fine when he went back, got the metal bar and took the first swing at them. When they retreated and then fell to the ground, and then he continue hitting them while on the ground, he crossed the line between self defense and assault. Just like the pharmacist that shot some guys trying to rob him. He was fine (self defense) until he went back, got a second gun and shot the guy that was wounded and defenseless on the ground. He crossed the line between self defense and murder.

It does seem a lot like the Oklahoma pharmacist incident.