TexasCHLforum.com

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Both reactions are equally ineffective, but at least the whites don't injure, kill, and destroy the property of, a bunch of innocent people.

Ummm.....have you heard of Antifa?

I understand that there is a difference in CA law and NY law regarding homicide. Supposedly, the defense attorney was able to claim that it was a richocet and that removed any homicide charge. But it doesn't square well with this situation.
http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/ ... ting-black

Flightmare wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Both reactions are equally ineffective, but at least the whites don't injure, kill, and destroy the property of, a bunch of innocent people.

Ummm.....have you heard of Antifa?

Yes I have. I just don't think that their terrorist acts are effective. Antifa sympathizers on the left applaud or at least try to justify their acts of violence. The shrinking numbers of people with the ability to use logic and common sense abhor their crimes. Net effect - no minds are changed by their terrorism. Yes they have managed to shut down free speech in liberal bastions of totalitarianism (aka Universities), but the only real impact is a further polarization of the people away from moderation and toward the extremes.

So I guess if Antifa is really trying to incite the third American Civil War, then they are being somewhat effective. Otherwise, they are just hurting people and destroying things like the thugs that they are.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Flightmare wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Both reactions are equally ineffective, but at least the whites don't injure, kill, and destroy the property of, a bunch of innocent people.

Ummm.....have you heard of Antifa?

Yes I have. I just don't think that their terrorist acts are effective. Antifa sympathizers on the left applaud or at least try to justify their acts of violence. The shrinking numbers of people with the ability to use logic and common sense abhor their crimes. Net effect - no minds are changed by their terrorism. Yes they have managed to shut down free speech in liberal bastions of totalitarianism (aka Universities), but the only real impact is a further polarization of the people away from moderation and toward the extremes.

So I guess if Antifa is really trying to incite the third American Civil War, then they are being somewhat effective. Otherwise, they are just hurting people and destroying things like the thugs that they are.

I agree with you that their tactics are ineffective. However to say that "whites don't injure, kill, and destroy the property of, a bunch of innocent people." was inaccurate. Carry on!

chasfm11 wrote:I understand that there is a difference in CA law and NY law regarding homicide. Supposedly, the defense attorney was able to claim that it was a richocet and that removed any homicide charge. But it doesn't square well with this situation.
http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/ ... ting-black

A couple differences I can think of are that one was a police officer and the other an illegal alien. The officer was convicted while BO was still going after and vilifying LE, while CA is welcoming illegal aliens with open arms. Another difference is that the officer admitted pulling the trigger, albeit accidentally after being startled, while the illegal alien kept to his story that the gun just went off.

I really don't know exactly how much responsibility this illegal alien should bear for Kate's death. There are many "ifs", but I find it very difficult to believe he intended to cause any harm at all if the shot really did ricochet off the ground. The jury asked to see the gun not long before they rendered their verdict. Maybe they know something we don't know yet.

It is very sad and shouldn't have happened. He shouldn't have been in the country. He shouldn't have had a gun. Maybe the family can sue SanFran and or the county for wrongful death because of their sanctuary policy that allowed this many to remain in the country.

flechero wrote:

rotor wrote: and the idiot who let his gun get stolen from his car.

1000's of us are forced to temporarily store guns in a vehicle when we go into a GFZ... let's keep the blame on the one who stole the gun, shot the girl, etc.

Even if the owner of the gun had it stored illegally, it was still then stolen and then used against the victim by the perp/illegal alien/criminal/felon/pick your description.

It is part of the chain of events that led to Kate being killed.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/02/k ... overnment/

A BLM agent had the gun in his back pack which was stolen from his car. It was because of this shooting that Gov. Brown signed a law requiring LEO to secure their guns when leaving them in their cars. Apparently 944 guns were lost or stolen by California police since 2010. Had the gun been secured would Kate Steinle be alive today?

I believe the California view is that the gun did the killing.

The undocumented patriot simply picked up an object on the ground and it then decided to kill someone as guns are inherently evil.

I believe there may have been evidence that the trigger was "light".

It may have also been jury nullification. One life is a small sacrifice to send a message to Trump that Hillary should have won.

The defense attorney immediately seemed to point to Trump being the real criminal here.

philip964 wrote:I believe the California view is that the gun did the killing.

The undocumented patriot simply picked up an object on the ground and it then decided to kill someone as guns are inherently evil.

I believe there may have been evidence that the trigger was "light".

It may have also been jury nullification. One life is a small sacrifice to send a message to Trump that Hillary should have won.

The defense attorney immediately seemed to point to Trump being the real criminal here.

Although there is no present in your comments I do sense some jest. Unfortunately, I think you may not be far from some truth.

So a career criminal who is not even supposed to be in the country can get away with murder in broad daylight.

I say, “No justice, no peace.”

Bitter Clinger wrote:So a career criminal who is not even supposed to be in the country can get away with murder in broad daylight.

I say, “No justice, no peace.”

I think that it is worse than that. If you follow the "logic" in this case, no one can ever be charged with a negligent homicide in CA including DUI. It is nearly impossible to prove that some who drank to excess and got behind the wheel of car intended to kill some innocent person whom they did not known in another vehicle during a collision. If ricochet bullets don't count, especially when they come from a stolen gun and are fired without reasonable purpose in a public situation, how can the results of a car "accident" count for more? Lost in the "ricochet" defense is that I believe the victim was hit by three different bullets, not fragments of one bullet.

Please let me know what I'm perceiving incorrectly.

chasfm11 wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:So a career criminal who is not even supposed to be in the country can get away with murder in broad daylight.

I say, “No justice, no peace.”

I think that it is worse than that. If you follow the "logic" in this case, no one can ever be charged with a negligent homicide in CA including DUI. It is nearly impossible to prove that some who drank to excess and got behind the wheel of car intended to kill some innocent person whom they did not known in another vehicle during a collision. If ricochet bullets don't count, especially when they come from a stolen gun and are fired without reasonable purpose in a public situation, how can the results of a car "accident" count for more? Lost in the "ricochet" defense is that I believe the victim was hit by three different bullets, not fragments of one bullet.

Please let me know what I'm perceiving incorrectly.

Not saying I am happy about the decision but if this dimwitted individual finds a gun (previously stolen from a LEO backpack), pulls the trigger, a bullet ricochets and kills Kate Steinle, is that murder? I believe that is what the jury was up against. We know facts that were not allowed into the case. Hopefully this guy serves time for something, it won't be murder. I don't know how they can get him for gun possession by a felon if he picked up a gun that he found (although in NYC that would get you arrested).

rotor wrote:

chasfm11 wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:So a career criminal who is not even supposed to be in the country can get away with murder in broad daylight.

I say, “No justice, no peace.”

I think that it is worse than that. If you follow the "logic" in this case, no one can ever be charged with a negligent homicide in CA including DUI. It is nearly impossible to prove that some who drank to excess and got behind the wheel of car intended to kill some innocent person whom they did not known in another vehicle during a collision. If ricochet bullets don't count, especially when they come from a stolen gun and are fired without reasonable purpose in a public situation, how can the results of a car "accident" count for more? Lost in the "ricochet" defense is that I believe the victim was hit by three different bullets, not fragments of one bullet.

Please let me know what I'm perceiving incorrectly.

Not saying I am happy about the decision but if this dimwitted individual finds a gun (previously stolen from a LEO backpack), pulls the trigger, a bullet ricochets and kills Kate Steinle, is that murder? I believe that is what the jury was up against. We know facts that were not allowed into the case. Hopefully this guy serves time for something, it won't be murder. I don't know how they can get him for gun possession by a felon if he picked up a gun that he found (although in NYC that would get you arrested).

Seriously? He just "found the gun", "it went off by itself", she was killed "by a richochet". Pfffttt.

He shot her through the heart with .40 Cal. He deserves to be executed for murder. The jury should be ashamed of themselves. This is a complete miscarriage of justice and we can only hope that when this illegal alien felon commits his next crime that he gets what he deserves.

Who hired and paid the defendant's mouthpiece?

Bitter Clinger wrote:

rotor wrote:

chasfm11 wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:So a career criminal who is not even supposed to be in the country can get away with murder in broad daylight.

I say, “No justice, no peace.”

I think that it is worse than that. If you follow the "logic" in this case, no one can ever be charged with a negligent homicide in CA including DUI. It is nearly impossible to prove that some who drank to excess and got behind the wheel of car intended to kill some innocent person whom they did not known in another vehicle during a collision. If ricochet bullets don't count, especially when they come from a stolen gun and are fired without reasonable purpose in a public situation, how can the results of a car "accident" count for more? Lost in the "ricochet" defense is that I believe the victim was hit by three different bullets, not fragments of one bullet.

Please let me know what I'm perceiving incorrectly.

Not saying I am happy about the decision but if this dimwitted individual finds a gun (previously stolen from a LEO backpack), pulls the trigger, a bullet ricochets and kills Kate Steinle, is that murder? I believe that is what the jury was up against. We know facts that were not allowed into the case. Hopefully this guy serves time for something, it won't be murder. I don't know how they can get him for gun possession by a felon if he picked up a gun that he found (although in NYC that would get you arrested).

Seriously? He just "found the gun", "it went off by itself", she was killed "by a richochet". Pfffttt.

He shot her through the heart with .40 Cal. He deserves to be executed for murder. The jury should be ashamed of themselves. This is a complete miscarriage of justice and we can only hope that when this illegal alien felon commits his next crime that he gets what he deserves.

I personally would not have been unhappy if that would have been the juries decision but it wasn't. Just like with OJ, we have to live with it. Perhaps the prosecutor should have gone with a more "acceptable" push than 1st degree murder. I wish the city officials that enabled this crime were the ones on trial. We were not on the jury so we will never know the true story.

rotor wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:

rotor wrote:

chasfm11 wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:So a career criminal who is not even supposed to be in the country can get away with murder in broad daylight.

I say, “No justice, no peace.”

I think that it is worse than that. If you follow the "logic" in this case, no one can ever be charged with a negligent homicide in CA including DUI. It is nearly impossible to prove that some who drank to excess and got behind the wheel of car intended to kill some innocent person whom they did not known in another vehicle during a collision. If ricochet bullets don't count, especially when they come from a stolen gun and are fired without reasonable purpose in a public situation, how can the results of a car "accident" count for more? Lost in the "ricochet" defense is that I believe the victim was hit by three different bullets, not fragments of one bullet.

Please let me know what I'm perceiving incorrectly.

Not saying I am happy about the decision but if this dimwitted individual finds a gun (previously stolen from a LEO backpack), pulls the trigger, a bullet ricochets and kills Kate Steinle, is that murder? I believe that is what the jury was up against. We know facts that were not allowed into the case. Hopefully this guy serves time for something, it won't be murder. I don't know how they can get him for gun possession by a felon if he picked up a gun that he found (although in NYC that would get you arrested).

Seriously? He just "found the gun", "it went off by itself", she was killed "by a richochet". Pfffttt.

He shot her through the heart with .40 Cal. He deserves to be executed for murder. The jury should be ashamed of themselves. This is a complete miscarriage of justice and we can only hope that when this illegal alien felon commits his next crime that he gets what he deserves.

I personally would not have been unhappy if that would have been the juries decision but it wasn't. Just like with OJ, we have to live with it. Perhaps the prosecutor should have gone with a more "acceptable" push than 1st degree murder. I wish the city officials that enabled this crime were the ones on trial. We were not on the jury so we will never know the true story.

This is not the time for quiet resignation. This is a turning point. The illegal immigrant felon will be prosecuted by the DOJ. This miscarriage of justice will fuel the building of the wall. Sanctuary cities will no longer receive millions of tax payer dollars. Now if only Nancy Pelosi and her corrupt district of murderous Federal law breakers would simply slide into the sea...