Crime Texas: Two fat hillbillies kill a Father over garbage

Slick_36 said:
I've been thinking about this thread a lot lately in relation to the Rittenhouse case and I forgot just how wild it was. Honestly a little nervous going through and seeing what I said, especially to the widow.

I'm glad to see how consistent I've been in my stance on the use of guns as a threat for control leading to an escalation of violence. The riots were so tied to political tribalism and racial tensions, it's nice to see my words on a somewhat similar situation but removed from the extraneous political factors.

This and the Rittenhouse shootings both involved shooters who brandished firearms with the attempt to control angry people who didn't necessarily pose a danger to their lives without the gun being involved. Both shot men who had mental illness that they did not know beforehand, one diagnosed anger issues and the other bipolar disorder with suicidal thoughts. And both ultimately put themselves in a position to have to shoot in self defense because they played chicken with strangers and a gun in their hand.
Click to expand...
I dunno that I agree that the situations are that similar. This case is sad, but it started with completely different circumstances. I know better than a lot of people that situations can escalate quickly and people can do irrational things when angry. But the guy in this situation could have walked away. Police had already been called, and the whole dispute was over garbage disposal. The shooter did everything possible to try to instigate a situation where he could murder someone. This is the exact kind of scenario that I throw out in discussions as a murder disguised as self defense.


KR was present at a riot, trying to defend local businesses and the community. Multiple factors show KR wasn't there to instigate a violent confrontation so he could hurt someone. Namely:

1. He was there throughout the day removing graffiti and offering first aid. Hes local to the area. Works there, his family lives there, he clearly has ties there. He also did not bring a firearm there as the media keeps lying about. Local business owners requested help from KR and others. He had more of a legitimate reason to be there then the rioters.

2. KR did not instigate a confrontation, didn't threaten anyone. Even after being assaulted by multiple people, several armed, he didn't shoot right away. He tried to flee while verbally telling them he was not a combatant.

3. When he did shoot, it was when he was in imminent danger of being disarmed and badly beaten at best. He shot only the people attacking him, then left the area immediately seeking law enforcement, and turned himself in. If he was truly there looking for an excuse to shoot people, it's highly unlikely he would try to avoid shooting until cornered, only shoot those that were an immediate threat, and proactively inform the police.

4. The people he shot were not just random people there that happened to get drawn into violence in the middle of a chaotic situation. All had a history of violent crime and were essentially career criminal lifetime losers. You obviously can't just say that in and of itself is a justification for killing them. But their rap sheets combined with the video evidence does indeed confirm these were bad human beings, there to take advantage of chaos. Hoping to get away with violently assaulting civilians and then vanish in the crowd.

5. Much has been made of his age and him being armed, as if those factors in and of themselves make him guilty. It's legal to open carry there, and his age should only be used as a point against him if it appears he reacted with childish immaturity. The fact that he was not the aggressor, tried to flee and only fired as a last resort, and didn't fire more than was absolutely necessary show he didn't act in an immature way. People much older than KR have used open carry as an excuse to shoot people. That's pretty obviously not what he did here.
 
Mike said:
I dunno that I agree that the situations are that similar. This case is sad, but it started with completely different circumstances. I know better than a lot of people that situations can escalate quickly and people can do irrational things when angry. But the guy in this situation could have walked away. Police had already been called, and the whole dispute was over garbage disposal. The shooter did everything possible to try to instigate a situation where he could murder someone. This is the exact kind of scenario that I throw out in discussions as a murder disguised as self defense.


KR was present at a riot, trying to defend local businesses and the community. Multiple factors show KR wasn't there to instigate a violent confrontation so he could hurt someone. Namely:

1. He was there throughout the day removing graffiti and offering first aid. Hes local to the area. Works there, his family lives there, he clearly has ties there. He also did not bring a firearm there as the media keeps lying about. Local business owners requested help from KR and others. He had more of a legitimate reason to be there then the rioters.

2. KR did not instigate a confrontation, didn't threaten anyone. Even after being assaulted by multiple people, several armed, he didn't shoot right away. He tried to flee while verbally telling them he was not a combatant.

3. When he did shoot, it was when he was in imminent danger of being disarmed and badly beaten at best. He shot only the people attacking him, then left the area immediately seeking law enforcement, and turned himself in. If he was truly there looking for an excuse to shoot people, it's highly unlikely he would try to avoid shooting until cornered, only shoot those that were an immediate threat, and proactively inform the police.

4. The people he shot were not just random people there that happened to get drawn into violence in the middle of a chaotic situation. All had a history of violent crime and were essentially career criminal lifetime losers. You obviously can't just say that in and of itself is a justification for killing them. But their rap sheets combined with the video evidence does indeed confirm these were bad human beings, there to take advantage of chaos. Hoping to get away with violently assaulting civilians and then vanish in the crowd.

5. Much has been made of his age and him being armed, as if those factors in and of themselves make him guilty. It's legal to open carry there, and his age should only be used as a point against him if it appears he reacted with childish immaturity. The fact that he was not the aggressor, tried to flee and only fired as a last resort, and didn't fire more than was absolutely necessary show he didn't act in an immature way. People much older than KR have used open carry as an excuse to shoot people. That's pretty obviously not what he did here.
Click to expand...
Obviously they aren't identical cases, there are parallels though and I feel my opinion of both is based on those factors. I'm not sure about them requesting Kyle's help, today someone showed me a text of Kyle asking if a store wanted his protection. He also said he'd be armed in that text, and the idea that bringing a gun with him is somehow different from planning to have someone bring a gun to him just feels kind of silly.

Motivations were definitely different though. The riot situation had a lot more nuance involved and felt inevitable, this thread is whatever the exact opposite of nuance is and frustratingly avoidable.
 
Slick_36 said:
Obviously they aren't identical cases, there are parallels though and I feel my opinion of both is based on those factors. I'm not sure about them requesting Kyle's help, today someone showed me a text of Kyle asking if a store wanted his protection. He also said he'd be armed in that text, and the idea that bringing a gun with him is somehow different from planning to have someone bring a gun to him just feels kind of silly.

Motivations were definitely different though. The riot situation had a lot more nuance involved and felt inevitable, this thread is whatever the exact opposite of nuance is and frustratingly avoidable.
Click to expand...
It's really all about the behavior around the shooting itself. People are making a really big deal about how or why he was armed. Since we're legally able to open carry I don’t find that part very important. To me, the key factor is the behavior before and during the shooting itself. I've always had an interest in true crime, so over the years I've read or watched videos about a lot of shooting cases.

The thing that sticks out in cases where people murder someone and try to claim self defense, is these people had a hair trigger temper and we're just looking for an excuse to shoot someone. Like the guys in this case. They either try to antagonize people into going for their weapon and then shoot, or react to a very mild physical threat with immediate lethal force. There are some pretty clear behavioral patterns that show they are hoping to trap someone into a scenario where they can force confrontation.

You don't see any of that in the KR case. The main things people still bring up is him being there and having a gun, as if either of those things are suspicious on there own. Maybe that's because quite a number of people have basically said they don't think people should be able to arm themselves and protect their community or property. And I disagree pretty adamantly there. We have the right to bear arms and the right to self defense for a reason. The people at fault here are the criminals latching on to "protests" to instigate violence, and the authorities for not having an aggressive response to rioting so citizens don't have to. If law enforcement and the government were doing their job, this would be ah entirely different conversation.

As it is people seem to think its fine for cops to look the other way while criminals destroy property and assault people, AND the people being assaulted can't fight back or they're vigilantes. To me, that is not giving law abiding citizens any option but to cower in their homes and hope for the best.
 
There's a clip of the incident with some music played over.. It's so fucking bizarre.
 
Andy Capp said:
They showed up with guns over a dispute over garbage.
Click to expand...

Well, one showed up and it was in his shorts. Concealing on private property?

The son appeared to show up with his when he heard shouting and commotion. I don't know if that meets the standard of brandishing given the circumstances (for Texas anyway), but the man who died defiantly showed everything it takes to get killed avoidably.
 
Mike said:
I dunno that I agree that the situations are that similar. This case is sad, but it started with completely different circumstances. I know better than a lot of people that situations can escalate quickly and people can do irrational things when angry. But the guy in this situation could have walked away. Police had already been called, and the whole dispute was over garbage disposal. The shooter did everything possible to try to instigate a situation where he could murder someone. This is the exact kind of scenario that I throw out in discussions as a murder disguised as self defense.


KR was present at a riot, trying to defend local businesses and the community. Multiple factors show KR wasn't there to instigate a violent confrontation so he could hurt someone. Namely:

1. He was there throughout the day removing graffiti and offering first aid. Hes local to the area. Works there, his family lives there, he clearly has ties there. He also did not bring a firearm there as the media keeps lying about. Local business owners requested help from KR and others. He had more of a legitimate reason to be there then the rioters.

2. KR did not instigate a confrontation, didn't threaten anyone. Even after being assaulted by multiple people, several armed, he didn't shoot right away. He tried to flee while verbally telling them he was not a combatant.

3. When he did shoot, it was when he was in imminent danger of being disarmed and badly beaten at best. He shot only the people attacking him, then left the area immediately seeking law enforcement, and turned himself in. If he was truly there looking for an excuse to shoot people, it's highly unlikely he would try to avoid shooting until cornered, only shoot those that were an immediate threat, and proactively inform the police.

4. The people he shot were not just random people there that happened to get drawn into violence in the middle of a chaotic situation. All had a history of violent crime and were essentially career criminal lifetime losers. You obviously can't just say that in and of itself is a justification for killing them. But their rap sheets combined with the video evidence does indeed confirm these were bad human beings, there to take advantage of chaos. Hoping to get away with violently assaulting civilians and then vanish in the crowd.

5. Much has been made of his age and him being armed, as if those factors in and of themselves make him guilty. It's legal to open carry there, and his age should only be used as a point against him if it appears he reacted with childish immaturity. The fact that he was not the aggressor, tried to flee and only fired as a last resort, and didn't fire more than was absolutely necessary show he didn't act in an immature way. People much older than KR have used open carry as an excuse to shoot people. That's pretty obviously not what he did here.
Click to expand...

Mike said:
It's really all about the behavior around the shooting itself. People are making a really big deal about how or why he was armed. Since we're legally able to open carry I don’t find that part very important. To me, the key factor is the behavior before and during the shooting itself. I've always had an interest in true crime, so over the years I've read or watched videos about a lot of shooting cases.

The thing that sticks out in cases where people murder someone and try to claim self defense, is these people had a hair trigger temper and we're just looking for an excuse to shoot someone. Like the guys in this case. They either try to antagonize people into going for their weapon and then shoot, or react to a very mild physical threat with immediate lethal force. There are some pretty clear behavioral patterns that show they are hoping to trap someone into a scenario where they can force confrontation.

You don't see any of that in the KR case. The main things people still bring up is him being there and having a gun, as if either of those things are suspicious on there own. Maybe that's because quite a number of people have basically said they don't think people should be able to arm themselves and protect their community or property. And I disagree pretty adamantly there. We have the right to bear arms and the right to self defense for a reason. The people at fault here are the criminals latching on to "protests" to instigate violence, and the authorities for not having an aggressive response to rioting so citizens don't have to. If law enforcement and the government were doing their job, this would be ah entirely different conversation.

As it is people seem to think its fine for cops to look the other way while criminals destroy property and assault people, AND the people being assaulted can't fight back or they're vigilantes. To me, that is not giving law abiding citizens any option but to cower in their homes and hope for the best.
Click to expand...
disagree with the entire conclusion drawn here. Just curious though with all these details, but not seeing one I'm under the impression occurred imminently before the shooting and is a very key detail. Not in a criminal sense, but reality on the ground. Did KR not detach from his little milia group to put out a dumpster fire? A fire literally burning waste in a container that it could not escape that a group was cheering on? I guess he was defending the property of whatever company owned the dumpster lmbo...

I didn't follow the case but for maybeee an hour in totality, and could be wrong on the details. Not looking for a back and forth so much as pointing out how we omit or put emphasis on certain things to end up at our desired conclusions.
 
blottstein said:
disagree with the entire conclusion drawn here. Just curious though with all these details, but not seeing one I'm under the impression occurred imminently before the shooting and is a very key detail. Not in a criminal sense, but reality on the ground. Did KR not detach from his little milia group to put out a dumpster fire? A fire literally burning waste in a container that it could not escape that a group was cheering on? I guess he was defending the property of whatever company owned the dumpster lmbo...

I didn't follow the case but for maybeee an hour in totality, and could be wrong on the details. Not looking for a back and forth so much as pointing out how we omit or put emphasis on certain things to end up at our desired conclusions.
Click to expand...
Disagree with the conclusion drawn? If you're going to quote long, detailed statents and say that can you at least explain why?

I remember reading that he was trying to put out the dumpster fires, along with others. Why is that a point against him in your eyes? Seems.... unreasonable. Also it's funny how many of you have jumped into these long running threads filled with info on the case, just to say I haven't followed the case but here's why your opinions are wrong.

{<huh}
 
Mike said:
Disagree with the conclusion drawn? If you're going to quote long, detailed statents and say that can you at least explain why?

I remember reading that he was trying to put out the dumpster fires, along with others. Why is that a point against him in your eyes? Seems.... unreasonable. Also it's funny how many of you have jumped into these long running threads filled with info on the case, just to say I haven't followed the case but here's why your opinions are wrong.

{<huh}
Click to expand...
i never said your opinion was wrong. I just pointed out how his imminent actions before the shootings never were detailed in those long "detailed statements"

let's think of the context of 2020 and within that I think it's an all time jackass move to attempt put out a dumpster fire by yourself with an AR15 on your shoulder that an irrational group of people are cathartically cheering on.. what's the end game with the tools he had at hand? what property damage was he preventing? Just pointing out in all likelihood subconsciously there's probably a good reason you just skipped over this part that fate brought kyle and the shootees together in that moment

it's the same reason you point out the failings of the guys who got shot, but also gloss over the fact that Kyle was in public months earlier being recorded swinging first on a teenage girl
 
blottstein said:
I just pointed out how his imminent actions before the shootings never were detailed in those long "detailed statements"
Click to expand...

Sure they were. He was out offering medic service to the rioters, got separated from who he was with, prevented by police from returning to the location his group was at, talked to his buddy on the phone who told him fires were being started at one of the Car Source locations so he should go over there. Between him heading over and being attacked by pedo there were no fires extinguished by Kyle.
 
Doctor Stoppage said:
Well, one showed up and it was in his shorts. Concealing on private property?

The son appeared to show up with his when he heard shouting and commotion. I don't know if that meets the standard of brandishing given the circumstances (for Texas anyway), but the man who died defiantly showed everything it takes to get killed avoidably.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with the last clause, but you still should not get vented over garbage.
 
Slick_36 said:
Yup, which is what I was talking about in the parade massacre thread when people were outraged that there was so much leniency to release the killer. We have serious logistical issues when it comes to processing cases. People see consequences of these issues and call for stricter law enforcement, but we have a prison population that dwarfs the rest of the world already, how much harder can we be?

Say you lower the bar for who you arrest, that's more people in jails awaiting trials. You lower the bar for what convictions get time, that's more people in the prisons. You increase the time served for the crimes people are convicted of, that's even more people in the prisons.

Our justice system is completely bloated and overwhelmed. Our law enforcement budgets are insanely high when compared to other areas funded by taxpayers. The solution can't be to create more prisons, especially considering many of those will be private prisons looking to turn a profit.

Police budgets have grown by 445% over the last 30 years. It's time we start thinking about preventing crime by investing in services that can reduce the amount of criminals that will eventually end up in the system.
Click to expand...
You're looking at the big picture when crime is merely a local issue. Yeah we spend a lot of money on police but for the most part it is money well spent, since we're hitting lows in crime we haven't seen in decades. Look at the places that have huge rises in crime and I can show you two things: budget cuts and much, much more importantly a negative political atmosphere vis a vis policing.

Look at the riots Rittenhouse was in: The police were there and were well equipped. They had armored vehicles and riot gears and drones (I think these were FBI drones though not local police) but they didn't use any of it. Why? Because the public would be outraged if they prevented the riot because it would involve use of force. The New York Times would let us know how peaceful protesters got hit with teargas and will try to compare use to Egypt or Syria.

Crime is not a difficult problem to solve, contrary to what liberals would have us believe.
 
deadshot138 said:
How the fuck did y'all get on Kyle Rittenhouse in this thread?

<36>
Click to expand...
Mainly because people wanted to compare them, although the cases are basically the inverse of eachother.
 
Yehudim said:
You're looking at the big picture when crime is merely a local issue. Yeah we spend a lot of money on police but for the most part it is money well spent, since we're hitting lows in crime we haven't seen in decades. Look at the places that have huge rises in crime and I can show you two things: budget cuts and much, much more importantly a negative political atmosphere vis a vis policing.

Look at the riots Rittenhouse was in: The police were there and were well equipped. They had armored vehicles and riot gears and drones (I think these were FBI drones though not local police) but they didn't use any of it. Why? Because the public would be outraged if they prevented the riot because it would involve use of force. The New York Times would let us know how peaceful protesters got hit with teargas and will try to compare use to Egypt or Syria.

Crime is not a difficult problem to solve, contrary to what liberals would have us believe.
Click to expand...
Pretty much this whole post is conjecture. Causation and correlation are not the same thing. You might as well say "Birthrates have gone down while police budgets have gone up. It must be concluded that the police are preventing women from becoming pregnant".
 
Slick_36 said:
Pretty much this whole post is conjecture. Causation and correlation are not the same thing. You might as well say "Birthrates have gone down while police budgets have gone up. It must be concluded that the police are preventing women from becoming pregnant".
Click to expand...
It isn’t conjecture and we have an entire field in criminology called evidence-based policing in which this stuff is thoroughly studied.

It is backed on greater science than what you probably think lowered crime, like abortion and removing lead from the environment. (The classic liberal talking points which coincidentally only started working in the mid-90s when cities like NYC, LA, and Chicago started a crackdown on crime)
 
Ghost in the Dark said:
Baseball bats or similar exist in every country. Mass gun ownership and worship do not.

Any other country 98% chance nobody would be dead. Any other country people get angry, threats are made, punches are thrown etc. people even get hit with sticks and no one dies.

Guns put death only a fraction of a second away. Some Person of Walmart gets in a bad mood and bang bang, shoot shoot it's a 187 call the coroner.

chartoftheday_11749_us_gun_deaths_outnumber_total_war_dead_n.jpg
Click to expand...
shut up you libtard
 
blottstein said:
i never said your opinion was wrong. I just pointed out how his imminent actions before the shootings never were detailed in those long "detailed statements"

let's think of the context of 2020 and within that I think it's an all time jackass move to attempt put out a dumpster fire by yourself with an AR15 on your shoulder that an irrational group of people are cathartically cheering on.. what's the end game with the tools he had at hand? what property damage was he preventing? Just pointing out in all likelihood subconsciously there's probably a good reason you just skipped over this part that fate brought kyle and the shootees together in that moment

it's the same reason you point out the failings of the guys who got shot, but also gloss over the fact that Kyle was in public months earlier being recorded swinging first on a teenage girl
Click to expand...


Weren't they pushing the flaming dumpster towards a gas station to set it on fire?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,145
Messages
55,469,960
Members
174,787
Latest member
Biden's Diaper

Share this page

Back
Top