Isn't the purpose of owning a CCW or whatever your state designates, an earned responsibility and not a right? "Purpose" perhaps isn't the right term, maybe, "a person who has exhibited good proven social skills and has been thoroughly trained in the use of a firearm, the definition of self defense and you meet your states required classes". It doesn't mean you are allowed to make up for your lack of manhood because you carry and allowed to use your firearm.
CHL carrier kills man
- Thread starter tnieto2004
- Start date
- Status
No, that's not true. Only certain people are given the benefit of the doubt. People seem to have characterizations of what they think the "typical" bad guy is like, and anyone who fits that gets blasted here while others who fit the good guy characterization are given extreme leniency. The evidence be damned. It's all liberal media commies hitler devil worshipping young punks controlling the media anyway. Same as the antis, I suppose. He's a gun owner? He must be guilty!
lacoochee
Member
It's a shame he isn't a cop, he could claim he thought the guy was holding a gun...oops it was just his wallet. Desk duty for 13 days, damn.
Really, looks like a bad shoot, but there are other factors, size disparity being one, maybe our shooter was a skinny dwarf with a bum leg. Whatever, there aren't enough facts here, wait 'til you actually see they guys statement and the witness testimony from the bus. If he was in the right and he gets a good lawyer he will be free otherwise he will get what he deserves.
Really, looks like a bad shoot, but there are other factors, size disparity being one, maybe our shooter was a skinny dwarf with a bum leg. Whatever, there aren't enough facts here, wait 'til you actually see they guys statement and the witness testimony from the bus. If he was in the right and he gets a good lawyer he will be free otherwise he will get what he deserves.
It doesn't take two start a confrontation like this. Only one idiot. There are several scenarios that could lead up to it.
Generally, a CHL holder in Texas will have a clean record and is very unlikely to be a criminal type based on raw statistics. That is a good reason to give the benefit of the doubt before rushing to judgement. LEO's deserve that also. That is why I usually condition my comments with "..if the facts are true..." or something like that.
I always figured it was assumed that any comments are based on the facts as presented.
I heard about this on the radio but didn't pick up on what they were talking about. They said a knife was pulled and then a gun, then the shoot. I don't remember who had the knife.
Generally, a CHL holder in Texas will have a clean record and is very unlikely to be a criminal type based on raw statistics. That is a good reason to give the benefit of the doubt before rushing to judgement. LEO's deserve that also. That is why I usually condition my comments with "..if the facts are true..." or something like that.
I always figured it was assumed that any comments are based on the facts as presented. I heard about this on the radio but didn't pick up on what they were talking about. They said a knife was pulled and then a gun, then the shoot. I don't remember who had the knife.
One other thing: Deadly force is allowed in Texas for threat to life or serious bodily injury. There is case law in Texas that says fists can cause serious bodiy injury. There was a case in Dallas early on where a guy was getting snot beat out of him and pulled out his gun and killed his attacker. It went to trial and the guy got off.
How this applies to this case I don't know. It depends on how the confrontation went down.
How this applies to this case I don't know. It depends on how the confrontation went down.
Professor K
Member
The media didnt blow out of proportion that he was a CCW holder. They just mentioned it once, matter of factly. At least that's what all the articles on the first page do.
It's a shame, but sh*t happens....
I guess you could argue if more of the passengers were armed, this could have been prevented. Don't know....
It's a shame, but sh*t happens....
I guess you could argue if more of the passengers were armed, this could have been prevented. Don't know....
I never hear about that stuff and I listen to local radio almost every day. I can remember a few incidents over years. Driving in Houston traffic is a bit of an adventure but I don't think shoot outs due to road rage are as common as you imply. Driving may be safer than taking the bus though.
How were your friends harmed by the way? Just curious. I got bumped from behind twice in 2 years of commuting to the Galleria area (no damage), but I have been in and around Houston for 10 years and never had a wreck in that time. I have been pissed at other drivers and had them pissed at me. Keeping gestures to myself normally prevents that.
Professor K
Member
Actually, wait, I'm wrong, the preacher was another guy from the same article.
romma
Member
A rather "snarky" statement considering this is The High Road...I think Mr CCW should get some benefit of the doubt. I have seen CCW holders here speak out against bad shoots by CCW holders.
PotatoJudge
Member
Jeff, I think part of the difference is that the blue wall has an effect. We can get on here and hold all CCW holders in the highest esteem and talk about how they always do the right thing and defend their actions or make excuses for them, but if anything happens they're subject to the same treatment as any other suspect. On the other hand, if a LEO does something and gets bashed on here, right or wrong, it won't effect his special treatment in the eyes of the law. For example, when police misuse authority who do they answer to? Other cops that turn a blind eye? A Captain that doesn't want to look bad for having criminals working under him? A DA that's poker buddies with the chief of police? A mayor that's as power hungry and corrupt as the worst of the cops he's supposed to oversee? A union with it's own political interests? What about when the same treatment gets spread around; cops kid with DUI or MIP, name dropping to get out of a ticket. Cops already have plenty of people in positions of power scrambling to defend them at every turn, a CHL holder does not. All they have is expensive lawyers.
This doesn't even take into account the reporting biases.
I heard something on the radio this morning and I think it applies pretty well. It was about the natural propensity of good, sane people to become sadistic when given total power over others. Given partial control, you can extrapolate. It was called the Lucifer Effect or something. The idea is that maybe it's not a few bad apples, but a bad barrel into which good apples are placed. No doubt there are systemic problems that are responsible for many of the recurrent events that turn people on LEOs. In the end it's still the individual's responsibility. At least that's what the Stanford guy said.
I can understand how this sort of thing gets to you. You're probably a very good cop and have dealt with this stuff most of your career. It's probably worse coming from people you volunteer for and have things in common with. It probably doesn't help when we say we're not talking about you, just the "bad ones." You probably are more reserved in closing "bad cop" threads because of the perception of your motivations, even if they're not constructive, are less than civil, and off-topic.
Unfortunately, the second is about protection from our government, and cops are the front line of enforcing the government's laws. Bad government=bad cops, and when no-knock raids and the like are performed it's mostly cops that take the heat. They're partly to blame, no doubt, but we tend to forget about the people that approve and encourage these sorts of things (think "bad barrel").
Yeah, your comments did come off as snarky (not that I blame you). Might be better to make the same points in a more palatable manner. You catch more flies with honey, and all that.
I don't know how tired you get of it all, but I hope your skin is thick enough to keep up the good work here and on the streets.
It's pretty late here, hope this all makes sense.
Anybody found a good source on who pulled the knife? It makes all the difference here.
This doesn't even take into account the reporting biases.
I heard something on the radio this morning and I think it applies pretty well. It was about the natural propensity of good, sane people to become sadistic when given total power over others. Given partial control, you can extrapolate. It was called the Lucifer Effect or something. The idea is that maybe it's not a few bad apples, but a bad barrel into which good apples are placed. No doubt there are systemic problems that are responsible for many of the recurrent events that turn people on LEOs. In the end it's still the individual's responsibility. At least that's what the Stanford guy said.
I can understand how this sort of thing gets to you. You're probably a very good cop and have dealt with this stuff most of your career. It's probably worse coming from people you volunteer for and have things in common with. It probably doesn't help when we say we're not talking about you, just the "bad ones." You probably are more reserved in closing "bad cop" threads because of the perception of your motivations, even if they're not constructive, are less than civil, and off-topic.
Unfortunately, the second is about protection from our government, and cops are the front line of enforcing the government's laws. Bad government=bad cops, and when no-knock raids and the like are performed it's mostly cops that take the heat. They're partly to blame, no doubt, but we tend to forget about the people that approve and encourage these sorts of things (think "bad barrel").
Yeah, your comments did come off as snarky (not that I blame you). Might be better to make the same points in a more palatable manner. You catch more flies with honey, and all that.
I don't know how tired you get of it all, but I hope your skin is thick enough to keep up the good work here and on the streets.
It's pretty late here, hope this all makes sense.
Anybody found a good source on who pulled the knife? It makes all the difference here.
tnieto2004
Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,389
MechAg- http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4670424.html
There are some statistic there .. Last week between Saturday and Wednesday there were 14 killings (Dunno how many involved being in their vehicles.. You could look that up if you are still wondering).. Thats quite a bit for me dunno about you ..I also recently talked to a few police officers at a firearm store and they confirmed that there was a recent increase .. Do a few searches and you will find many incidents
There are some statistic there .. Last week between Saturday and Wednesday there were 14 killings (Dunno how many involved being in their vehicles.. You could look that up if you are still wondering).. Thats quite a bit for me dunno about you ..I also recently talked to a few police officers at a firearm store and they confirmed that there was a recent increase .. Do a few searches and you will find many incidents
tnieto2004
Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,389
I have still yet to see ANY published article (or local news report ) stating the victim had a knife .. No one seems to have even seen that accusation .. ALL I have seen is that the suspect first grabbed his knife .. Then his gun .. Never have I read the victim had a knife .. If someone has found a source saying the victim had the knife please show ..
XavierBreath
Member
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/chronicle/4668543.html
I have noticed the blade is no longer mentioned.........
Correction.......here's the knife. Escalation of force?
More, with witness statements to the media:
I have noticed the blade is no longer mentioned.........
Correction.......here's the knife. Escalation of force?
More, with witness statements to the media:
Last edited:
rhubarb
Member
The first shooting by a Texas CHL holder was in Houston. The shooter killed an unarmed man who was beating him senseless. The shooter walked.
Not that this is a parallel case, just saying . . .
Not that this is a parallel case, just saying . . .
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
No, that is incorrect. You are referring to the same incident MechAg94 referred to about fists. The first shooting death directly involving a licensee occurred only 52 days into the new program in Dallas.
On Feb. 21, 1996, Gordon Hale III, 42, a welding equipment repairman and scrawny little guy, was involved in a minor traffic accident in Dallas that shattered the side mirror of a delivery van. The men in the delivery van (actually, just the driver) chased Hale through traffic. While stopped/trapped in traffic, witnesses told police, van driver Kenny Tavai, 33 and a large Samoan, walked to Hale's pickup and started punching him in the shoulders, face, and general head areas as he sat behind the wheel, trapped by traffic and his seatbelt.
Hale used restraint even though several facial bones were broken already and he had a damaged left eye that was never to heal properly. Then Tavai, who apparently was not happy with beating Hale repeatedly the first time, turned around and went back to beat Hale again. As he reached into the truck, Hale produced handgun and killed Tavai with a single shot to the chest. Just one shot. Nothing more. Hale was charged with murder, but a grand jury refused to indict him and the charges were dropped.
This was a great case and an excellent example of lethal force being used in the 'face' of overwhelming power. Hale's face was a bloodly mess after the fist assault and all of the conditions for use of lethal force were not only feared, but realized. Hale suffered significant and potentially life threatening injuries as a result of the beating by Tavai. Note that Hale shot Tavai when Tavai returned to administer more punishment. Hale did very well.
Some of the best information from the case came from Tavai's associate in the truck who stated that he did not understand why Tavai was so upset, why Tavai found a need to beat Hale, or why Tavai returned to Hale's vehicle to try to beat him again.
Contrary to rhubarb, the shooter didn't exactly walk. He was arrested and things went to the grand jury where he was no-billed, but at considerable expense to Hale, most of which, I understand, was picked up by the NRA as it was a landmark case in Texas. The media scrutiny on Hale was hugely stressful. The really sad part was that Hale felt guilty about the whole thing and said that if he had to do it over again, he would not have shot. This, from a man who had several bones broken in his face and loss of vision in his left eye as a result of the beatings.
On Feb. 21, 1996, Gordon Hale III, 42, a welding equipment repairman and scrawny little guy, was involved in a minor traffic accident in Dallas that shattered the side mirror of a delivery van. The men in the delivery van (actually, just the driver) chased Hale through traffic. While stopped/trapped in traffic, witnesses told police, van driver Kenny Tavai, 33 and a large Samoan, walked to Hale's pickup and started punching him in the shoulders, face, and general head areas as he sat behind the wheel, trapped by traffic and his seatbelt.
Hale used restraint even though several facial bones were broken already and he had a damaged left eye that was never to heal properly. Then Tavai, who apparently was not happy with beating Hale repeatedly the first time, turned around and went back to beat Hale again. As he reached into the truck, Hale produced handgun and killed Tavai with a single shot to the chest. Just one shot. Nothing more. Hale was charged with murder, but a grand jury refused to indict him and the charges were dropped.
This was a great case and an excellent example of lethal force being used in the 'face' of overwhelming power. Hale's face was a bloodly mess after the fist assault and all of the conditions for use of lethal force were not only feared, but realized. Hale suffered significant and potentially life threatening injuries as a result of the beating by Tavai. Note that Hale shot Tavai when Tavai returned to administer more punishment. Hale did very well.
Some of the best information from the case came from Tavai's associate in the truck who stated that he did not understand why Tavai was so upset, why Tavai found a need to beat Hale, or why Tavai returned to Hale's vehicle to try to beat him again.
Contrary to rhubarb, the shooter didn't exactly walk. He was arrested and things went to the grand jury where he was no-billed, but at considerable expense to Hale, most of which, I understand, was picked up by the NRA as it was a landmark case in Texas. The media scrutiny on Hale was hugely stressful. The really sad part was that Hale felt guilty about the whole thing and said that if he had to do it over again, he would not have shot. This, from a man who had several bones broken in his face and loss of vision in his left eye as a result of the beatings.
Sharps-shooter
Member
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2006
- Messages
- 488
I reckon that as more and more people get CHL or CCW permits, that the purported big difference in character and law-abidingness between them and the general population will shrink. At least where I am, the permits are a lot harder to get than they used to be.
When I was growing up, I think you had to get deputized by the sherrif to get one. Now you can get one unless you've got some sort of a record, and i even know one guy who, in spite of having been in jail for domestic vioence (which supposedly prevents one from even owning a gun in this state), managed to get a CCW permit.
Of course, the sherrif in the town where I grew up did beat his wife and kids from time to time, too. But that's neither here nor there.
When I was growing up, I think you had to get deputized by the sherrif to get one. Now you can get one unless you've got some sort of a record, and i even know one guy who, in spite of having been in jail for domestic vioence (which supposedly prevents one from even owning a gun in this state), managed to get a CCW permit.
Of course, the sherrif in the town where I grew up did beat his wife and kids from time to time, too. But that's neither here nor there.
rhubarb
Member
Dallas. I was wrong. I knew it was one of them big cities up north.
Even if Hale had gone to trial and had been found not guilty, I would say he walked. It would be a good outcome even if it wasn't the best.
The best outcome is achieved by avoiding or evading confrontations.
Even if Hale had gone to trial and had been found not guilty, I would say he walked. It would be a good outcome even if it wasn't the best.
The best outcome is achieved by avoiding or evading confrontations.
Last edited:
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Three witnesses to a car wreck = five different versions about what happened. Doesn't seem different, here. And the way some of these reporters write about what they think they heard, you'd think they flunked remedial ESL.
Speculation.
Art
Speculation.
Art
BHPshooter
Member
We are NOT getting the whole story.
This...
...Displays actions that are incongruent with this.
People who "just shoot people" don't surrender their gun and wait for the police with their hands raised.
There's an essential gap between the two quotes that we're missing.
Wes
This...
...Displays actions that are incongruent with this.
People who "just shoot people" don't surrender their gun and wait for the police with their hands raised.
There's an essential gap between the two quotes that we're missing.
Wes
Contrary to rhubarb, the shooter didn't exactly walk. He was arrested and things went to the grand jury where he was no-billed, but at considerable expense to Hale, most of which, I understand, was picked up by the NRA as it was a landmark case in Texas. The media scrutiny on Hale was hugely stressful. The really sad part was that Hale felt guilty about the whole thing and said that if he had to do it over again, he would not have shot. This, from a man who had several bones broken in his face and loss of vision in his left eye as a result of the beatings.
If he had the gun within grasp to begin with, he wouldn't have had a beating and he probably would have been able to diffuse the situation without shooting.
Too many CHL holders worry more about being scot-free with the law than protecting themselves, especially this guy. If your life is in danger, SHOOT. Don't hesitate worrying about what a grand jury might think. If you know that the shooting is justified and you fear for your life, then SHOOT. Hale shouldn't be guily about a damn thing; he should be ashamed that he didn't get the gun out earlier.
This newspaper article is quoting too many witnesses opinions as facts. Mooring probably didn't even witness the entire thing.
If he had the gun within grasp to begin with, he wouldn't have had a beating and he probably would have been able to diffuse the situation without shooting.
Too many CHL holders worry more about being scot-free with the law than protecting themselves, especially this guy. If your life is in danger, SHOOT. Don't hesitate worrying about what a grand jury might think. If you know that the shooting is justified and you fear for your life, then SHOOT. Hale shouldn't be guily about a damn thing; he should be ashamed that he didn't get the gun out earlier.
This newspaper article is quoting too many witnesses opinions as facts. Mooring probably didn't even witness the entire thing.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
You obviously are not familiar with the Hale-Tavai incident. The gun was within reach, under a jacket on the passenger seat. Hale stated he thought Tavai was simply going to demand insurance paperwork or yell at him. Instead, Tavai threw the first punch, fracturing bone around the left eye and damaging Hale's vision, then continued to pound on him as Hale did what he could to cover up.
Hale felt guilty because he really did not want to kill Tavai. He just wanted to not be beaten again as he knew he was seriously injured. Suggesting that he should feel shame for not producing his gun sooner is naive.
Getting back to the Houston incident, Mallot pulled a knife, then a gun, then fired? Y'all are right. We aren't getting the whole story. Of course, the fact that the number of people on the bus changes from 30 to 12 to 20 is interesting in and of itself.
Hale felt guilty because he really did not want to kill Tavai. He just wanted to not be beaten again as he knew he was seriously injured. Suggesting that he should feel shame for not producing his gun sooner is naive.
Getting back to the Houston incident, Mallot pulled a knife, then a gun, then fired? Y'all are right. We aren't getting the whole story. Of course, the fact that the number of people on the bus changes from 30 to 12 to 20 is interesting in and of itself.
hagar
member
How did I call this story about 100%? And as the truth will come out, it will prove that the dead person was the one that pulled the knife. Anybody pulls a knife on me, one of us is going to die. The ccw holder did nothing but defend his life against an aggressive anti-social character threatening him with bodily harm first, and then a knife.
I'll take another SWAG at the dead person. Katrina survivor.
I'll take another SWAG at the dead person. Katrina survivor.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
I'd almost guarantee it. Katricians as our friend Kinky called them.
(Don't start with the race crap, there's just as many caucasian Katricians as any other race)
- Status