this is very sad.
#21
03-18-2008, 07:54 AM
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: terrorizing southeastern norf carolina
Posts: 2,092
RE: this is very sad.
times like this, i believe in eye-for-an-eye.
shot him in the back and let him suffer. that was TOTALLY unjustifiable.. he was a loose cannon, and locals knew it.. well, they know for sure now, unfortunately.
shot him in the back and let him suffer. that was TOTALLY unjustifiable.. he was a loose cannon, and locals knew it.. well, they know for sure now, unfortunately.
#22
03-18-2008, 09:48 AM
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 12,584
RE: this is very sad.
ORIGINAL: kx slaughter king
oh, i thought it was like those portable turrets some really screwy ppl have.
and no, i havent. i havent even driven since, parents orders
oh, i thought it was like those portable turrets some really screwy ppl have.
and no, i havent. i havent even driven since, parents orders
#23
12-02-2008, 03:30 AM
Justice served!
ALMOST started a new thread for this cause I couldn't find the thread...
---
Ok - I looked around for the thread - I know we had a LONG discussion about the guy on a bike who was following a chick home - she called her dad on the phone, and he met them out front of the house with a gun and shot the biker in the back as he tried to ride away, killing him.
Anyhow... finally found it - that asshat "father" was FOUND GUILTY of MURDER.
SALUUUUUUUUUUUD!
http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/...62331753.shtml
---
Ok - I looked around for the thread - I know we had a LONG discussion about the guy on a bike who was following a chick home - she called her dad on the phone, and he met them out front of the house with a gun and shot the biker in the back as he tried to ride away, killing him.
Anyhow... finally found it - that asshat "father" was FOUND GUILTY of MURDER.
SALUUUUUUUUUUUD!
http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/...62331753.shtml
#25
12-02-2008, 10:08 AM
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: ROLL TIDE ROLL!!!! ALABAMA #1 SEC CHAMPIONS!!
Posts: 1,327
Even after Gear fired two warning shots at the passing biker, Tolley argued, Mough turned around and drove straight at Gear, who jumped backward and fired a third time, killing Mough.
A father in an attempt to safeguard his family, is forced to shoot and kill a man after the motorcyclist engaged in reckless endangerment by charging the father with his vehicle. A vehicle used in this purpose as defined by the law is considered a deadly weapon because it was used with the intent to cause harm.
So now, instead of us having the female driver of the car issued a citation and having to make an insurance claim, we have a motorcyclist who lost his life and a father that will not be able to be with his family for 28 years.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how they got murder out of this situation. The father was threatned by the man on the motorcycle charging him. I would have shot at a **** if he would have came at me like that too. That is called safeguarding your life. The fact of the matter is, proper procedure was not followed here and it was ignorance on the girls and the motorcyclist parts that caused this crap to happen. Lame...
#26
12-02-2008, 01:14 PM
I think you need to re-read the entire article, and the others associated with it.
The father first fired twice at the bike, un-provoked, as it passed on the street, off the property, and with the father standing in the front yard. It wasn't until the bike returned, at which time the father placed himself in the middle of the street, in the path of the oncoming vehicle that the terminal shot was fired.
Last time I checked - a bike going up and down the street does not generally pose a threat to someone standing in their front yard - certainly not to the point to warrant the discharge of a firearm AT them. Further - a person walking into the middle of a street, brandishing a firearm while standing in obstruction of traffic does not constitute grounds for discharging the gun either. They put themselves in harms way - and at that point it could easily be taken that the biker was acting in self-defense in attempting to run down some fool standing in front of him waving a gun around and pointing it at him.
If someone took a couple shots at me like that and I wasn't strapped, or was pointing a gun at me or waving it around in the middle of the street - you better damn well believe I would try my damnedest to run his *** down as he poses an immediate danger to myself and anyone else around, and it would be considered self defense. As a police officer - I would not have waited until AFTER someone discharged a weapon at me to fire at them. If someone points a gun at me - that is all the grounds necessary to defend myself and eliminate the threat - and it is all the grounds you need too.
The father could have easily remained in his yard, NOT discharging his gun, and ushering his daughter into the house while calling the police (which is also what the girl should have done instead of calling her dad), and maintaining a watchful eye - with or without gun.
While the biker MIGHT have been wrong in following her home (might because we dont know why he was following her - quite possible that SHE collided with him and then refused to stop as I have seen many scared, young drivers do - which makes it felony LSA for her), it in no way constituted the resultant death. The father had already pre-disposed himself by already firing the first two shots at the passing biker by his own choice, thus making it pre-meditated. That act is mostly what built the foundation for murder (an act which must be pre-meditated, unlike manslaughter).
The father first fired twice at the bike, un-provoked, as it passed on the street, off the property, and with the father standing in the front yard. It wasn't until the bike returned, at which time the father placed himself in the middle of the street, in the path of the oncoming vehicle that the terminal shot was fired.
Last time I checked - a bike going up and down the street does not generally pose a threat to someone standing in their front yard - certainly not to the point to warrant the discharge of a firearm AT them. Further - a person walking into the middle of a street, brandishing a firearm while standing in obstruction of traffic does not constitute grounds for discharging the gun either. They put themselves in harms way - and at that point it could easily be taken that the biker was acting in self-defense in attempting to run down some fool standing in front of him waving a gun around and pointing it at him.
If someone took a couple shots at me like that and I wasn't strapped, or was pointing a gun at me or waving it around in the middle of the street - you better damn well believe I would try my damnedest to run his *** down as he poses an immediate danger to myself and anyone else around, and it would be considered self defense. As a police officer - I would not have waited until AFTER someone discharged a weapon at me to fire at them. If someone points a gun at me - that is all the grounds necessary to defend myself and eliminate the threat - and it is all the grounds you need too.
The father could have easily remained in his yard, NOT discharging his gun, and ushering his daughter into the house while calling the police (which is also what the girl should have done instead of calling her dad), and maintaining a watchful eye - with or without gun.
While the biker MIGHT have been wrong in following her home (might because we dont know why he was following her - quite possible that SHE collided with him and then refused to stop as I have seen many scared, young drivers do - which makes it felony LSA for her), it in no way constituted the resultant death. The father had already pre-disposed himself by already firing the first two shots at the passing biker by his own choice, thus making it pre-meditated. That act is mostly what built the foundation for murder (an act which must be pre-meditated, unlike manslaughter).
Last edited by srobak; 12-02-2008 at 01:17 PM.
#29
12-02-2008, 01:25 PM
Problem is, if you keep a gun and are prepared to use it you must assume that other people do the same. Motorcyclists are scary people in their helmets and leathers. Maybe this biker was carrying a concealed gun? Why else would you need oneyourself? Doesn't matter if he did or not, it's the fear that matters and gun owners have lots of fear. Fear is the enemy of being rational.
Rob
Rob
#30
12-02-2008, 01:50 PM
no he did not have a gun in his jacket, the cops would of put that in the report.
Problem is, if you keep a gun and are prepared to use it you must assume that other people do the same. Motorcyclists are scary people in their helmets and leathers. Maybe this biker was carrying a concealed gun? Why else would you need oneyourself? Doesn't matter if he did or not, it's the fear that matters and gun owners have lots of fear. Fear is the enemy of being rational.
Rob
Rob
Last edited by hoedogg; 12-02-2008 at 02:44 PM.