RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!!

RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Hillwilliam -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 5:36:40 AM)
You brought up an interesting point chatterbox. I've seen that in this part of the country as well. I wonder if the landowner was a long time resident or a 'transplant'. It doesn't affect the case legally in any way at all but it might explain the attitude.

chatterbox24 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 5:40:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam You brought up an interesting point chatterbox. I've seen that in this part of the country as well. I wonder if the landowner was a long time resident or a 'transplant'. It doesn't affect the case legally in any way at all but it might explain the attitude. All the neighbors in the area who own quite a bit of land, these lands had been in the same families for generations, same as the land we sold. The buyer was a transplant.

eulero83 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 9:04:50 AM)
I just can't understand who is more insane, if the floaters that spent more than one second arguing with the creepy guy with a gun, or the "drop the stone or I shoot your friend" man. You must have a lot of mild driving collisions that end in a bad fight there.

BamaD -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 9:38:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Crocker told police the shooting came as the culmination of a dispute over whether the group was trespassing or not, and he fired after a man approached him with rocks in his hands. Paul Dart wasn’t the one with the rocks. “I just shot the one closest to me,” Crocker said, according to police. ....... Then, Loretta Dart said, her cousin picked up a rock. (Crocker told police the man had a rock in each hand.) Her husband stood between her cousin and the gunman. “My husband tried to calm the guy down,” Loretta Dart said. “He went to the guy’s arm to try to stop him, but the guy jerked back and popped him in the face.” I would be shocked if a former ranger (according to his son) believed that going for Crocker's arm was going to "calm things down".

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 9:40:19 AM)
Is that all the rebuttal you have? Crocker showed up, brandished the weapon and fired it twice before the fatal confrontation. The people were on an area where there are easement rights for the public, so they had legal access. Castle Doctrine will not play since the people had legal access. Self defense will not play since he confronted them and assaulted them first. The guy is toast and there is no dream sequence here. quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 By 'appearing'? In a puff of smoke? ROTFLMAO!!! Dream on.

tazzygirl -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 9:44:53 AM)
quote: I would be shocked if a former ranger (according to his son) believed that going for Crocker's arm was going to "calm things down". Might want to read that again for a better understanding of what the woman said, instead of reading what you want to read.

BamaD -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 9:56:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf Is that all the rebuttal you have? Crocker showed up, brandished the weapon and fired it twice before the fatal confrontation. The people were on an area where there are easement rights for the public, so they had legal access. Castle Doctrine will not play since the people had legal access. Self defense will not play since he confronted them and assaulted them first. The guy is toast and there is no dream sequence here. quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 By 'appearing'? In a puff of smoke? ROTFLMAO!!! Dream on. NOT A RESPONSE TO ANYONE A couple of things to think about. 1 How did he know they were there? 2 That part of the river was being occupied by so many "partiers " being drunk and disorderly that some of the neighbors couldn't go to the river on their own property, 3 The warning shots can be seen and will be portrayed as a desire to avoid shooting anyone. 4 A ex ranger would know that swiping the gun aside would escalate things, not calm them down. 5 When the "experts" say that it is often hard to see were the public area end you can't expect a backwoods farmer to make that judgment in the heat of the moment. 6 How much alcohol had the floaters consumed? I AM NOT SAYING INNOCENT JUST POINTING OUT MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH MAY VERY WELL LEAD TO MANSLAUGHTER NOT MURDER

Powergamz1 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 9:58:58 AM)
That has nothing to do with my post. I was responding to the claim that simply walking around removes the right to self defense because it is 'aggression'. That was debunked in the Zimmerman trial, and it is equally untrue here. Shooting at people is an entirely different matter but simply 'appearing' on your own property isn't an assault. quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf Is that all the rebuttal you have? Crocker showed up, brandished the weapon and fired it twice before the fatal confrontation. The people were on an area where there are easement rights for the public, so they had legal access. Castle Doctrine will not play since the people had legal access. Self defense will not play since he confronted them and assaulted them first. The guy is toast and there is no dream sequence here. quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 By 'appearing'? In a puff of smoke? ROTFLMAO!!! Dream on.

BamaD -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 10:00:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: I would be shocked if a former ranger (according to his son) believed that going for Crocker's arm was going to "calm things down". Might want to read that again for a better understanding of what the woman said, instead of reading what you want to read. My husband tried to calm the guy down,” Loretta Dart said. “He went to the guy’s arm to try to stop him, but the guy jerked back and popped him in the face.” Nope just what I thought she said. His son said, apparently in another article that you haven't seen, that he was a former ranger. So yep my statement was accurate.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 10:01:56 AM)
Didn't you just say that a history of property problems justified shooting someone in the back, after chasing them down the road and off your land? Maybe this guy had been putting up with the locals using his land as a party dump for a while. quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam You brought up an interesting point chatterbox. I've seen that in this part of the country as well. I wonder if the landowner was a long time resident or a 'transplant'. It doesn't affect the case legally in any way at all but it might explain the attitude. All the neighbors in the area who own quite a bit of land, these lands had been in the same families for generations, same as the land we sold. The buyer was a transplant.

tazzygirl -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 10:08:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: I would be shocked if a former ranger (according to his son) believed that going for Crocker's arm was going to "calm things down". Might want to read that again for a better understanding of what the woman said, instead of reading what you want to read. My husband tried to calm the guy down,” Loretta Dart said. “He went to the guy’s arm to try to stop him, but the guy jerked back and popped him in the face.” Nope just what I thought she said. His son said, apparently in another article that you haven't seen, that he was a former ranger. So yep my statement was accurate. Try again.

papassion -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 10:42:54 AM)
This whole thing got started by urinating in public, which I think is illegal. Not to mention indecent exposure. If a guy is drunk enough to try to take on a gunman, who knows what would happen if the drunk did get the gun? Would it be reasonable to assume he was impaired, and pissed enough to shoot the farmer?

mnottertail -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 10:43:27 AM)
hardly public.

tazzygirl -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 10:52:42 AM)
quote: Would it be reasonable to assume he was impaired, and pissed enough to shoot the farmer? Shoot the farmer with what?

DomKen -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 11:13:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion This whole thing got started by urinating in public, which I think is illegal. Not to mention indecent exposure. If a guy is drunk enough to try to take on a gunman, who knows what would happen if the drunk did get the gun? Would it be reasonable to assume he was impaired, and pissed enough to shoot the farmer? No. The guy went into the woods which shows intent not to indecently expose himself or urinate in public. The crazy shithead murderer then attacked his party with a deadly weapon. They certainly had a right to defend themselves or Zimmerman didn't.

mnottertail -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 11:22:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Would it be reasonable to assume he was impaired, and pissed enough to shoot the farmer? Shoot the farmer with what? A stream of piss, it would seem. Do we know if the penis was big enough to be considered a deadly weapon? Was it described as a sealclubber, as mine is?

tazzygirl -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 12:49:36 PM)
Oh no! Nothing could compare to yours! ~do I get that shiny piece of metal now?

BamaD -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 12:55:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: I would be shocked if a former ranger (according to his son) believed that going for Crocker's arm was going to "calm things down". Might want to read that again for a better understanding of what the woman said, instead of reading what you want to read. My husband tried to calm the guy down,” Loretta Dart said. “He went to the guy’s arm to try to stop him, but the guy jerked back and popped him in the face.” Nope just what I thought she said. His son said, apparently in another article that you haven't seen, that he was a former ranger. So yep my statement was accurate. Try again. Surely you are not trying to say that going for his arm will calm things down or that a former ranger is so out of touch as to think it will.

tazzygirl -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 1:17:49 PM)
She never said he was going "for" his arm.... or are you not wanting to see that? I can go to someone's side, and not be attacking them... I can go for someone's side and be attacking.

chatterbox24 -> RE: Stand your ground in Missouri OH NO!!! (7/26/2013 1:19:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Didn't you just say that a history of property problems justified shooting someone in the back, after chasing them down the road and off your land? Maybe this guy had been putting up with the locals using his land as a party dump for a while. quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam You brought up an interesting point chatterbox. I've seen that in this part of the country as well. I wonder if the landowner was a long time resident or a 'transplant'. It doesn't affect the case legally in any way at all but it might explain the attitude. All the neighbors in the area who own quite a bit of land, these lands had been in the same families for generations, same as the land we sold. The buyer was a transplant. That is not what I said. You have no idea what you are talking about at all. Its prime well taken care of property. Would you like to go hunting and see? [:D] I think I will leave you to debate with yourself now.

Page: << < prev 12 13 [14] 15 16 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875