Stand Your Ground? Texas man kills teacher over noise complaint.

While I do believe in the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution, the legalese behind the "Stand Your Ground" laws have potential abuse written all over them. What happened in Texas might be just such a case:

A Texas man says he was justified in killing an elementary school teacher over a noise complaint because he was “standing my ground.”

Now the details get rather fuzzy. First from the defendants perspective:

Retired firefighter Raul Rodriguez is hoping that a video that he taped himself will prove that he was acting in self-defense when he gunned down P.E. teacher Kelly Danaher outside the victim’s home near Houston in May 2010.

On the video that was presented as evidence in court on Wednesday, loud music can be heard as Rodriguez tells Danaher to “turn it down.”

“You need to stop right there,” Rodriguez says. “Don’t come any closer please. I’m telling you, I’m telling you, stop, I said stop right now or I will shoot you! … I fear for my life. I told you to stop, my life’s in danger, you got weapons on you, stay away from me.”

While standing in Danaher’s driveway with a flashlight and a gun, Rodriguez is also on the phone with a 911 dispatcher using the buzzwords he learned in concealed weapons class, according to the prosecutor.

Okay, now he was on with the 911 dispatcher and he did warn the victim not to come any closer or else he would take action.

However, this is over a "noise complaint". That seems a bit overly dramatic. However it gets fuzzier. From the other perspective:

“This is a difficult defense to mount,” legal analyst Dana Cole told ABC News. “He had no injury, he brought a gun to a noise complaint, and it appeared he was escalating it by baiting the party-goers.”

KHOU legal expert Gerald Treece also questioned the suspect’s motive.

“Nobody’s hold your own ground, or stand your own ground laws are ever on the side of the person who started the fight,” Treece said.

Stand Your Ground? Texas man kills teacher over noise complaint

This is a seriously messed up situation that left a person dead.

What gets my goat about this is how Mr. Rodgriguez almost seemed to take aggressive action knowing he could fall back on the "Stand Your Ground" law.

I realize this is just my opinion, but please note the following (I'm going to use a comment left at the link above as the user summed it up so well to me)...

How can this guy have a case? He goes over to the neighbor's house with a gun, a camera, and a phone while talking to police dispatcher. He INSTIGATES a confrontation with unarmed people instead of leaving this nonemergency, nonthreatening case to the police all because he can't stand the noise and he's too impatient to let trained professionals handle it.

Seriously. I cannot see how this could possibly be justified. Mr. Rodgriguez from the information I can get seemed to be clearly egging on a confrontation. And he went head-first into the situation with dire results.

So what do you folks think?

One last note, is the eerie prediction made by a Texas lawmaker after the Trayvon Martin shooting:

In the wake of the killing of Florida teen Trayvon Martin earlier this year, state Rep. Garnet Coleman (D) warned that the same type of situation was possible in Texas.

“It can happen here,” Coleman pointed out. “The law is the same – the law that protects the guy that shot Trayvon.”

ETA: Video found at the end of the source.

reply to post by Hessling


I think this is where I think our system fails. What needs to happen is some serious education. I am all for stand your ground, I think overall the idea is a positive one with great benefit to the populace. But we must take into account the hot heads out there. When laws such as these are in effect, the people must be educated about it and what it really means.

Proper education fixes the majority of problems, not money or more laws.

Okay, now he was on with the 911 dispatcher and he did warn the victim not to come any closer or else he would take action.

Well he did say don't come near me or I'll defend myself...So he was warned, If the guy was acting with violence, and the shooter felt he was in danger, then the stand you ground law is legal.

If you were to come at me with violence and rage, you better bet I'll do what I deem necessary to end the conflict

But on the other hand...Why can't people just duke it out and at the end of the day go home bruised but still alive. Some people are just to quick to pick up a gun vs just taking a butt kicking. Must be a pride thing

guns are ment to be equalizers
not chicken wings


( i have while unarmed, taken guns form more then one operson who pulled them in my bar - i done my duty)

reply to post by Hessling
Yeah...further review is called for, but just with this little bit I hope they throw the book at him as this seems to be blatant abuse and misapplication of the law.

He was on the victim's property (where lawfully he shouldn't be unless invited, I believe - regardless...), which isn't his ground.

Additionally - exactly why did he "fear for his life"? Sounds to me like he was just waiting for an excuse to kill this neighbor, or otherwise try to set up some way where he could legally put himself in a situation to kill someone.

I can see no justification here.

This may be a false flag set up too
Imagine now all the teachers will be screaming disarm disarm disarm to all the kids now
You know how teachers are
It really does play into the hands of the opponents to guns and the stand your ground law
and it is their common tactic to do murder to advance their agenda

reply to post by mytheroy


Was it determined that the lady did indeed have a weapon? If not, I do not see how the man could be threatened by an unarmed lady. Surely, being a decent sized guy, that if the unarmed woman approached him aggressively he could have simply just bitch slapped her to stop her at the least, no need to end her life.

But to me, in this case he went looking for trouble and should have consequences.

How can he stand his ground on the victim's property? Seems the victim should have had the stand your ground rights, he was the threat.
Why not just call the cops and report a disturbance and let them handle it? You know they will come in SWAT style and break up the unruly party.

Stand your ground laws, when interpreted to allow idiots like this to INSTIGATE confrontation, are seriously problematic, and threaten to turn States into the wild west.

reply to post by Skewed


Then if he went in to the situation with the intent then yes SYG should not be applied and murder charges should be filed, Unless he has figured out that you can use their laws against em.

reply to post by Hessling


This guy is an idiot and a bully and should be charged with murder. He was not standing his ground for the simple fact that he was ON another person's property--with a gun and thereby a threat--where he was NOT invited.

While standing in Danaher’s driveway with a flashlight and a gun. . . Rodriguez explains to the dispatcher. “It’s about to get out of hand, sir. Please help me, now. I’m standing my ground here.” . . .

“This is a difficult defense to mount,” legal analyst Dana Cole told ABC News. “He had no injury, he brought a gun to a noise complaint, and it appeared he was escalating it by baiting the party-goers.”

"I'm standing my ground here." If he was so fearful of his life he would not be standing there in that drive way, he would be leaving (especially if the other person is not armed). I'd LOVE to hear his tone of voice. I bet it's calm, cool, and collected, just waiting to shoot someone.

The reminds me of one country's army illegally invading another country and then saying "we have the right to stay and defend ourselves--by killing people--because we are standing our ground. And they are trying to hurt us."

No rational basis for any of it. This guy needs to go down.

From the video I think I'd have to side with the defendant.

I'm surrounded by rednecks and hicks and have had to make my share of 3AM "please keep it down" visits.

Im always carrying and if somebody and their buddies started coming not just towards me but around me like that I would be pretty freaked out too.

Parties often involve alcohol and drunk people are unpredictable.

His request to keep it down wasnt asking for a confrontation. The partiers coming up and surrounding him was.

The video didnt actually show at what point the shooting took place though. So without that I cant be certain of my opinion.

reply to post by stanguilles7
I've got to consider that a non-issue, as long as the courts handle the cases appropriately. Unless everyone doing something stupid and then killing someone is rubber-stamped by the courts with no critical review - highly unlikely, given what we've seen so far - I don't think we'll have to worry about a rash of people using this loosely.

Just because your state has a law stating you are allowed to *defend* yourself with lethal force instead of being held liable for running away does not mean people will want to go to prison for murder any more than they did beforehand.

reply to post by Hessling


I agree, not a "stand your ground" situation. You have no "stand your ground" rights on someone else's property. The property owner had every right to walk toward this guy and forcibly remove him from their driveway.

The fact that it was originally a noise complaint has little bearing, because once it escalates to violence, that is the important aspect, but he never had the right to trespass on someone else's private property, with his gun, and threaten them.

The problem here is that the teacher didn't have a gun. She should have shot him first, and we would all be better off.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere
We'll have to disagree on this one. Watching the video, he had already told them to turn it down, he wasn't surrounded during most - if any? - of the video (they were all gathered about 20 feet or so in front of him), and he had no reason to stick around other than to argue or instigate.

I can't see the defense winning this one, nor do I think they should.

reply to post by Hessling


The misuse of items to harm other people happens everyday. This is not a good reason to ban guns, it is the person's fault, not the item's.

I know the original poster wasn't talking about banning guns, but I'm just stating my opinion just in case someone thinks that this would be a valid reason to do so.

Originally posted by Hessling

While standing in Danaher’s driveway with a flashlight and a gun, Rodriguez is also on the phone with a 911 dispatcher using the buzzwords he learned in concealed weapons class, according to the prosecutor.

Bolding by myself.

First: How the HELL can you stand in someone's driveway with a flashlight and a gun and then claim self defense?

Okay, now he was on with the 911 dispatcher and he did warn the victim not to come any closer or else he would take action.

He was in HER driveway. Not his own. Or even his own property. He was on HER property. If anyone can claim "stand your ground" it would be HER.

He is in the wrong. You can't go to someone else's property and then claim you were standing YOUR ground on THEIR ground.

Originally posted by mytheroy
If you were to come at me with violence and rage, you better bet I'll do what I deem necessary to end the conflict

And you would be in the wrong while on MY property.

reply to post by Praetorius


Sticking around was stupid. At least he should have removed himself to the street to wait for the police.

The article says he was in the driveway but the text in the video has people saying he was standing in the street.

Once he pulled the gun though he's pretty much locked to the location. He cant just brandish and flee. That in itself would open up a whole 'nother can of worms.

I thought I saw a few of them circle left in the video. I could be mistaken. It's a crappy video and he keeps moving the camera.

I'd still like to see the point when the trigger is pulled. Kelly could have made some movement. Cops always say it only takes an instant to close 20 feet.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Come to my driveway and point a gun at me and I WILL stand MY ground.

They had every right to surround someone tresspassing on their property univited with a gun. Period.