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

reply to post by SlowlyLonely


You do know more than one person got shot right what of the others? Show me in the video where they attacked him? Or anyone for that matter.

This guy just wanted to go on a shooting spree and was looking for a excuse to do it. I really hope people arent so short sighted as to want this behavior to take precedence in society.

I bet you anything this guy gets sent up the river... You will see.

reply to post by nenothtu


From what is shown in the video - he did not start the fight.
Can you tell me where exactly he started a fight? Which video and frame please.
-----
Abduction or being chased on to the property...blah blah blah – that's irrelevant.
-----
The location and the reason he shot are the few things that do matter. And he did not throw rocks or taunt them with name calling as you are asserting. He told them to turn down the volume and then stood his ground on public property.
-----
If you said you were a lawyer then I might be a little impressed. The fact that you are certified means very little to me after having seen countless videos of leo who do not follow the law because they do not understand it correctly.
-----
You did misunderstand and please don't come back saying he broke a twig so he is liable for trespass. We both know what I meant.
-----
He did not instigate anything but having them turn down the volume of their music. And he did not try to force them to turn down their music, that is what he called the police to do. He did try to force them to back up though and was justifiable.
-----
From the looks of the video the man only wanted to stand his ground and he did not want to be forced to defend himself. I think you are projecting your own desires on to this man. He was clearly stressed and did not want to backdown but I think being kept up all night by obnoxious neighbors would cause that.

sounds alot more like premeditated murder ...

what a senseless and stupid reason to take the life of another human being over... never a justification for taking the life of another...

reply to post by ker2010


At least one person rushed the shooter at the end of the video. You can hear the person's footsteps. Also, you can hear the person make maniacal noises. I've read nothing about the others who were shot, so I won't comment on that.

In my opinion, the man had the gun in order to feel confident about approaching a group of noisy drunks. If he wanted to go on a "shooting spree," he would have fired when the man initially refused his warnings to stop advancing.

The shooter may well go to prison, and perhaps he should. However, I have no sympathy for a cantankerous drunk who blares music at night, and gets shot because he rushes a man who threatens to shoot him.

Darwin Award, anyone?

maybe the foot steps you heard were running away

reply to post by Skewed

Just for the sake of clarification, the teacher who was killed, Kelly Danaher, was a male. Not that it makes much of a difference though.

In Texas, the weapon is to be concealed. People can't walk around old west style. If he had a habit of letting people see he carried, it should have been when he was on his property, not in public.

A business or property owner can exclude permitted persons from carrying on their property. I guess I should put up a sign up at my place in case anyone comes to visit.

This guy knew exactly what buzzwords to shout out when he had the 911 operator on the phone, before he murdered the teacher standing in his own driveway. He basically "framed" him for his own murder.

This is exactly what's wrong with "stand your ground" laws, there are NUTS like this who will use the law to get away with murder and present it as self-defense. Just like the Zimmerman case, the shooters were the aggressors who would later claim "self-defense".

A grade-school teacher shot dead in her own driveway. The backers of "stand your ground" laws like ALEC have blood on their hands. Too bad they don't have a conscience.


Edited to correct gender of teacher!

YOU GOT TO BE F#&$ING S&@*ING ME

1st off throw that 911 operator and the shooter in jail ASAP!
2nd CHANGE THE DAMN LAW to SHOOT TO MAIM, NOT TO KILL ( ARE WE REALLY THIS IDIOTIC? )
3rd Stop saying he was warned, he was prolly in shock, cuz he was threatened with life because this guy thinks he owns the right to quiet, go fight the same dispute with the millions of other things that make noise and you can't do jack about it.

Stand your ground, I believe in it, but not to kill, to operate a firearm, and use it should mean you are skilled with it. Meaning you can choose to kill or maim a target, this being the case, if you kill said target without justifiable reason ( meaning that target had a weapon, not an attitude, a weapon, an a deadly one at that )

If this is how we want to live, we all need to just end our lives now, since there is no hope then.
Life anyone's Life is more valuable than your opinion, relaxation, and mindset of that day.

PRETTY MUCH BOILS DOWN TO, THE WORLD DOESN"T REVOLVE AROUND YOU, BE A BE BOY/GIRL.

Originally posted by Macabe
This guy knew exactly what buzzwords to shout out when he had the 911 operator on the phone, before he murdered the woman standing in her own driveway. He basically "framed" her for her own murder.

This is exactly what's wrong with "stand your ground" laws, there are NUTS like this who will use the law to get away with murder and present it as self-defense. Just like the Zimmerman case, the shooters were the aggressors who would later claim "self-defense".

A grade-school teacher shot dead in her own driveway. The backers of "stand your ground" laws like ALEC have blood on their hands. Too bad they don't have a conscience.

holy crap how many times does it need to be pointed out? The deceased was not female, Kelly was a man. The shooter was NOT on Kelly's property, he was in the street, which is public property. When the shooter said " i am not talking to you " that was him effectively and legally, attempting to leave the confrontation. The deceased kept the confrontation going and acted aggressively. The single fact that the shooter had a gun on him does not create a crime. He was not trespassing, he was not what some poster tried to fabricate " trespassing with the intent to go armed" what the frack is that? does that mean he was trespassing and he really really wanted (intended) to be armed but was not ? There is no such crime i have ever heard of. The shooter was well within the law to be carrying his firearm. He was also within the law to request the neighbor to turn down his music, and he was also within the law to document it. I know i know, why would i bring those pesky little facts to the discussion

Originally posted by Bleeeeep
reply to post by nenothtu

 

From what is shown in the video - he did not start the fight.
Can you tell me where exactly he started a fight? Which video and frame please.
-----

When he left his house and went to confront a bunch of rowdy drunks with a gun.

Abduction or being chased on to the property...blah blah blah – that's irrelevant.
-----

Use that in court and see how far it gets you.

The location and the reason he shot are the few things that do matter.

The reason he shot is because he got confrontational with drunks. He placed himself in that precarious position, and cannot plead that they came to him. He was not defending anything, he was aggressing. The very fact that he was there to begin with demonstrates that.

And he did not throw rocks or taunt them with name calling as you are asserting. He told them to turn down the volume and then stood his ground on public property.

The principle is the same. Confrontation is confrontation.

-----
If you said you were a lawyer then I might be a little impressed. The fact that you are certified means very little to me after having seen countless videos of leo who do not follow the law because they do not understand it correctly.

I gathered that it means little to you, as does the law in general. When you can point to any disciplinary action against me for misinterpreting the law, THEN you can question my understanding of the law. I gave you my qualifications in that understanding, but have yet to see your superior ones.

You did misunderstand and please don't come back saying he broke a twig so he is liable for trespass. We both know what I meant.

What do twigs have to do with it? Do you mean straw-sized twigs, like the ones you are grasping at? I don't know what you meant beyond what you actually SAID. I'm not a mind reader. I've already explained what constitutes trespass. twigs did not enter into it.

He did not instigate anything but having them turn down the volume of their music. And he did not try to force them to turn down their music, that is what he called the police to do. He did try to force them to back up though and was justifiable.

he took a gun to confront drunk partiers, then refused to de-escalate and retreat, even though he failed to meet the elements for SYG law in Texas, as I've already pointed out, then shot 3 people. What constitutes force in your world?

From the looks of the video the man only wanted to stand his ground and he did not want to be forced to defend himself. I think you are projecting your own desires on to this man. He was clearly stressed and did not want to backdown but I think being kept up all night by obnoxious neighbors would cause that.

Fine. Let's see how that argument plays out against the actual law in court. If he hadn't wanted "to be forced to defend himself" he wouldn't have gone over there loaded for bear and looking for trouble.

To what "desires" are you referring?

Originally posted by Expat888
sounds alot more like premeditated murder ...

what a senseless and stupid reason to take the life of another human being over... never a justification for taking the life of another...

There most certainly ARE justifications for killing. Intentionally and needlessly placing yourself between a rock and a hard place,and then shooting your way out is not one of them.

reply to post by Macabe


There;s nothing wrong with SYG laws. What's wrong is in people misapplication of them, thinking they are get out of jail free cards for settling scores. We'll see how this one plays out, and I'll bet dollars against donuts that the shooter doesn't get out of jail free. he ignored what the law says, and is now trying to use it as a justification.

reply to post by Hessling


The TeaBag gun culture ... putting guns in the hands of drooling morons for years now.

Repeal the Second Amendment.

Originally posted by Moneyisgodlifeisrented

2nd CHANGE THE DAMN LAW to SHOOT TO MAIM, NOT TO KILL ( ARE WE REALLY THIS IDIOTIC? )

Shooting to maim is asking for trouble, and inhumane on top of that. If you're justified in shooting at all, you're justified in shooting to kill. Otherwise, better leave it alone.

Dead men tell no tales. When it's your word against his, and he ain't talking, your word takes it. Unfortunately for Rodriguez, his plan went wrong. The dead man IS talking.

On Rodriguez's trophy tape.

Originally posted by SM2

He was not trespassing, he was not what some poster tried to fabricate " trespassing with the intent to go armed" what the frack is that?

A felony.

does that mean he was trespassing and he really really wanted (intended) to be armed but was not ? There is no such crime i have ever heard of.

The full working title is "Intent to go armed to the terror of the public". Look it up.

Anybody who argues against SYG legislation doesn't want people to defend themselves.

It's a sad state in any country where you are not allowed to defend yourself when someone's hurting you and attacking you.

if it was country or rap music they were blaring then i would have shot the # out of them too.

Are you guys joking? Did you not watch the video?

The man has every right to carry a gun, and he has every right to nicely ask neighbors to quiet down. Asking your neighbors a reasonable and polite request should not be considered instigating a fight. When the people who pulled up in a truck approached him threateningly, he did the right thing. He didn't shoot them. He warned them to stay back several times, told them he will use his weapon if he has to. They then threaten him by saying they are going to go and get guns. Then someone rushes the guy! And you're trying to tell me this guy is abusing his rights by shooting someone who is attacking him??

This guy is not the problem. You people are. All of you people on the side of the idiots who attacked this man.

Let me play the devil's advocate for a moment. He knew these guys had been partying and were possibly intoxicated. I don't believe he went over there with the intention of shoot someon The article says he had a permit for a concealed weapon so he was probably taught to document and collect evidence as much as possible. Just in case. Plus,


how he hold all that stuff
truck pulled up at the house