• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

An armed society is a polite society. Well..

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
WelshBloke said:
That was a public right of way and they were blocking him from moving that mattress. That's what it was about wasn't it?
Click to expand...

You should read the article. This is from the article.

"Howard then told Miller to put the mattress back into the dumpster. Miller refused, then added some foul language."

Apparently, Howard had put the mattress into the dumpster, and Miller took it out. Howard put it back in, and Miller took it out again the next day. Howard then tells Miller to put it back in and that is the day the shooting happens.

"Howard, who is unarmed, receives a baseball bat from his brother, though he does not use it, according to Box." The guy shot had a baseball bat in his hand, and then came closer to the guy with the gun after the guy with the gun told him not to come closer. Guy with the baseball bat repeatedly said he was going to kill the guy with the gun.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...amera-gunning-killing-neighbor-row-trash.html
 
realibrad said:
You should read the article. This is from the article.

"Howard then told Miller to put the mattress back into the dumpster. Miller refused, then added some foul language."

Apparently, Howard had put the mattress into the dumpster, and Miller took it out. Howard put it back in, and Miller took it out again the next day. Howard then tells Miller to put it back in and that is the day the shooting happens.

"Howard, who is unarmed, receives a baseball bat from his brother, though he does not use it, according to Box." The guy shot had a baseball bat in his hand, and then came closer to the guy with the gun after the guy with the gun told him not to come closer. Guy with the baseball bat repeatedly said he was going to kill the guy with the gun.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...amera-gunning-killing-neighbor-row-trash.html
Click to expand...
So why are the guys with the guns there? Why haven't they just walked off? The shot guy isn't stopping them from doing anything or going anywhere.
 
WelshBloke said:
So why are the guys with the guns there? Why haven't they just walked off? The shot guy isn't stopping them from doing anything or going anywhere.
Click to expand...

Guys with the guns did not appear to be stopping them from doing anything either. That is not the issue. You mistakenly thought they were holding them and then shot them. That is wrong.

What did happen was that some idiots brought a gun to a dispute over throwing away a mattress. Another idiot takes a bat and after having threatened the guys with the guns previously moves toward them after being warned not to do so. So, you have idiots that are being idiots and then bring guns to a situation where they are not even close to being needed. Guy who was shot loses his shit and gets super angry and aggressive and makes an already bad situation much worse. Both sides should have done things differently. Guys with the guns definitely started the situation. The guy that got shot is the one who took the bad situation started by the guys with the guns and made it drastically worse.
 
This is a sickening shooting. Those two armed men went out with their guns to stop their neighbor from putting a mattress in a dumpster. They weren't defending there homes or selves, they were settling a neighborhood dispute with guns. You don't have the automatic right to shoot someone for coming within 3 feet of you, nor do you have the right to provoke an attack by brandishing your gun and telling someone to back up or you will shoot them.

But the utter stupidity of the guy with the baseball bat saying he was going to kill the guys with the gun is mind boggling. He told them they were dead men, begged them to point their guns at them, made all kinds of threats and had a bat in his hands while doing so. He kept screaming and yelling at them, just begging to be shot, IMHO.

The actions of the guy with the baseball bat *MIGHT* have made it self-defense *IF* he had advanced at those guys with the bat, which we can't see that because he's off camera. But the fact that those two guys got their guns and went out to pick a fight with their neighbor is the deciding factor in my mind that makes them at fault and this a very bad shooting. They created this situation that got that man killed, and I hope they are found guilty when this is all over.
 
Paladin3 said:
This is a sickening shooting. Those two armed men went out with their guns to stop their neighbor from putting a mattress in a dumpster. They weren't defending there homes or selves, they were settling a neighborhood dispute with guns. You don't have the automatic right to shoot someone for coming within 3 feet of you, nor do you have the right to provoke an attack by brandishing your gun and telling someone to back up or you will shoot them.

But the utter stupidity of the guy with the baseball bat saying he was going to kill the guys with the gun is mind boggling. He told them they were dead men, begged them to point their guns at them, made all kinds of threats and had a bat in his hands while doing so. He kept screaming and yelling at them, just begging to be shot, IMHO.

The actions of the guy with the baseball bat *MIGHT* have made it self-defense *IF* he had advanced at those guys with the bat, which we can't see that because he's off camera. But the fact that those two guys got their guns and went out to pick a fight with their neighbor is the deciding factor in my mind that makes them at fault and this a very bad shooting. They created this situation that got that man killed, and I hope they are found guilty when this is all over.
Click to expand...

I think there is a very good case for manslaughter here.
 
realibrad said:
Guys with the guns did not appear to be stopping them from doing anything either. That is not the issue. You mistakenly thought they were holding them and then shot them. That is wrong.
Click to expand...

No they are standing in a public right of way blocking people from going through and threatening to shoot those people if they move forward.

If that's legal why can't I do it on a walkway in Dallas?
 
realibrad said:
Guys with the guns did not appear to be stopping them from doing anything either. That is not the issue. You mistakenly thought they were holding them and then shot them. That is wrong.

What did happen was that some idiots brought a gun to a dispute over throwing away a mattress. Another idiot takes a bat and after having threatened the guys with the guns previously moves toward them after being warned not to do so. So, you have idiots that are being idiots and then bring guns to a situation where they are not even close to being needed. Guy who was shot loses his shit and gets super angry and aggressive and makes an already bad situation much worse. Both sides should have done things differently. Guys with the guns definitely started the situation. The guy that got shot is the one who took the bad situation started by the guys with the guns and made it drastically worse.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you are saying. Lots of bad decisions all the way around, but it still doesn't justify the shooting, IMHO. And if him advancing at those two armed men with the bat (if that actually happened) makes anyone want to lean towards it being a good, self-defense shooting, remember that the guys with the guns went out looking to pick a fight. They brought out and threatened their neighbor with their guns to settle a trash dispute, with is hella illegal.

I think you and I are in agreement that there is lots of blame on both sides, but the two armed men are criminally at fault for their initial illegal actions of bring a gun to a trash fight.
 
WelshBloke said:
No they are standing in a public right of way blocking people from going through and threatening to shoot those people if they move forward.

If that's legal why can't I do it on a walkway in Dallas?
Click to expand...

How do you figure they were blocking people from going through? The dispute was about the mattress. At not point do I see it discussed in the article or in the video about them trying to move through the alley way. What is discussed is that it was an alley way vs a driveway, but, that is different than obstruction. The guy who was shot brought it up saying he did not have a right to tell people what to do in the alley, that's all.

Why do you think they were blocking people from going through?
 
Paladin3 said:
I agree with everything you are saying. Lots of bad decisions all the way around, but it still doesn't justify the shooting, IMHO. And if him advancing at those two armed men with the bat (if that actually happened) makes anyone want to lean towards it being a good, self-defense shooting, remember that the guys with the guns went out looking to pick a fight. They brought out and threatened their neighbor with their guns to settle a trash dispute, with is hella illegal.

I think you and I are in agreement that there is lots of blame on both sides, but the two armed men are criminally at fault for their initial illegal actions of bring a gun to a trash fight.
Click to expand...

Are you from CA?
 
realibrad said:
Are you from CA?
Click to expand...
Thirty-six years in the greater Los Angeles area, then four more in the north San Francisco Bay area. My kids used to say "hella" when they were younger, "hecka" before that when they were worried about cursing. Not the dumbest regional slang I've ever heard, but it's up there.
 
WelshBloke said:
Every time the guy moved forwards they threatened to shoot him?
Click to expand...

The guy was clearly not trying to move down the alley. He was engaging the people with the gun, and eventually grabbed a bat. Is that really what lead you to believe they were trying to travel vs engage? Have you read the article yet, specifically the account from the wife?

The argument took place in an alley behind Howard’s home on Don Juan Street in Abilene, which lies 150 miles west of Fort Worth.

Authorities said the confrontation had started days before and reached a boiling point on this particular Saturday.

Box and Howard had moved next door to the Millers in April. They had never encountered them face to face until September 1.

'We had thrown out a twin mattress in a dumpster in our alley a few days before the shooting,' Box said.

'You have to have the mattress in the dumpster or they will not haul it away.'

On the morning of September 1, Box and Howard noticed that the mattress was back on their property. So they tossed it back in the dumpster.

Box said that at this point John Miller came to the alley, took the mattress out of the dumpster, and tossed it back onto her and Howard's property.

Howard then told Miller to put the mattress back into the dumpster. Miller refused, then added some foul language.
Click to expand...

Its pretty clear that Howard was never trying to move down the alley.
 
Paladin3 said:
Thirty-six years in the greater Los Angeles area, then four more in the north San Francisco Bay area. My kids used to say "hella" when they were younger, "hecka" before that when they were worried about cursing. Not the dumbest regional slang I've ever heard, but it's up there.
Click to expand...

Its one of the bad habits I dropped.
 
WelshBloke said:
Every time the guy moved forwards they threatened to shoot him?
Click to expand...
They were just thinking in their ignorant minds that giving fair warning and having the guy within their personal space would justify the shooting. Did you see how badly that old guy wanted to raise his gun and shoot? His arm kept coming up seemingly all on it own, but he never once looked frightened for a afraid for his safety. Nor did is shotgun wielding son. They both looked calm and cool, and dead set on winning a dispute over trash even if it meant killing someone. Fucking animals.

People like the two families involved in this video should have to trade their guns in for condoms and/or vasectomies.
 
realibrad said:
Its pretty clear that Howard was never trying to move down the alley.
Click to expand...

Why does it matter if he was trying to move a foot down the alley or to the end?
He has freedom of movement in that public space yes?
So how come the fat half naked guys get to block the alley and say if you walk forwards I'll kill you?
 
realibrad said:
No, that is not what I'm doing. I am telling you what will likely happen. That said, I will give you my opinion on this.

The guys who brought a gun to this are stupid and had they not I bet nobody would have been killed. That said, the guy in orange looked to be in a rage. He apparently had his kids there, wife filming and all he could do was to say he was going to kill the guys with the guns because he wanted to be tough. The old guy with the gun, while an idiot for bringing it, appeared to be the calm one of out everyone there.

So, escalating by bringing a gun, sure. Does not change the fact that the guy who was shot by far did more escalating which had he not done that I bet he would be alive. I see more onus on the guy who was shot, but, fully believe that more guns in situations like this leads to more death.
Click to expand...
Perhaps my point was lost. What I was saying is your post was stating they would get off. Irrelevant of the fact that they initiated the confrontation AND drew a firearm, apparently when no threat to themselves was present at the time. By saying you were arguing it was not the best wording. perhaps a better choice of phrasing was that you were spelling out a way for them to do this without consequence on the face of all they did to initiate it in the first place.

I’m not saying you agree with it. But the fact that anyone can state they would likely get off after they themselves started the confrontation and introduced firearms into it when there seems to be no indication it was warranted is exactly what is wrong with these laws. These fucking yahoos are doing this over and over and over.

And you are adding your own narrative about the bat. There was no bat in that video. His hands were empty. The article says nothing about him going toward the others with the bat nor does it say he had it in his hand. It says he never used it and someone else retrieved it. The video supports that.
 
Last edited:
MomentsofSanity said:
Perhaps my point was lost. What I was saying is your post was stating they would get off. Irrelevant of the fact that they initiated the confrontation AND drew a firearm, apparently when no threat to themselves was present at the time. By saying you were arguing it was not the best wording. perhaps a better choice of phrasing was that you were spelling out a way for them to do this without consequence on the face of all they did to initiate it in the first place.

I’m not saying you agree with it. But the fact that anyone can state they would likely get off after they themselves started the confrontation and introduced firearms into it when there seems to be no indication it was warranted is exactly what is wrong with these laws. These fucking yahoos are doing this over and over and over.

And you are adding your own narrative about the bat. There was no bat in that video. His hands were empty. The article says nothing about him going toward the others with the bat nor does it say he had it in his hand. It says he never used it and someone else retrieved it. The video supports that.
Click to expand...

Wrong with what laws? If you are saying the stand your ground laws are wrong because all someone has to do is claim the were in fear for their life and a shooting is automatically justified, then that is flat out wrong. The belief you are in danger, and need to shoot someone in self-defense, must be found reasonable in a court of law when held to certain legal standards and justifications. Just because some wack-job thinks in their own mind that they were justified in shooting someone does not make it so, nor does any stand your ground laws make it so. Too many anti-gunners repeat this lie to demonize stand your ground laws and I wish they would stop.

And the guy who was shot did have a bat. His fiance who did the filming admitted his brother had given it to him, and you see it come flying from off camera to hit the older guy about a second after he fires his pistol. A split second later, possibly reacting to the thrown bat, the son racks and fires his shotgun. I bet the dead guy's brother is proud he gave him that bat. IMHO, he got his brother killed.

But the two guys with guns are the ones ultimately responsible and should rightly face murder charges. They took their guns out to make sure their neighbor didn't put a mattress in the dumpster. That's illegal. I think they will have a hard time convincing a judge and jury that they just happened to be armed when the neighbor attacked them with a baseball bat and they were forced them to defend themselves.
 
MomentsofSanity said:
Perhaps my point was lost. What I was saying is your post was stating they would get off. Irrelevant of the fact that they initiated the confrontation AND drew a firearm, apparently when no threat to themselves was present at the time. By saying you were arguing it was not the best wording. perhaps a better choice of phrasing was that you were spelling out a way for them to do this without consequence on the face of all they did to initiate it in the first place.

I’m not saying you agree with it. But the fact that anyone can state they would likely get off after they themselves started the confrontation and introduced firearms into it when there seems to be no indication it was warranted is exactly what is wrong with these laws. These fucking yahoos are doing this over and over and over.

And you are adding your own narrative about the bat. There was no bat in that video. His hands were empty. The article says nothing about him going toward the others with the bat nor does it say he had it in his hand. It says he never used it and someone else retrieved it. The video supports that.
Click to expand...

First, I was talking about getting off from Murder, as that is currently what they are charged with. This, as I said before, is more likely manslaughter as they directly started the incident that lead to the death.

Second, you clearly did not read the article, as the wife said he was given a bat.

"Howard, who is unarmed, receives a baseball bat from his brother, though he does not use it, according to Box."

You cannot say he did not have the bat, as the wife clearly said he did. Further, if you go to 2:17 of the video you can clearly see something thrown just after a shot is fired. You got that wrong as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top