TexasCHLforum.com

barstoolguru wrote:

Will you make a written promise here on the forum to never call a lawyer should you be involved in a shooting incident?

They made us many promises, more than I can remember, but they kept only one; they promised to take our land, and they did
~red cloud

barstoolguru wrote:

§ 545.401. RECKLESS DRIVING; OFFENSE. (a) A person
commits an offense if the person drives a vehicle in wilful or
wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property

your right; her driving down the road taking turns cutting each other off is normal every day driving. What was wrong with me to think that they were endangering everyone around them with their little road rage stunt. And while all this is going on I bet they used their blinkers too

What info do you have showing her actions were "wilful " or "wanton " the LEO did not?

Scott, 23, told deputies she and Ables had been cutting each other off.

Was there someone else driving her car? Last time I checked it took two to have an accident. SHE rear ended someone. We call that failure to control your vehicle. all she had to do was let him go but she chose to fight because SHE HAD A GUN AND NO ONE WAS GOING TO PUSH HER AROUND

smoothoperator wrote:

barstoolguru wrote:Now correct me if I am wrong but the law says you can't claim self-defense if you instigate or antagonize another

PC §9.31. SELF-DEFENSE.
(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity,

That's right. If you provoke the fight you lose the justification of self defense.

barstoolguru wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:Barstoolguru, your attempt to discredit this woman's defending herself appears to me to be patterned after the same style of attacks that the antis perpetrate against anyone who defends themself with a firearm. What is your real issue with this lady? Please come clean. If your issue is that she acted counter to what you would have done, please state clearly what your rules of engagement are in these exact circumstances. Be sure and not let any actual facts of this shooting get in the way since you obviously have a significantly better understanding of what actually happened than anyone else.

Anygunanywhere

It’s not a matter of discrediting the woman to defend herself, but the mere fact that a man lost his life because "SHE" though her life was in danger; so the question is was it really? The LAWYER said he broke the window. Tempered glass is hard to break with your fist just pounding on it and it would have been pushed in with the tint holding it together. Another fact is no one at a gas station heard or seen anything. She rear ended him and then for some reason drove off. I bet the guy was hopping mad and scared her but was that reason enough to shoot and kill someone. He never made entry into the car, she never got even a scratch. There was still a barrier between them and she could have drove off but instead because she had a gun she chose a different way to end it.
So is this the way thing should be handled every time someone gets scared? A man and woman have a heated verbal conversation and she gets scared and shoots him is the way to settle disputes?

how tough is tempered glass...." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;