Man killed after bumping Metro bus passenger

[stevie_d_64]

Where do some of ya'll get that "fear of your life" stuff?

I dunno...

We need to have a class on this whole "fear" thing I suppose...

[stevie_d_64]

Here's option #3, Lucky:

3) Don't ride the bus in Houston

I think the #1 priority in self-defense is NOT carrying a firearm but keeping yourself away from locations in which you might have to use it.

Bingo!

[Lucky45]

Seeing how he walked to the back and took a seat, I would have felt comfortable just keeping on eye on him so I could point him out to the police.

That is fine. But if this guy thought it was fit to shoot someone after they brushed up against each other. I wonder what would his demeanor when you start reckless eyeballing him. Would you guys then exchange words also?

PC §9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b),
a person is justified in using force against another when and to the
degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful
force.

Would this apply since he already used deadly force and you have no idea of his intentions or mental state while your ears are ringing from the gun shot in an enclosed bus.
I know some people in here try to act as though they could sit there like nothing happened and a dead body is a few feet from them. But the human body is wired for SELF preservation. A gun shot going off in close proximity will make the adrenalin flow. If you don't have adrenalin, it might be because you replaced it with Ridillin.

PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.31;

Think we got that.
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have
retreated; and

I think they is no safe way to exit a moving bus which is crowded. Either kick down Granny to get to the door, or jump through the window into oncoming traffic.

(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly
force is immediately necessary:
Don't know if I'm next so bet your dollar it is immediately necessary.

(A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use
of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated
kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault,
robbery, or aggravated robbery.

Think the guy already demonstrated that he will use deadly force. Do you asked him if he is finished shooting so you can sit in peace?

The only grey area would be the draw because you would have to seen and heard the entire confrontation. Because if the suspect shot the victim just on verbal provocation then I would be very concerned about being in his zone. Who knows if he included "TALL PEOPLE" in argument with the victim?
Now if the victim pulled a weapon and they both drew on each other, then that would be a different story.

[stevie_d_64]

None of the other 12 passengers on the bus was hurt.

let's take a look at this. "None... was hurt."
really?
The English Language that far gone that journalists don't even have to learn it.

in that mode, I opine.

Wells, what I's be doings is duckin's mah headses as soon as thu gunses be goings offs. soundses to meh that thu suspect be puttin's thu gunses in his pantses, so's I's no see no need to be's pullin's mah gunses.
Now, if he be aimin's that thar gunses at anybody's elseseses, wells, I's maht be's inclined to be defendin's the sichy-ation.
Well's, that's a I's be doin's.

enjoy.

I'm gonna get flatter'n a flitter on the floorboards, fast.

I believe you meant to say: "flo boad"...

[ih8h8ers]

Seeing how he walked to the back and took a seat, I would have felt comfortable just keeping on eye on him so I could point him out to the police.

That is fine. But if this guy thought it was fit to shoot someone after they brushed up against each other. I wonder what would his demeanor when you start reckless eyeballing him. Would you guys then exchange words also?

PC §9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b),
a person is justified in using force against another when and to the
degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful
force.

Would this apply since he already used deadly force and you have no idea of his intentions or mental state while your ears are ringing from the gun shot in an enclosed bus.
I know some people in here try to act as though they could sit there like nothing happened and a dead body is a few feet from them. But the human body is wired for SELF preservation. A gun shot going off in close proximity will make the adrenalin flow. If you don't have adrenalin, it might be because you replaced it with Ridillin.

PC §9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person
is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.31;

Think we got that.
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have
retreated; and

I think they is no safe way to exit a moving bus which is crowded. Either kick down Granny to get to the door, or jump through the window into oncoming traffic.

(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly
force is immediately necessary:
Don't know if I'm next so bet your dollar it is immediately necessary.

(A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use
of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated
kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault,
robbery, or aggravated robbery.

Think the guy already demonstrated that he will use deadly force. Do you asked him if he is finished shooting so you can sit in peace?

The only grey area would be the draw because you would have to seen and heard the entire confrontation. Because if the suspect shot the victim just on verbal provocation then I would be very concerned about being in his zone. Who knows if he included "TALL PEOPLE" in argument with the victim?
Now if the victim pulled a weapon and they both drew on each other, then that would be a different story.

[stevie_d_64]

Did anyone else notice the video they did show of the "shooter"???

I know what I saw in that clip, but rest assured, it cannot be used against him because of the source...

News is news, not evidence...

This is not going to go very well for anyone...actors, victim, families, communities, the court, etc etc etc...

Just got that funny feeling...

[jimmy]

FWIW, every time I've been interviewed for a newspaper article the reporter was more interested in speed than accuracy. Accuracy was only important to the extent of making the article appear convincing or plausible. So I always take what I read with a grain of salt.

What I'm getting at is that the shooter may indeed have been a concealed handgun licensee. But information like this has been mistaken before, so I'm waiting for confirmation.

[stevie_d_64]

What I'm getting at is that the shooter may indeed have been a concealed handgun licensee. But information like this has been mistaken before, so I'm waiting for confirmation.

"...indeed have been a..."

Haven't seen a thing about this...

I know we all have a concern about this alledged shooter having a CHL, but nothing I've seen that is linkable, or postable supporting that has been reported...

I agree, I believe we should hold off on these assumptions till it is confirmed, either way...

[Lucky45]

News is news, not evidence...

I know that stevie. I would hope that everyone look at these discussions as a chance to get set in your mind on how you would personally react if faced with the same situation.
I don't know the people and will not be on jury, so don't care. Just using real cases as they come as discussing them with what you know. Because that is how it will be whenever you are faced with a situation involving a weapon. It will most likely be dynamic and changing all the time.
So what if we don't have all the information, then most of us have learned by now that there are lots of grey areas and everyday you should be looking to find them when it comes to using your handgun.

So just like brainstorming, we can hash out all the different ways this event could have taken place if a CHL holder was on board the bus (or wherever a future incident takes place) and we don't have to have all the facts.

This isn't a COURT, this is a discussion. As the fact become available, we will ALL fill it in. So everyone get off the "this is just a news report" horse. We know that.

[KBCraig]

None of the other 12 passengers on the bus was hurt.

let's take a look at this. "None... was hurt."
really?
The English Language that far gone that journalists don't even have to learn it.

"None" is a contraction-cum-conflation of "not one", and "Not one... was hurt" is correct.

Modern customary usage treats "none" as a plural, so "None... were hurt" would also be correct.

Kevin

[Lucky45]

March 28, 2007, 11:22PM
Man shot to death on Metro bus

By ROBERT CROWE and MIKE GLENN
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

At least 11 slayings have occurred in Houston since Saturday, and the latest came Wednesday when a Metro bus passenger shot another passenger who had bumped into him, police said.

The victim and suspect apparently got into an argument while the suspect was trying to get off the bus in the 11700 block of Westheimer, Houston police said.

The suspect, who had a license to carry a concealed handgun, shot the other man in front of about 30 passengers at about 11:30 a.m., police said.

"Murder charges are pending, but we will present it to the district attorney, and it's likely that charges will be accepted," said Capt. Dale Brown of the Houston Police Department Homicide Division. "It's also possible it will be referred to a grand jury."

Things that make you go HMMMMMMMM.

[casselthief]

None of the other 12 passengers on the bus was hurt.

let's take a look at this. "None... was hurt."
really?
The English Language that far gone that journalists don't even have to learn it.

"None" is a contraction-cum-conflation of "not one", and "Not one... was hurt" is correct.

Modern customary usage treats "none" as a plural, so "None... were hurt" would also be correct.

Kevin

ahthankyou. least somebody recognized that.

[Freedom4All]

March 28, 2007, 11:22PM
Man shot to death on Metro bus

By ROBERT CROWE and MIKE GLENN
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

At least 11 slayings have occurred in Houston since Saturday, and the latest came Wednesday when a Metro bus passenger shot another passenger who had bumped into him, police said.

The victim and suspect apparently got into an argument while the suspect was trying to get off the bus in the 11700 block of Westheimer, Houston police said.

The suspect, who had a license to carry a concealed handgun, shot the other man in front of about 30 passengers at about 11:30 a.m., police said.

"Murder charges are pending, but we will present it to the district attorney, and it's likely that charges will be accepted," said Capt. Dale Brown of the Houston Police Department Homicide Division. "It's also possible it will be referred to a grand jury."

Things that make you go HMMMMMMMM.

The name of the man who was arrested is apparently "Garrett Mallot" (source: http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/ ... f07cb.html). If that is enough info, let's request a CHL status from DPS.

[Liberty]

Where do some of ya'll get that "fear of your life" stuff?

Years of conditioning and gunshop lore that predates the CHL law. While "fear of (my) life" isn't required, such fear does support a reasonable person's belief that deadly force is reasonably required to prevent... blah blah blah.

I think mostly it comes from media reporting of police shooting. On almost every shooting in Texas or otherwise the officer is sure to make clear when he is describing the incident that he was in fear for his life.

[Freedom4All]

If that is enough info, let's request a CHL status from DPS.

Texas Administrative Code
Title 37, Part 1, Ch. 6, Sub Ch. H, RULE §6.113:

(a) On written request and payment of a reasonable fee to cover costs of copying, the department shall disclose to any person or agency whether a named individual or any individual whose full name is listed on a specified written list is licensed under the Act. Information concerning a license holder that is subject to disclosure under this section includes the license holder's name, date of birth, gender, race, and zip code.

(b) The department shall notify a license holder of any request for information made relating to the license holder under this section and provide the name of the person or agency making the request.


I forgot about part (b), so I guess this isn't really worth doing.