TexasCHLforum.com

The "canine backup" was a Jack Russel Terrier...being at a party, unwelcomed, may deserve an azz kicking....but not a march of death down a public street. To shoot the unarmed man while off the premises is a major problem. Another thing to consider is that it is unlikely that the deceased just showed up for the heck of it, got ran off, and then decided it was so much fun he wanted to come back. I would bet there is more to the story. The shooter and the other party goers were admittedly intoxicated so a number of things could have spurred the argument/confrontation. Regardless of all the minor details...an unarmed man, alone, was shot by the homeowner while the remaining party guests looked on. I feel confident that a better resolution could have been found. The bottom line is that the homeowner went inside, obtained his weapon, and went back out to the unwanted guest unnecessarily. He, at that point, became the aggressor. We can't allow that to happen. Having a license to carry a weapon does not give someone a license to take a life at will.
Again, my .02...or .04 now...

tbrown wrote:

bdickens wrote:What is with the insane need to keep referring to the criminal perpetrators of incidents as "victims?"

Alinsky could tell you. So could Goebbels.

I think it's obvious that a ne'er–do–well who crashes a party in a private home, gets kicked out, and returns with canine backup is the aggressor, not the victim.

This person's criminal history was alcohol related. No bodily injury type history, no muggings or rapes, etc. It really is irrelevant here. The shooter had ample opportunity to call the police prior. He did not. Instead, he took the law into his own hands, went into his home and got a weapon. At that time, why would he not simply lock the door and call police?

The 911 recordings are now out. You can google them. Odd that the son told someone to "flush it, all of it". There apparently were some "altered states of mind" in this equation.
I find it odd that the shooter was not tested for drugs or alcohol. They were still up partying at 4:30 in the morning. The shooter deemed it necessary to pursue the deceased off the property and down the street. He was quite a distance off the property when he shot Smith. I have personally walked this scene.

Lakeview PD has done a poor job investigating. But rest assured, 21mph in their 20mph zone will get you a ticket :)

I think the shooter may very well be in some trouble here. The man he shot was unarmed and off his property. Although it seems the deceased was probably argumentative I don't believe it warranted being shot in the street. Just my .02