Tyler, TX: GG w/ pistol is cut by BG w/ knife, shoots him 2x

[surprise_i'm_armed]

http://www.kltv.com/story/17926183/two- ... nd-a-knife

You know what they say - don't bring a knife to a gunfight.

Since the GG was cut multiple times by the BG's knife, it's a clear case of self defense.

The Smith County DA should agree, and "no bill" him if there's a question.

SIA

[pinkpistol]

Believe me, Tyler will support the GG. No worries.

[Jumping Frog]

He was way too slow to shoot, and he should have kept shooting until the threat was stopped.

One white male, who was threatened by Hampton, had a handgun in his possession. He confronted Hampton in an effort to protect himself and others. Hampton continued to use the knife and continued to threaten the victim and others. Hampton eventually cut the victim with the knife at which point the victim shot Hampton. After being shot, Hampton continued to verbally threaten and attack him. The victim shot Hampton again.

Why wait until after you are cut to shoot?

If I am feeling generous and have some distance, the guy gets one chance at "Drop the knife" before bang, bang, bang . . .

In the situation as described ("Officers learned that Lewis Hampton, a white male age 41, had threatened several people with a large knife."), I am not feeling generous. Self defense isn't done with "play fair" rules, and I do not have the same duty to warn someone like an LEO. See the credible threat with deadly force and go straight to bang, bang, bang. No warnings. Shoot him down like a rabid dog.

At close range, I am way more afraid of a large knife than I am of a handgun.

[jocat54]

"He was way too slow to shoot, and he should have kept shooting until the threat was stopped."

You hit the nail on the head---that gun should have been empty when it was over.

[MoJo]

http://www.kltv.com/story/17926183/two- ... nd-a-knife

You know what they say - don't bring a knife to a gunfight.

Since the GG was cut multiple times by the BG's knife, it's a clear case of self defense.

The Smith County DA should agree, and "no bill" him if there's a question.

SIA

SIA The DA does not no bill or return a true bill on someone. That is the duty of the Grand Jury who looks at the evidence and decides if there is enough to take the case for trial.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

MoJo:

Please clarify this for me: Isn't the DA or the ADA (Assistant DA) the one who PRESENTS the case to
the Grand Jury?

Doesn't the learned opinion of the DA greatly influence the Grand Jury as to whether a "true bill" is generated?
In other words, if the DA wants to indict someone he presents the case that way to the Grand Jury.

If he thinks the case is weak, he steers the Grand Jury to a "no bill".

I'm hazy on just how this works.

SIA

[WildBill]

MoJo:

Please clarify this for me: Isn't the DA or the ADA (Assistant DA) the one who PRESENTS the case to
the Grand Jury?

1. Doesn't the learned opinion of the DA greatly influence the Grand Jury as to whether a "true bill" is generated?

2. In other words, if the DA wants to indict someone he presents the case that way to the Grand Jury.

3. If he thinks the case is weak, he steers the Grand Jury to a "no bill".

I'm hazy on just how this works.

SIA

IMO, I believe you have it mostly correct. IANAL or DA.

1. The evidence and the opinion of the DA will determine how hard he wants to prosecute the case. As you know, DAs are politicians so sometimes the prosecution has political motives. Also, DAs are motivated to win so most will not prosecute a case they do not think they can win.

2. If the DA wants the grand jury to indict, he will present a strong case. Most of the time, the grand jury will go along with the DA. As the saying goes a semi-competant DA can indict a ham sandwich.

3. If he thinks the case is weak and really wants an indictment, he may wait until he can build a stronger case. If the DA has enough evidence and doesn't believe that a crime was committed or the person shouldn't be tried, he can "steer" the grand jury towards a no-bill.

At least, that's my understanding of the system.

[VoiceofReason]

He was way too slow to shoot, and he should have kept shooting until the threat was stopped.

One white male, who was threatened by Hampton, had a handgun in his possession. He confronted Hampton in an effort to protect himself and others. Hampton continued to use the knife and continued to threaten the victim and others. Hampton eventually cut the victim with the knife at which point the victim shot Hampton. After being shot, Hampton continued to verbally threaten and attack him. The victim shot Hampton again.

Why wait until after you are cut to shoot?

If I am feeling generous and have some distance, the guy gets one chance at "Drop the knife" before bang, bang, bang . . .

In the situation as described ("Officers learned that Lewis Hampton, a white male age 41, had threatened several people with a large knife."), I am not feeling generous. Self defense isn't done with "play fair" rules, and I do not have the same duty to warn someone like an LEO. See the credible threat with deadly force and go straight to bang, bang, bang. No warnings. Shoot him down like a rabid dog.

At close range, I am way more afraid of a large knife than I am of a handgun.

A knife doesn’t even have to be large. If the person knows how to use it, an extremely sharp three inch blade will kill you just as dead as a .45 in the chest.

When I was with the S.O. I handled a call where a guy was cut across the back and didn’t even know it until someone told him he was bleeding. He had been cut with a straight razor and said he had just felt a slight sting.

If the guy was brandishing a knife I would never have been cut. By the way, in a lot of cases an LEO does not have a duty to warn. Most will do it if they feel they have time, but an officer does not have to put his life in jeopardy to warn someone.

Something that really makes me steam is that some people have gotten the idea from television that an LEO cannot fire until fired upon, or an LEO cannot fire until the BG points a firearm at him/her. In real life the BG does not get a "free shot" and the perp only has to move a firearm in a menacing manner to get shot.

[Rex B]

two thoughts:

1 - the reporter correctly identified who the victim was. Good for him/her

2 - the Victim needs more gun, or better shot placement. Probably more gun.

[speedsix]

...machete, steak knife, box cutter, single edged razor blade...all get the same BANG, BANG, BANG...the carotid is less than 1/2" from the surface...ANY knife is deadly...and the only warning is him seeing me draw...I will not be cut if I can stop him...