Soccer dad pulls gun on coach's husband - Lubbock

[LCP_Dogg]

For the sake of discussion, let's say he did start it and let's say this other dad started a fight with him and tackled him and was on top of him smacking him around. Is he justified then in drawing his weapon?

I would think so.. (regardless of who "started it")

What do you think?

[Keith B]

Here is an updated story and video link

http://www.kcbd.com/Global/story.asp?S= ... enu69_2_12" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

LCP_dogg,
If that was the case...I would agree with you.

[Keith B]

For the sake of discussion, let's say he did start it and let's say this other dad started a fight with him and tackled him and was on top of him smacking him around. Is he justified then in drawing his weapon?

I would think so.. (regardless of who "started it")

What do you think?

Nope, you start an argument, you have escalated the issue in the first place. If he didn't try to deescalate the situation by walking away or trying to move out of the situation, then I think he is at fault. Same would go for road rage, etc. If you push buttons and make someone madder, you are asking for a fight. And if you are hot headed enough to push buttons, then you shouldn't be carrying IMO.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Seven and Eight yr old soccer...what ever happened to having fun at the games and letting your child just play. At seven and eight soccer is just herd ball. All the kids run around they dont understand their positions all the way. And its a fun/funny thing to watch as a parent.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Keith B,
Thanks for that explanation. I agree with that. I was not looking at it that way but it makes perfect sense. The coach's husband had every right to defend his wife. I know if some dude was yelling at my wife I would defend her and shut him up. But the way my wife shoots I would think she could handle herself...I wouldnt want to mess with her, (im not saying that her shooting in this case would be the right thing, just a joke)

[LCP_Dogg]

Keith, so are you saying there is some duty to retreat if you are the one who started it?

I guess I didn't see that, but I mean common sense tells me that is the thing to do here, but like I said, what happens if the guy got on top of him and he could not move. His only two choices are to get beat and take it like a man, or draw his firearm. (I have been in this exact situation and took it like a man, err, I mean 14 yr old (at the time) and had no weapon to draw fortunately).


Anyways, from reading the article, it sounds like all he did was push him. Yes, this Tye guy was an idiot to pull his firearm out just for a lousy push. what the heck?!?

He deserves what is coming to him as he CLEARLY cannot control his temper.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

LCP_Dogg,
I dont think Keith is saying to retreat. However it is called self defense. If you start the altercation you are obviously on the offense. I think that is what he was saying. (nothing is meant by the bold lettering)

[Keith B]

Keith, so are you saying there is some duty to retreat if you are the one who started it?

I guess I didn't see that, but I mean common sense tells me that is the thing to do here, but like I said, what happens if the guy got on top of him and he could not move. His only two choices are to get beat and take it like a man, or draw his firearm. (I have been in this exact situation and took it like a man, err, I mean 14 yr old (at the time) and had no weapon to draw fortunately).


Anyways, from reading the article, it sounds like all he did was push him. Yes, this Tye guy was an idiot to pull his firearm out just for a lousy push. what the heck?!?

He deserves what is coming to him as he CLEARLY cannot control his temper.

This is only MY point of view; If you are the aggressor 'period' then you are at fault. Going strictly from the article/video (we all know they are ALWAYS 100% accurate ) Burke started the argument with the lady coach. Her husband stepped in and argued with Burke. From all reports Burke didn't try to back down, stop yelling or walk away. The husband pushed Burke, but that does not justify the use of force, especially if you are still trying to argue with the individual. So, in this case as the article reads, Burke is an idiot.

And to answer your scenario further, I feel you get what you deserve if you start a fight. You cannot push someone else to the breaking point and then go screaming to Mommy (or Kimber or Glock, etc.) If you haven't tried to back away and deescalate the situation, then you need to figuratively take your lumps. Carrying brings a responsibility, and that means avoiding conflict if at all possible. Threat of or use of deadly force is a last ditch move and needs to be only when there are no alternatives. This guy had alternatives, like not stating a ruckus in the first place.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

not only is this guy an idiot he seems like a punk. He can start a fight with a lady but when he gets confronted by a man he has to pull his gun. i think he needs to do some growing up.

I am NOT saying anything bad about women or that they are weak. I know there are some women that I would not want to mess with as I am sure they could take me. So please dont think that I think that women are weak.

[LCP_Dogg]

Keith, I follow what you say, and I do agree he should have walked away vs. drawing his weapon, but the bit about force seems to conflict with what my CHL instructor told me.

He said that there have been cases here in TX where gang members go around and start verbal altercations just trying to get someone to push them. When he does, they make a big scene about this guy pushing him and then fall to the ground pull out their weapon and shoot. It has stood up in court and gang members know this and continue to do this for "initiation" still to this day.

I'm not saying it is right either, but there are laws and then there are trials. So it seems that Self-defense generally does not include nor care about what verbal altercations existed, just "force" and "deadly force".

Perhaps I am messing up the details here, but I believe that is why my CHL instructor told me. If that is accurate, then it is not self-defense to response to someone's abusive remarks unless they use force against you.

[txflyer]

My opinion: There is not enough information for a judgement. We need to wait for all the facts. There are quite a few things we don't yet know such as:

Was there a significant disparity in size between the two men?

Does Burke have a physical problem that would not allow him to defend himself the way others can? I notice they ask about drugs and alcohol, but don't ask about mitigating circumstances.

Was Burke's confrontation with the coach justified? (i.e. was the coach doing something to put his child at risk - I have seen coaches that have no business coaching because they don't understand safety first). And was the husband out of line?

What occurred between the push and pulling the gun? The article states that Burke was pushed and then Burked pulled a gun? Could there be selective editing here (no I don't trust the press to report anything accurately).

I'm not defending Burke's actions and if he is in the wrong, then let him rot in jail. However, I won't judge without all the facts.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Im no lawyer but...If the agressor has a physical problem that he cant defend himself as a normal person could he has no right to be going around starting fights. Thats just not smart. Especially if he has a gun. Cause now he knows he will have to pull his gun. So if he starts the fight knowing he will have to pull his gun and fires and the other guy dies...its no longer self defense but premeditated murder. As for his altercation with the coach. If the coach was doing something harmful to the child a normal parent would go down and get the child out of harms way and then confront the coach. They would not sit there and just yell at them from the stands. When they do that they are usually mad at the coach for putting the child in a different position or taking them out of the game. The husband of the coach was justified in his pushing of Burke as he was defending his wife. I would have done the same. As would most husbands...I hope. So if you badmouth some guys wife and he shoves you I dont see how that qualifies as you being in fear for your life. At that point you either fight back or you walk away. You dont draw your weapon to be state your dominance.

[LedJedi]

Im no lawyer but...If the agressor has a physical problem that he cant defend himself as a normal person could he has no right to be going around starting fights. Thats just not smart. Especially if he has a gun. Cause now he knows he will have to pull his gun. So if he starts the fight knowing he will have to pull his gun and fires and the other guy dies...its no longer self defense but premeditated murder. As for his altercation with the coach. If the coach was doing something harmful to the child a normal parent would go down and get the child out of harms way and then confront the coach. They would not sit there and just yell at them from the stands. When they do that they are usually mad at the coach for putting the child in a different position or taking them out of the game. The husband of the coach was justified in his pushing of Burke as he was defending his wife. I would have done the same. As would most husbands...I hope. So if you badmouth some guys wife and he shoves you I dont see how that qualifies as you being in fear for your life. At that point you either fight back or you walk away. You dont draw your weapon to be state your dominance.

In the story as presented thus far there is no indication that Burke was doing anything other than having a disagreement (assuming verbal) with the coach. I understand standing up to verbally defend your wife, i'd do the same myself, but there is no indication that force (a push) was justified on the part of the husband.

Up to that point it SOUNDS like it was purely a verbal disagreement. Assuming that there were no threats of immediate violence on Burke's behalf I can't see how the force would be justified.

That being said, I can't really see a push being justification for drawing the weapon either in that scenario.

If you remove the circumstance of the husband/wife relationship and the verbal disagreement I dont think it's unreasonable to argue that if another person pushes you without provocation it's conceivable that a draw might be justified from a push depending on the scenario. Though I can't see it as justification here given how it's set up.

Given the other circumstances involved it seems that Burke may be off his rocker though. I doubt any reasonable person would have reacted the way he did and I'm sure a jury will see it the same way if all the facts of the case are presented as they are represented here.

My point is don't be so quick to judge/condemn someone and that there is nothing in the story that justifies the husband's use of force as the story is currently presented. That does not necessarily excuse Burke, but the husband has to share some blame in the situation. Had Burke not drawn his weapon I could easily see the husband getting arrested for assault.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

LedJedi,
Your right there is nothing that is noted that justifies the push and you are right by saying he was justified in verbally arguing with Burke not shoving. But we also dont know what it was that Burke was saying. Depending on what he said to the coach I could justify the shove from the husband. If he is just yelling at her and voicing his disgust no but if he is calling her names and I dont mean 'poopyhead' and he is verbally assaulting her I could see where a shove would be needed to shut him up. Just my thoughts.