TexasCHLforum.com

flechero wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:44 am So when you tell someone they are breaking the law or acting inappropriately, that justifies an assault from another person coming from another direction. Ok, got it.

Good or bad shoot aside, the guy was attacked from the blind side and most here would have drawn if able, after being flattened. He clearly didn't know that the attacker was with the HC parker.




This wasn't about a HC spot- it was about somebody talking to the unstable, dead guys girl...

I read almost every post in this thread, and didn't see a single one that claimed the shoving was justified. Maybe I missed a post saying that, but in any event, I agree with you that the "shover" was not justified to lay his hands on the shooter.

The only real question being discussed here is whether the shooting was justified given the totality of the circumstances, including the shooters decision to initiate the confrontation in the first place.

Deltaboy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 30, 2018 10:27 am Sad he been charged I find that even in Johnson County we have issues finding parking for my wife. If I complain about it that doesn't allow some one to walk out and shove me to the ground.

My bottom line is don't park in Handicapped spots and don't get upset when you get called out about it.

And their parking or traffic infraction doesn't allow you to get in their face with your complaint, either. Personally, I don't initiate confrontations with any of the hundreds of people I see on a daily basis who commit a traffic or parking infraction. I suppose I could lodge a polite complaint, as long as I didn't get right up in their face screaming and yelling, but to me it seems a completely unnecessary thing to do. I have enough drama in my life without going out of my way to create more.

LTUME1978 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 27, 2018 4:30 pm

mojo84 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:28 am The video makes it pretty obvious what happened.

Yes, it sure does. Older gentleman gets forcefully shoved to the pavement by the boyfriend of the lady that parked illegally in a handicapped spot. Older gentleman did nothing wrong. If fact, we need more people to step up and speak out when the "privileged folks" break the law or those "privileged folks" will continue their behavior and escalate from there.

I am amazed at the people that are defending the behavior of the boyfriend. Go back and watch the video again. Look at the guy that came out of the store after the boyfriend and how fast and how far he went once he saw the gun coming out. If the boyfriend was truly afraid, he should have been back tracking just as fast. The fact that he did not move much while starring down the wrong end of a gun would lead a reasonable person think that he was not afraid for his safety and may very well intend to attack again.

Ecclesiastes 8:11 When the sentence for a crime is not quickly carried out, people’s hearts are filled with schemes to do wrong.

I have to disagree with you on one point. The older gentleman definitely did something wrong, IMHO. I believe that a non-LEO should not initiate an altercation when they witness a traffic infraction that does not directly impact them. This is especially true when armed.

I also have not seen a single post in this 8 page thread saying that the boyfriend did nothing wrong. If there are such posts (that I missed) then I disagree with those posters. The boyfriend escalated the confrontation that had been initiated by the shooter, in a big way, by turning it physical. It may be understandable for him to instinctively come to the defense of his girlfriend and children, but a verbal response would have been better, IMHO. Something like communicating to the shooter that he needs to move away from the vehicle immediately (actual wording would violate forum policies in a big way).

But here's the key point, to me. As a LTC holder, when I choose to be armed, I believe that I have an increased responsibility to be a good citizen. This includes avoiding confrontations over traffic or parking infractions. Just this morning on my drive to work, I witnessed approximately 50 drivers who were speeding. I didn't initiate a confrontation with any of them, nor with the folks who failed to signal when making lane changes or who were following too closely. An untold number of tough use of force calls were avoided just because I decided not to play batman and initiate a confrontation when I saw someone breaking a law. The shooter in this case did the exact opposite.

srothstein wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:50 pm

oljames3 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:49 pm(by a civilian authorized to do so in Travis County)

I thought I should emphasize this since most people do not know it is the law in Texas. Transportation Code section 681.0101 allows any political subdivision (city, county, school district, other special district) to appoint volunteers to enforce the handicapped parking laws. They cannot get paid, are not police officers, and are specifically forbidden from carrying firearms while doing this (I think someone foresaw this exact scenario when they decided to pass this).

I have no idea of Florida law, but they have a lot of similar laws to us - some start here and some, like CHL, start there. It would not surprise me if they allow this to find that the shooter in this case was a parking enforcement volunteer.

If Florida does have a similar law, and if the shooter in this case was such a volunteer, then someone erred in appointing him to that job, IMHO. Having the ability to issue a citation would make the verbal confrontation completely unnecessary, since he could have just written down the cars' license plate, maybe snapped a picture or two with his phone, and he would be assured that this lawbreaker would get her due. A verbal confrontation is complete and total overkill in that case.

The need to lay into this driver, and apparently others, makes more sense if the shooter felt that he was otherwise not empowered to actually rectify the wrong that he was seeing. Still an extreme lack of good judgment, IMHO, especially since he was armed. But at least a bit more understandable.

Yes, I understand that a lot of people's wives would not be parking in a handicapped spot. So say she made an illegal lane change or committed some other infraction instead, and was followed into the parking lot by a guy who decided to berate her as you were walking out of the store. What would you do at that point?

The specific infraction doesn't really matter. It was an infraction. The police could issue a ticket. But it doesn't justify involvement from a random citizen, IMHO. And it especially does not justify involvement from a random citizen who happens to be legally armed with a concealed weapon. The presence of the legally carried concealed weapon turns a normal altercation into a potentially deadly one. This alone should entice a LTC holder to practice de-escalation of any conflict. De-escalation here was extremely easy for the shooter. Upon seeing the car parked in a handicapped spot, there was no conflict. Do nothing and it stays as de-escalated as it can get. Instead he initiated the confrontation. I don't think that is going to be a positive for him.

Answering my question above, if the man was just yelling at my wife and kids and was not using force, I would have to assess whether we could safely get out of there if I simply entered the vehicle and had my wife drive off. If I thought the guy might be armed, this becomes a less viable option. In that case, I would try to move to a point where I had a clear shot and would then order him to immediately step away from the vehicle. My gun would be holstered, but I would be ready to draw and fire if he forced me to do so. At that point, I would be in active mode of attempting de-escalation while being ready in case the aggressor chose to continue to escalate the conflict that he had initiated.