TexasCHLforum.com

rp_photo wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote: If there were police there (as noted in the article) you're going to open up on them? How many rounds do you think you're going to get from those police firing at you? Seriously? Getting everyone in the vehicle killed doesn't seem like a prudent course of action to me.

Not following.

Why would she feel threatened by police or feel any need to shoot at them?

Of course there would have been considerable risk of hitting bystanders, which could have included police.

If you start shooting near some police officers they are going to shoot at you.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

rp_photo wrote:I believe that the grandmother handled the situation well, but it may have been seconds away from turning ugly:

[The link was deleted because it included at least two redirectors, the first being to a quasi-porn site. Be sure to verify links before posting.]

Assuming the grandmother was armed, would it have been lawful for her to display or shoot?

If the driver felt that their life was in danger, would it have been lawful to run over those blocking the car?

Since a passenger was ill, would the mere act of blocking them be a threat to their life and justify use of force?

Yes.

Shoot them. If that was my grandaughter there would have been dead bodies on the road. Might have been a few protesters that looked like hood ornaments.

Anygunanywhere

You would now be facing multiple felonies and could kiss seeing your grandkid goodbye then.
It does not meet the definition of self defense.

Well I guess I would have to pay the piper. My grandchildren are my life. No one will endanger them. If I decide it is time to act and my actions send me to prison then so be it.

The ones on the receiving end will no doubt understand that I will not tolerate danger to my grandchildren.

Maybe, just maybe, if people stood up for their children and grandchildren AGAINST ALL MANNERS OF EVIL, and if the legal system DID NOT PANDER TO THE CRIMINALS then we would not be having this discussion.

Anygunanywhere

This is what I would consider to be the best order of action if in that situation:

Assuming no serious emergencies on my part, treat it as a normal traffic backup and "go with it", meaning that I avoid doing anything to make me stand out such as coming across as aggressive or passive. Not making myself stand out is the key to avoid escalation.

Avoid making eye contact with anyone who walks close just like I would at an intersection where people are soliciting.

If someone makes more that passing contact with the vehicle or begins pounding, first I would yell back off through the closed window and if that didn't help, I would be preparing to draw a weapon. My biggest question would at what point should the ignoring stop and aggressive response begin?, as this could very well make the difference between a good and bad resolution.

The moment that anyone opens a door or breaks a window, that is when I would first attempt to drive away and then shoot as a last resort.

It would be a fight to the death if anyone tried to pull me out, and I would use my BUG if need be.

anygunanywhere wrote: Maybe, just maybe, if people stood up for their children and grandchildren AGAINST ALL MANNERS OF EVIL, and if the legal system DID NOT PANDER TO THE CRIMINALS then we would not be having this discussion.

Anygunanywhere

I would like to believe that our local legal system wouldn't pander to criminals as much as in many other jurisdictions, and that the victim would receive more benefit of the doubt.

That being said, the Left and MSM are probably hoping against hope for a shooting at one of these protests, preferably someone of that grandmother's demographic.

rp_photo wrote:
I would like to believe that our local legal system wouldn't pander to criminals as much as in many other jurisdictions, and that the victim would receive more benefit of the doubt.

That being said, the Left and MSM are probably hoping against hope for a shooting at one of these protests, preferably someone of that grandmother's demographic.

Look at the City of Houston administration. I realize that they do not run the DA's office but don't try and tell me that they do not have influence. Look at the Harris County Sheriff - an obama wannabe.

At one time you could count on Harris County to have a fair and impartial justice system but not any more.

Anygunanywhere

I can't see shooting when the car was driving away and there was no chance of that guy opening the door. However, I keep a can of OC/pepper spray in my center console. I can see spraying a nice blast of OC at the crowd as they engulfed the car, (banging, hitting, ect) while trying to leave . I also say keep the window closed. A car 'can' be a weapon, and if you hit the gas to get away while fearing for your life, people will move.

Shutting down freeways is a common tactic. It puts the police in a bad position as well. By the time you set up for the mob, they will scatter.

texanjoker wrote:
Shutting down freeways is a common tactic. It puts the police in a bad position as well. By the time you set up for the mob, they will scatter.

Since the TSA claims jurisdiction over highways via the VIPR program, perhaps they should have gone in and resolved this situation.

rp_photo wrote:

texanjoker wrote:
Shutting down freeways is a common tactic. It puts the police in a bad position as well. By the time you set up for the mob, they will scatter.

Since the TSA claims jurisdiction over highways via the VIPR program, perhaps they should have gone in and resolved this situation.

The feds can claim whatever they want. However local LEOs would be the ones to handle it. it takes time for the mobile field force to respond, stage and deploy.

This is what I would do ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h38D6jkzn-c" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=h38D6jkzn-c[/youtube]

A-R wrote:This is what I would do ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h38D6jkzn-c" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=h38D6jkzn-c[/youtube]

LOL

gigag04 wrote:Now you know why cops like to have those fun, obscure, arrestable offenses...

They solve problems quickly. Once that guy pulled on my door handle, depending on what he said, he would've been facing a loaded pistol, and hearing clear instructions to get back. I wouldn't advocate this for most people, but I am comfortable using the threat of deadly force as a use of force.

Don't forget the disparity of force text in penal code (ch 9?) which could get you to a clean shoot. I think it would be an expensive shoot as it would likely be highly protested, politicized, and skewed....

I could see the headlines now...."black protester killed while peacefully demonstrating Trayvon Martin verdict"


While untrue, it is little different from "black teen killed while carrying skittles and wearing a hoodie"

Here, let me fix that headline for you "Unarmed black protester killed while peacefully demonstrating Trayvon Martin verdict"

I was around for the entire 60's decade but just barely.

Is this anything like what went on back then?

rp_photo wrote:I was around for the entire 60's decade but just barely.

Is this anything like what went on back then?

Um... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watts_Riots" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

OldCannon wrote:

rp_photo wrote:I was around for the entire 60's decade but just barely.

Is this anything like what went on back then?

Um... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watts_Riots" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I wasn't in CA for the Watts riots but I did happen to fly into Santa Monica Airport during the Rodney King riots in 1992, on business, I forget now just what.

From the air, it looked like a place a middle aged white man did not want to be. Santa Monica seemed to be somewhat OK, but the rest of LA wasn't. This event in Houston seems quite mild and nowhere near as violent as the 1992 LA riots.

First thing i would have done is start recording. Its always smart to record. theres some pretty cheap dashcams out there that could pay for themselves after one incident.