TexasCHLforum.com

anygunanywhere wrote:Since when are criminal thug bangers known for common sense? Sorry for being so redundant.

I'm not saying that the attackers were MENSA members, I'm just curious as to why this individual was a target?

Were they just driving around at 2 am looking for someone who was outside?

Why did they continue to attack after they had received return fire?

They suppposedly, exited their vehicle, and moved towards, someone who was firing at them.

There is so much wrong with the reporting of this story, that we may never know the actual truth, and while I am glad the LTC holder, won that round, it just sounds a little suspicious. JMHO

An AR with a trained shooter vs three thugs with most likely handguns. Third guy lucky to be alive.

Jusme wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:Since when are criminal thug bangers known for common sense? Sorry for being so redundant.

I'm not saying that the attackers were MENSA members, I'm just curious as to why this individual was a target?

Were they just driving around at 2 am looking for someone who was outside?

Why did they continue to attack after they had received return fire?

They suppposedly, exited their vehicle, and moved towards, someone who was firing at them.

There is so much wrong with the reporting of this story, that we may never know the actual truth, and while I am glad the LTC holder, won that round, it just sounds a little suspicious. JMHO

I understand what you're saying, but often we are quick to assume that in attacks like these the victims were involved in something to invite the attack.

I'm perfectly happy to think that the thugs were looking for a victim and picked the wrong person. Maybe they just needed killing.

Words mean something, sentience composition as well....

Wounded the three thugs exited the vehicle and continued the pitched firefight on foot. The homeowner who is an avid marksman continued returning fire hitting all three, stopping them before they could reach his property.

One of the men was immediately killed at the scene, while the others were rushed to the hospital

Now Im sure the writers intent was to note, one of them died at the scene... But the way it can be read is somewhat different

Not that Im all that opposed to the ending for a drive by shooter, but im reasonable sure there is supposed to be an arrest, trial and conviction before we kill um

On Friday, the day before the shooting, officers said arson investigators were called to the same home after someone attempted to set the home on fire. Officers believe the home was targeted based on both of those incidents.

Well, now we know why he was out on the front porch in the wee hours. Now just wonder why they wanted to burn his house down.

http://abc13.com/news/homeowner-shoots- ... 2/1960774/

ELB wrote:

On Friday, the day before the shooting, officers said arson investigators were called to the same home after someone attempted to set the home on fire. Officers believe the home was targeted based on both of those incidents.

Well, now we know why he was out on the front porch in the wee hours. Now just wonder why they wanted to burn his house down.

http://abc13.com/news/homeowner-shoots- ... 2/1960774/

Maybe he told them to get off his lawn!

I'm betting gang activity, we had several incident of gang bangers getting the wrong house!

For those three, boy was it the wrong house!

anygunanywhere wrote:I understand what you're saying, but often we are quick to assume that in attacks like these the victims were involved in something to invite the attack.

I'm perfectly happy to think that the thugs were looking for a victim and picked the wrong person. Maybe they just needed killing.

Yes, like some comments about another shooting http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=94&t=88415

If a BG is shot while doing a drive by, I don't care if they're shot by a GG or a BG, as long as no innocents are harmed.