Texas ”Stand Your Ground” Shooter Headed for Jail

[Blake]

”A Texas man convicted of shooting and killing his unarmed neighbor during a dispute over loud music received a 40-year prison sentence on Wednesday.

Raul Rodriguez, 47, faced a minimum of five years and a maximum of life in prison. He claimed he shot schoolteacher Kelly Danaher in self-defense under Texas' version of the "stand your ground" law.

But prosecutors argued Rodriguez provoked the incident by confronting Danaher, 36, and his friends with a handgun and demanding they quiet down at a late-night birthday party in May 2010.

The Houston case captured more attention in the wake of Trayvon Martin's death in Florida. There, George Zimmerman says he was being attacked and cited the state's "stand your ground" law after shooting the unarmed teen. But prosecutors charged him with second-degree murder.....”

more details:

http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/blogs/lookout/texas-stand-ground-shooter-headed-prison-210731482.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=US&.lang=en-US

[DarrinS]

I've never heard of this case.

[coyotes_geek]

I don't have any problems with the verdict or the sentence. At 47 years old, a 40 year sentence may as well be a life sentence.

[cantthinkofanything]

I didn't think the "Stand Your Ground" defense applied to minorities anyway.

[ChumpDumper]

Dude wanted to kill somebody. Should have gotten more years.

[TeyshaBlue]

^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^

[mavs>spurs]

fags like this guy make all gun owners look bad. reminds me of the bitch who pulled a gun on me for no good reason, shit pissed me off. all these wannabe cowboys out there need to chill the fuck out.

[Wild Cobra]

Yep, when I was young and played my music loud at night, the neighbor just called the police on me.

[Jacob1983]

Why do these dumbasses shoot to kill? If you just wound them, you would at least get a lighter sentence than if you killed them. And why not just use something unconventional like a paint ball gun, BB gun, or flare gun? The guy could have just picked up a paintball gun and shot the guy in the balls with it. It wouldn't have killed him but it would have hurt.

Why are people so blood thirsty?

[Wild Cobra]

When shooting at someone, you either shoot to kill, or you don't shoot.

Didn't anyone, teach you anything about weapons?

[cantthinkofanything]

When shooting at someone, you either shoot to kill, or you don't shoot.

Didn't anyone, teach you anything about weapons?

This the the problem with many gun owners. It's all or nothing. Through proper training, gun owners can learn to disable or incapacitate a would be attacker and quickly neutralize the situation with NON FATAL shots. This puts control back in the hands of the gun wielder and allows him/her the time to fully assess the situation, call the police, or shoot the attacker if merited.

[desflood]

Why do these dumbasses shoot to kill? If you just wound them, you would at least get a lighter sentence than if you killed them. And why not just use something unconventional like a paint ball gun, BB gun, or flare gun? The guy could have just picked up a paintball gun and shot the guy in the balls with it. It wouldn't have killed him but it would have hurt.

Why are people so blood thirsty?
Universe 25.

[Bill_Brasky]

This the the problem with many gun owners. It's all or nothing. Through proper training, gun owners can learn to disable or incapacitate a would be attacker and quickly neutralize the situation with NON FATAL shots. This puts control back in the hands of the gun wielder and allows him/her the time to fully assess the situation, call the police, or shoot the attacker if merited.

Ummm WC is right. Unless the situation requires deadly force, do not shoot.

[coyotes_geek]

This the the problem with many gun owners. It's all or nothing. Through proper training, gun owners can learn to disable or incapacitate a would be attacker and quickly neutralize the situation with NON FATAL shots. This puts control back in the hands of the gun wielder and allows him/her the time to fully assess the situation, call the police, or shoot the attacker if merited.

You've watched too many movies.

[cantthinkofanything]

Ummm WC is right. Unless the situation requires deadly force, do not shoot.

I disagree. With some kind of Threat Neutralization training, gun owners could pinpoint targets on the perp that would allow the would be victim the extra time needed to decide to use deadly force or to call the police first. It's not much different that what they would teach people in law enforcement. It might not seem catastrophic but a well placed shot to the knee will slow anyone down. Even someone on drugs. This "shoot to kill" attitude is even further promoted by the targets they sell at the ranges. They almost always exclude the lower portion of the target's body. So people are actually brainwashed into only shooting at the torso or head even.

[Slydragon]

Link to video?

[Trill Clinton]

interesting.

anyone see the case of the grandmother who shot her grandson 8 times? shits fucked up too. I wonder if WC thinks this kid is a Thug and deserves to die as well. he does have a criminal history


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57465566-504083/sandra-layne-mich-grandmother-will-stand-trial-in-grandsons-shooting-death-judge-says/

[cantthinkofanything]

interesting.

anyone see the case of the grandmother who shot her grandson 8 times? shits fucked up too. I wonder if WC thinks this kid is a Thug and deserves to die as well. he does have a criminal history


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57465566-504083/sandra-layne-mich-grandmother-will-stand-trial-in-grandsons-shooting-death-judge-says/

Not much from her side on what happened.

[z0sa]

This the the problem with many gun owners. It's all or nothing. Through proper training, gun owners can learn to disable or incapacitate a would be attacker and quickly neutralize the situation with NON FATAL shots. This puts control back in the hands of the gun wielder and allows him/her the time to fully assess the situation, call the police, or shoot the attacker if merited.

No dude.

[Trill Clinton]

Not much from her side on what happened.

8 times though?!

[cantthinkofanything]

No dude.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not anti-gun at all. I own several. But I do believe that a large % of gun owners only know how to do one thing with their gun. And it's shoot to kill. And obviously, in some cases, that turns out to be the best choice. But there are large number of lives needlessly lost by gun toters that have no Threat Neutralization training. And you know why? Because it's not offered to the public.

[cantthinkofanything]

8 times though?!

I know. But who knows what the kid was on or what he was doing. Or where the first of those shots hit. Not taking her side but would like to at least hear the full story. I guess maybe it's out there somewhere.

[Trill Clinton]

I know. But who knows what the kid was on or what he was doing. Or where the first of those shots hit. Not taking her side but would like to at least hear the full story. I guess maybe it's out there somewhere.

well he did have marijuana in his system. he couldn't have been that gone off the drug to call 911 and speak coherently. He was shot again while he was on the phone with 911 and then law enforcement heard 3 more shots when they arrived.

[cantthinkofanything]

well he did have marijuana in his system. he couldn't have been that gone off the drug to call 911 and speak coherently. He was shot again while he was on the phone with 911 and then law enforcement heard 3 more shots when they arrived.

I don't now. Nothing more sobering than getting shot. What's your take? Crazy white bitch?

[Trill Clinton]

I don't now. Nothing more sobering than getting shot. What's your take? Crazy white bitch?

she called LE on him twice and similar to Trayvon, he had a few minor run in's with the law. looks like the case of a 74 year old lady forced with the responsibility of raising a 17 year old kid. that's a lot to ask for a woman of her age, especially a kid with behavior problems. she probably watched enough news programs to come to the conclusion that her grandson turned into a zombie and was going to kill her. in fear of that, she shot and killed him.

[TeyshaBlue]

Why do these dumbasses shoot to kill? If you just wound them, you would at least get a lighter sentence than if you killed them. And why not just use something unconventional like a paint ball gun, BB gun, or flare gun? The guy could have just picked up a paintball gun and shot the guy in the balls with it. It wouldn't have killed him but it would have hurt.

Why are people so blood thirsty?

Wait a second. Flare gun? WTF?:lol:rollin

[cantthinkofanything]

she called LE on him twice and similar to Trayvon, he had a few minor run in's with the law. looks like the case of a 74 year old lady forced with the responsibility of raising a 17 year old kid. that's a lot to ask for a woman of her age, especially a kid with behavior problems. she probably watched enough news programs to come to the conclusion that her grandson turned into a zombie and was going to kill her. in fear of that, she shot and killed her him.

Well shit I don't know. Maybe he fucked up her jigsaw puzzle or something.

[Trill Clinton]

Wait a second. Flare gun? WTF?:lol:rollin

:lol I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say the flare gun can be used as a weapon still. might not kill the target but could distract him and give you time to get away or disarm him.

now if he meant shooting it overhead into the air.....

[BlairForceDejuan]

I disagree. With some kind of Threat Neutralization training, gun owners could pinpoint targets on the perp that would allow the would be victim the extra time needed to decide to use deadly force or to call the police first. It's not much different that what they would teach people in law enforcement. It might not seem catastrophic but a well placed shot to the knee will slow anyone down. Even someone on drugs. This "shoot to kill" attitude is even further promoted by the targets they sell at the ranges. They almost always exclude the lower portion of the target's body. So people are actually brainwashed into only shooting at the torso or head even.

Maybe for Elite Navy Seals, but LE is trained to shoot to stop. Center mass. aka basically kill but "stop" sounds more PC.

If you are drawing a deadly weapon on someone, you better be justified because a gun is used to kill or cause serious bodily injury and you will still be legally screwed regardless if you shoot the bad guys shoulder and miss all his vitals like you are a Movie hero.












http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/210/566/An+arrow+in+the+knee+Some+fresh+oc_6ad7ab_2932806. jpg?1322766208

[pawe]

This the the problem with many gun owners. It's all or nothing. Through proper training, gun owners can learn to disable or incapacitate a would be attacker and quickly neutralize the situation with NON FATAL shots. This puts control back in the hands of the gun wielder and allows him/her the time to fully assess the situation, call the police, or shoot the attacker if merited.

LOL
You dont shoot to kill, you shoot to stop the threat.
Also, it's illegal to shoot to maim.

I shoot USPSA and im telling you, it's hard to shoot a 5" diameter steel target with minimal stress at 7 yards. What made you think you can hit the arm/leg of a person who's gonna knife you at 10 feet?

[Capt Bringdown]

Yet another example of Amerika's bloodthirsty gun culture.

[Wild Cobra]

Yet another example of Amerika's bloodthirsty gun culture.
No, simple self preservation. Someone comes at me with a knife, and they will likely end up with several holes in them, center mass.

[cantthinkofanything]

LOL
You dont shoot to kill, you shoot to stop the threat.
Also, it's illegal to shoot to maim.

I shoot USPSA and im telling you, it's hard to shoot a 5" diameter steel target with minimal stress at 7 yards. What made you think you can hit the arm/leg of a person who's gonna knife you at 10 feet?

I'm not talking about shooting to maim. Shooting someone in the knees has to be less maiming that shooting someone in the face.

And it's all training. But you tell people that they now have to pass more stringent tests to carry a gun and you won't have as many buying guns. So, the easiest thing to do is teach them to shoot at big targets which just happens to be shooting to kill.

It's all in what people are led to believe. If a particular government would get serious about installing a Threat Neutralization training program, they would see the number of unnecessary gun deaths drop substantially.

[redzero]

If one wants to incapacitate somebody, why would they use a gun? Why not use a taser or pepper spray?

[cantthinkofanything]

If one wants to incapacitate somebody, why would they use a gun? Why not use a taser or pepper spray?

Because then you wouldn't be able to actually kill them if that was needed. I'm not saying that it's never appropriate to kill someone with the gun. But in many cases, a shot to the knee would give the would be victim time to assess the situation and then 1) kill the attacker OR 2) call the police.

[redzero]

If they have no intention to kill their attacker, WHY USE A GUN? Are you stupid or something? Does it really make sense to buy and train with a lethal weapon only to use it non-lethally? There are non-lethal weapons one can use instead.

[cantthinkofanything]

If they have no intention to kill their attacker, WHY USE A GUN? Are you stupid or something? Does it really make sense to buy and train with a lethal weapon only to use it non-lethally? There are non-lethal weapons one can use instead.

I'm saying the gun gives them the option to kill or not to kill. In some cases, killing may be absolutely necessary and justified. But with the proper training, they could allow themselves that option after the threat was neutralized.

[redzero]

Or they could just get a taser and not waste time and money on pointless training.

[cantthinkofanything]

Or they could just get a taser and not waste time and money on pointless training.

You can shoot someone a lot farther than tasing them. If they were trained to shoot at non fatal target spots, they could stop an attacker at distance. Then have the time to either kill the attacker or call the police. I don't know why this is hard to understand. With the taser, you're only neutralizing the threat but then you don't have the option to then shoot them.

[redzero]

I don't know why it's so hard for you to understand the purpose of a gun.

[redzero]

And if the attacker is far away, that's even more of an incentive to aim for center mass.

[George Gervin's Afro]

so the moral of the story is... you can't claim self defense if you are the one who instigates the situation... why does this sound so familiar?

[cantthinkofanything]

I don't know why it's so hard for you to understand the purpose of a gun.

You've been brainwashed into thinking the only purpose of a gun is to kill. With proper training, a gun can provide a multi faceted approach to crime prevention. But this training is not being offered. It's no different that a knife or martial arts. Sure you can use either to kill someone but that's not the only purpose. Guns can be used for much more than just sending someone to their grave. It's attitudes like yours that the left wing gun control freaks latch on to when trying to ban guns.

[redzero]

I don't have a problem with guns. I just think your idea of training to aim for the limbs is stupid. Either don't use live rounds or don't use a gun if you don't want to kill anybody. If the attacker is far away, that makes not aiming for central mass even more stupid.

[Blake]

so the moral of the story is... you can't claim self defense if you are the one who instigates the situation... why does this sound so familiar?

it's definitely less effective to cry ”standing my ground” when he is standing in the driveway owned by the guy he just shot.

[cantthinkofanything]

I don't have a problem with guns. I just think your idea of training to aim for the limbs is stupid. Either don't use live rounds or don't use a gun if you don't want to kill anybody. If the attacker is far away, that makes not aiming for central mass even more stupid.

So you don't think it would have worked out better if Zimmerman shot Trayvon in the knee and then called the cops?

[redzero]

I'm not saying that being able to hit the limbs is a bad thing. It's impractical, though. If somebody can cap somebody from 50 feet, good for them. However, training every gun owner to do that is stupid.

[cantthinkofanything]

I'm not saying that being able to hit the limbs is a bad thing. It's impractical, though. If somebody can cap somebody from 50 feet, good for them. However, training every gun owner to do that is stupid.

I don't know that it's impractical if it ultimately saves lives. I would think it's something that most could accomplish with use of a pistol scope.

[redzero]

Using a taser would save lives, too. We are going around in circles. Let's just agree that you're an idiot and call it a day.

[cantthinkofanything]

Using a taser would save lives, too. We are going around in circles. Let's just agree that you're an idiot and call it a day.

Yeah...but the taser doesn't give you the option to shoot them if it's justified. I'm worn out as well but I don't know why you don't get that one point.

[redzero]

So you just want to shoot people?

[cantthinkofanything]

So you just want to shoot people?

LOL. No. I own several guns and actually do practice shooting at small moving targets. I've got a Glock 19mm with a 4x pistol scope mounted on see thru rings. But I don't have a CC license. And I keep my guns locked up because of my kids.

But IF I did have CC and opted to carry my gun, I would use my preparation to neutralize the threat first, then decide whether to kill them or not. That being said, if I was really scared, I'd probably just shoot as many bullets as I could toward their head.

[pawe]

LOL. No. I own several guns and actually do practice shooting at small moving targets. I've got a Glock 19mm with a 4x pistol scope mounted on see thru rings.

Thank you for subtly letting us know that you are just trolling.
You actually scared me a little bit with your logic.
I see your posts all over ST and I know you're not that stupid.