Uh oh Joe Mixon

[*Synric*]

It's going to be tough for whoever shot the kid to prove Castle Laws. Even if they say they saw a gun as mentioned it was dark the kids did not threaten their lives by firing and they were not attempting to break into the house or were in the house.

You have to prove without a doubt that your life is in danger to return lethal force.

[Sled21]

(03-19-2023, 03:38 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: If you make enough to move into a half a million-dollar home, you are not going to shoot your neighbors kid for walking thru his yard. Do all that to get out of the hood then you just going to shoot up your new neighborhood. So silly.

Aaron Hernandez says hello....you just keep maki g these silly blanket statements. I worked some high dollar neighborhoods, and I worked the hoods. You'd be surprised what goes on in both. ( but I probably made that up, right?)

[Sled21]

(03-19-2023, 03:41 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: You all need to take a course in gun safety or at least watch a 5 min video. You are not only responsible for what you are shooting but what is beyond your target in the background as well. Even a 10-year-old novice hunter knows that you make sure of what you are shooting at before you even shoot.

Not only did this guy fail at that but he failed at that 10 or 11 times since that is how many times he pulled the trigger.

I'm not even talking about him or her. I'm talking about your incorrect blanket statements that guns can never be orange, blue or green. I believe those videos point it out quite nicely.

[*bfine32*]

(03-19-2023, 03:52 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: Think you guys need to call in FredToast as backup he at least has some understanding of the law.

The Mods really need to put a stop to this stupid retort. Anyone who uses this intends to insult someone who is serving his punishment and the person they are replying to. 

Every response you have received has been civil, you on the other hand have not. 

Not one person is saying the kid should have been shot. No one person is saying the law was not broken. I'm simply suggesting if the reports are accurate the kid may deserve some small degree of culpability.  

[*bfine32*]

(03-19-2023, 04:05 PM)Synric Wrote: It's going to be tough for whoever shot the kid to prove Castle Laws. Even if they say they saw a gun as mentioned it was dark the kids did not threaten their lives by firing and they were not attempting to break into the house or were in the house.

You have to prove without a doubt that your life is in danger to return lethal force.

GOV DeWine removed the "Duty to Retreat" from Ohio's Stand Your Ground Laws 

[BengalsBong]

(03-19-2023, 04:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The Mods really need to put a stop to this stupid retort. Anyone who uses this intends to insult someone who is serving his punishment and the person they are replying to. 

Every response you have received has been civil, you on the other hand have not. 

Not one person is saying the kid should have been shot. No one person is saying the law was not broken. I'm simply suggesting if the reports are accurate the kid may deserve some small degree of culpability.  

Not really sure what you are trying to say here. I am a FredToast fan and supporter. Love the guys posts and I was pointing out the fact he was a lawyer and has an understanding of the law.

The kid did nothing wrong you stated yourself it was dark, and they might not have seen the colors on the toy gun. Even if this was the case that just proves that they could not determine that the shadowy figure was a threat to their life. 

BTW I had a nice nap...

[BengalsBong]

(03-19-2023, 04:25 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I'm not even talking about him or her. I'm talking about your incorrect blanket statements that guns can never be orange, blue or green. I believe those videos point it out quite nicely.

Some people customize the guns they own, and some pink guns are sold to get women's attention. These types of guns are never used in high end home invasions. They are used for targets only they are most likely not even used in hunting unless the person has fears of being shot by other hunters and want to be noticed at a glance.

Those pictures of REAL guns with colors that pop and are easy to notice were all used in gangs and in high crime areas not for home invasions in nice neighborhoods. 

Please take a poll show your blue-, yellow- and orange-colored guns next to black guns that is a normal Glock type color and see which people chose to take on a home invasion in a nice neighborhood. Shakes my head in utter disgust at this long conversation about something so simple. Your views are just unrealistic.

[*rfaulk34*]

(03-19-2023, 08:34 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: Some people customize the guns they own, and some pink guns are sold to get women's attention. These types of guns are never used in high end home invasions. They are used for targets only they are most likely not even used in hunting unless the person has fears of being shot by other hunters and want to be noticed at a glance.

Those pictures of REAL guns with colors that pop and are easy to notice were all used in gangs and in high crime areas not for home invasions in nice neighborhoods. 

Please take a poll show your blue-, yellow- and orange-colored guns next to black guns that is a normal Glock type color and see which people chose to take on a home invasion in a nice neighborhood. Shakes my head in utter disgust at this long conversation about something so simple. Your views are just unrealistic.

This is exactly, word for word, what you said and i simply pointed out how it was incorrect. 

(03-19-2023, 12:05 AM)BengalsBong Wrote: The bright colors yellow, blue, orange are colors never used on real guns and should have alerted someone immediately that it was a toy. 

My post showed that they are. Where and when they're used isn't solely determined on what part of town you are in. 

As an aside to that, actual toy guns are used in real crimes as well. Some dude in Texas recently got blown away trying to rob a restaurant recently with a toy gun. I've also watched many youtube videos of people carrying toy guns, who were shot by police when they brandished them, in all kinds of neighborhoods.

To the point of where and when a real or toy gun is used, regardless of where the incident happens, if you are threatened, it would be silly, negligible and potentially deadly to your safety if you wait to see if the gun is real or not, because real crimes are committed by people who are carrying real guns and fake/toy guns. 

I don't reply like Fredtoast because i ususally employ context, common sense and real-world expierence when i form a thought.

As a nice little added anecdote, just the other day, 3 teens came walking down the street where i work with what, upon closer inspection, looked like 3 assault type rifles that were cut out of wood and painted. If confronted with the decision, with the number of active shooters in the world today, how long do you wait before you decide to brandish your own weapon with the intent to defend yourself?

The entire point being, the world isn't as black and white as you are trying to make it and with hindsight, you can never be wrong. In the moment, though, you can. 

[Sled21]

(03-19-2023, 08:34 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: Some people customize the guns they own, and some pink guns are sold to get women's attention. These types of guns are never used in high end home invasions. They are used for targets only they are most likely not even used in hunting unless the person has fears of being shot by other hunters and want to be noticed at a glance.

Those pictures of REAL guns with colors that pop and are easy to notice were all used in gangs and in high crime areas not for home invasions in nice neighborhoods. 

Please take a poll show your blue-, yellow- and orange-colored guns next to black guns that is a normal Glock type color and see which people chose to take on a home invasion in a nice neighborhood. Shakes my head in utter disgust at this long conversation about something so simple. Your views are just unrealistic.

There you go again with your "nevers." Did you get all this knowledge of gangs, thuggery, home invasions from tv, or do you have any real life experience. Because your being ridiculous.

[BengalsBong]

(03-19-2023, 10:08 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: This is exactly, word for word, what you said and i simply pointed out how it was incorrect. 


My post showed that they are. Where and when they're used isn't solely determined on what part of town you are in. 

As an aside to that, actual toy guns are used in real crimes as well. Some dude in Texas recently got blown away trying to rob a restaurant recently with a toy gun. I've also watched many youtube videos of people carrying toy guns, who were shot by police when they brandished them, in all kinds of neighborhoods.

To the point of where and when a real or toy gun is used, regardless of where the incident happens, if you are threatened, it would be silly, negligible and potentially deadly to your safety if you wait to see if the gun is real or not, because real crimes are committed by people who are carrying real guns and fake/toy guns. 

I don't reply like Fredtoast because i ususally employ context, common sense and real-world expierence when i form a thought.

As a nice little added anecdote, just the other day, 3 teens came walking down the street where i work with what, upon closer inspection, looked like 3 assault type rifles that were cut out of wood and painted. If confronted with the decision, with the number of active shooters in the world today, how long do you wait before you decide to brandish your own weapon with the intent to defend yourself?

The entire point being, the world isn't as black and white as you are trying to make it and with hindsight, you can never be wrong. In the moment, though, you can. 

That is for each person to determine with the knowledge that they might have to justify their actions in a court of law. Even police officers are held to this standard and accept it as does everyone that carries or owns a gun.

If a cop shoots a kid with a gun they are put on trial and must defend themselves as does store owners in some cases when it is determined that fowl play was involved like in this case. You must know your life is in danger Joe did not shoot one shot even though gun fire was going off a few feet away from him why? Because he did not think his life was in danger even after someone from his home had shot 11 rounds out of their firearm. Joe still showed restraint while his companion a convicted felon that should not have possession of a firearm was blasting away. This guy is doing time for just being in possession of a firearm before the kid being shot is even mentioned. Two other people Joe and his trainer was armed there was no reason whatsoever the felon that shot the kid should have a firearm.  

[BengalsBong]

BTW I am not here to cross the T's and dot the i. It is a slow Sunday no podcasts to watch so I am really just here for the argument.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-19-2023, 01:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It's not reaching back 30 years and no one is trying to prove it's OK to shoot a 16-year-old. Below is a gun that was confiscated in a raid in NC back in 2021:



https://wpde.com/news/local/north-carolina-police-seize-real-gun-disguised-to-look-like-toy-gun-during-drug-raid

Given we don't know all the facts, but is any of the reports of them pulling in Mixon's driveway and being on his property are correct, the little sh!ts playing Soldiers put themselves in a compromising position

I don’t believe Mixon’s sister would be out there picking up the brass after the shooting if she feared for her life. And I don’t believe Mixon’s sister or her boyfriend would have been arrested and charged had it been a justifiable self defense shooting.

[*bfine32*]

(03-20-2023, 12:49 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I don’t believe Mixon’s sister would be out there picking up the brass after the shooting if she feared for her life. And I don’t believe Mixon’s sister or her boyfriend would have been arrested and charged had it been a justifiable self defense shooting.

I agree, she most likely didn't fear for her life while she was picking up the casings. 

I've feared for my life in the past and then policed up casings later. 

[grampahol]

(03-19-2023, 04:22 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Aaron Hernandez says hello....you just keep maki g these silly blanket statements. I worked some high dollar neighborhoods, and I worked the hoods. You'd be surprised what goes on in both. ( but I probably made that up, right?)

I guess some people just don't understand the economics of living in the hood..i lived in a few in my life. Most people living in them can't actually afford guns and if they can it's got good odds of being in the pawn shop when they need it..Compare that with a neighborhood where the average homeowner has enough money to buy a half million dollar house? Not even close..

[WeezyBengal]

Man there's a lot of ignorance in this thread.

[Sled21]

(03-20-2023, 08:07 AM)grampahol Wrote: I guess some people just don't understand the economics of living in the hood..i lived in a few in my life. Most people living in them can't actually afford guns and if they can it's got good odds of being in the pawn shop when they need it..Compare that with a neighborhood where the average homeowner has enough money to buy a half million dollar house? Not even close..

Again, a banket statement. Sure, I've confiscated more than my share of Raven .25s and Hi-Point 9mms, that would more than likely blow up in your hand before you could hit anything with it. I've also taken more than my share of Glocks, ZSmiths, AKs, ARs, shotguns, etc. It's called stealing.... or drug money. Anybody wanting to paint a certain neighborhood (rich or poor) a certain way simply hasn't dealt with the people living there. You can't make blanket statements.

[PDub80]

Joe Mixon's sister was in the right for shooting that kid.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-20-2023, 01:06 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree, she most likely didn't fear for her life while she was picking up the casings. 

I've feared for my life in the past and then policed up casings later. 

But, you’re a highly trained, professional soldier and the Army loves their brass details and police calls.

I don’t think most responsible gun owners would police up their brass after a self defense shooting because that would be evidence that police can use to recreate the scene to corroborate a justifiable self defense shooting.

At least in my mind, Mixon’s sister policing up the brass afterwords indicates an active attempt to destroy evidence to control the narrative.

But, I’m not a police officer. I’m just a guy who has been forced to watch too many true crime shows with his wife.

But, I also view these shooting through the lens of a former infantryman who likes to think I understand ROE. And someone who likes to believe I’m a responsible gun owner that understands when I can/can’t use deadly force. And if I was on the boyfriend’s jury, he’d be ****** unless further evidence changed my opinion. (Which by the way, is the main reason I hate those true crime shows. By the time the show is over, I still don’t know the damn truth. Too much doubt. Not sure if it is the editing to create drama for an TV show or just the nature of the crimes. And I hope I never have to be on a jury.)

[*Nately120*]

(03-20-2023, 12:31 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Joe Mixon's sister was in the right for shooting that kid.

I think stuff like this is expressed in terms of being "not in the wrong" or "justified."  Saying someone was right to shoot a kid may turn people off of your message.

[*bfine32*]

(03-20-2023, 12:32 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: But, you’re a highly trained, professional soldier and the Army loves their brass details and police calls.

I don’t think most responsible gun owners would police up their brass after a self defense shooting because that would be evidence that police can use to recreate the scene to corroborate a justifiable self defense shooting.

At least in my mind, Mixon’s sister policing up the brass afterwords indicates an active attempt to destroy evidence to control the narrative.

But, I’m not a police officer. I’m just a guy who has been forced to watch too many true crime shows with his wife.

But, I also view these shooting through the lens of a former infantryman who likes to think I understand ROE. And someone who likes to believe I’m a responsible gun owner that understands when I can/can’t use deadly force. And if I was on the boyfriend’s jury, he’d be ****** unless further evidence changed my opinion. (Which by the way, is the main reason I hate those true crime shows. By the time the show is over, I still don’t know the damn truth. Too much doubt. Not sure if it is the editing to create drama for an TV show or just the nature of the crimes. And I hope I never have to be on a jury.)

Oh, I fully concur that whoever picked up the brass did so in an attempt to "mask" evidence. I was just disagreeing with the notion that it meant the person didn't fear for their lives/property when they discharged the rounds. 

The question is "Why" the shots were fired and IMO IF the kid was on their property playing badass with his toy gun, he shares in the why.