Shooting at Midtown Tulsa Gas Station

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Michael Brown

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
5,208
Reaction score
2
Location
Tulsa
I'm not begrudging the turning, it's the turnee. :)

No, cops shouldn't make those decisions, although your input commands a great deal of weight in the courtroom.

I hope Mr. Grey makes it through this whole process without penalty. It's not a totally clear-cut scenario like we read in American Rifleman.

I would agree that our input carries a bit of weight in the courtroom, but IMO it carries even more prior to the decision to prosecute or not which is why I'm so adament about giving a simple statement if you are involved in a shooting.

All that said, Tim Harris is really not a bad choice when it comes to self defense cases. The only major self defense case I disagreed with was the Gumm case and, quite honestly, I blame Gumm more for the way that turned out than I do the D.A.'s office.

There are many decisions to prosecute on which I disagree with Tim Harris but I don't have his caseload and in all but one self defense case, I've agreed with his decision-making.

I don't think this case will be a problem at all.

















........but I've been wrong before.

Michael Brown
 

buckeye

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
1,064
Reaction score
0
Location
Tulsa
That's good to hear.

Speaking generally now, a lot of the rationale in this thread boils down to "the guy needed killing". (He's a felon, dirtbag, scum, gene pool pollutant, etc.) He may have been all those things, but that's not sufficient reason in itself to shoot him. In fact, that stuff shouldn't either enter consideration at all. None of us are in a position to pass judgment and FINAL sentencing on another person for such things. We are only qualified to judge whether our own life is threatened and respond accordingly - that the attacker is good, bad or ugly is irrelevant.
 

Glocktogo

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 12, 2007
Messages
29,424
Reaction score
15,659
Location
Collinsville
That's good to hear.

Speaking generally now, a lot of the rationale in this thread boils down to "the guy needed killing". (He's a felon, dirtbag, scum, gene pool pollutant, etc.) He may have been all those things, but that's not sufficient reason in itself to shoot him. In fact, that stuff shouldn't either enter consideration at all. None of us are in a position to pass judgment and FINAL sentencing on another person for such things. We are only qualified to judge whether our own life is threatened and respond accordingly - that the attacker is good, bad or ugly is irrelevant.

In court, it should only come up in sentencing if the shooter is found guilty. But when determining justification it may color the perception. It's obviously relevant to the shooter's frame of mind during the incident.

It would be difficult to process the visual information and defend one's self if someone like the Pope were to present a deadly threat. There are a very small handful of individuals that I would draw down on just for approaching me. That the shooter had a previous run-in with the shootee where an arrest was made is certainly relevant.

Remember, in God we trust. All others keep your hands where I can see them! :)
 

buckeye

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
1,064
Reaction score
0
Location
Tulsa
That the shooter had a previous run-in with the shootee where an arrest was made is certainly relevant.
That the shooter was somehow involved with law enforcement will make a big difference, no? His previous actions (specifically, the ones that pissed the other guy off) were done under the auspices of the law - as such, any retribution for them is strictly forbidden. A similar history between two ordinary citizens would have a much different impact.
 

ttown

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
4,619
Reaction score
4,791
Location
Oologah
That the shooter was somehow involved with law enforcement will make a big difference, no? His previous actions (specifically, the ones that pissed the other guy off) were done under the auspices of the law - as such, any retribution for them is strictly forbidden. A similar history between two ordinary citizens would have a much different impact.

Why, You want some of this and shows a gun tells me he wasn't bluffing or totally stupid. Maybe he thought only BG's could carry guns. If that doesn't make you fear for your life you must be Superman and can repel bullets :)
 

Danny

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
1,409
Reaction score
1
Location
Broken Arrow
That the shooter was somehow involved with law enforcement will make a big difference, no? His previous actions (specifically, the ones that pissed the other guy off) were done under the auspices of the law - as such, any retribution for them is strictly forbidden. A similar history between two ordinary citizens would have a much different impact.

If the DA/Court were to even consider his law enforcement ties, then they'd surely consider why he was "dismissed". So just the fact he WAS involved in law enforcement may or may not be in his best interest.

Just my opinion.
 

BryanDP

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 6, 2007
Messages
2,793
Reaction score
305
Location
Tulsa
Police officers that have seen the actual video of the whole ordeal (not just "heard" second-hand information form "news" sources) have gone on record saying that they believe this to be a justified self-defense shooting. It baffles me why this not good enough for some members of a group that is supposed to be supportive of carrying weapons for self defense.

Has anyone here that has seen the video feel like the shooter acted inappropriately?

Bryan
 

buckeye

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
1,064
Reaction score
0
Location
Tulsa
Why, You want some of this and shows a gun tells me he wasn't bluffing or totally stupid. Maybe he thought only BG's could carry guns. If that doesn't make you fear for your life you must be Superman and can repel bullets :)
You're missing the point... The conversation just before the shooting is not "history" - and I'm not suggesting this was a bad shoot. I'm pondering the idea that a self defense shooter with law enforcement ties will be looked on differently than an ordinary citizen.

To be clear: I'm not trying to stir the pot and I'm not suggesting this was a bad shoot. Just pontificating... Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough. :wave:
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom