SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Oct 04 2010 03:53 pm

http://www.push.ca/blogs/sayer_sk/archive/2010/09/27/stand-up-for-skaters-get-shot.aspx

Joined: Nov 11 2009 Location: Cajun Country Posts: 1511

Wow. That's tragic.

Joined: Sep 17 2010 Posts: 156

Read this: http://www.truecrimereport.com/2010/09/david_james_air_force_veteran.php

Goes in a little more depth. Basically the old guy, the shooter, was walking away, and David, the young guy, noticed he had a gun on him and asked about it. So the old guy pulled it out, and shortly after that David lunged for the gun, and in the process was shot. The old guy is off his rocker for bringing a gun and pulling it out in a park that's retarded.

That said, this is a hard case for me because i don't think we're dealing with a murderer here, I think we're looking at a old guy that was stupid for bringing a gun, and a young guy unnecessarily trying to play hero. Perhaps by reaction he shot. Maybe anyone would have shot, by reflex, in that situation. Someone's lunging at you, I think you might just by reflex shoot them. I'd need more context and to know if this old guy has a history of violence. It's a hard case.

Joined: Nov 11 2009 Location: Cajun Country Posts: 1511

If the guy had that big of a problem with the kid skateboarding there then he should've just called the cops.

Joined: Sep 17 2010 Posts: 156

Quote:

David yelled after him about the gun. Dooley turned around and pulled it from his pants. Seeing that there was now a man with a gun and two kids close by, David lunged for the weapon. The two men struggled and fell to the ground. Dooley pulled the trigger, striking David in the chest and killing him.

It all depends when he shot him, apparently, I misread, he didn't shoot him mid lunge. If Trevor shot after he had time to assess the situation (during their struggle) then I think it's clear he should be held accountable for shooting him. It wasn't just reflex, it was deliberate.

However, now I'm wondering if he pulled the trigger as he hit the ground.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Oct 04 2010 07:20 pm

I don't think these sources are particularly neutral, especially the first one. But I think the fact he introduced a firearm into this situation is what's gonna put him away for a longer time rather than a shorter one (not that it matters, the dude is almost 70). There was no need at all to bring a gun into that situation, there was even less need to draw it, and regardless of his intentions, I can see that being enough recklessness to justify it.

Still, what a stupid thing to die over.

Posted: Oct 04 2010 07:47 pm

If you had a gun and a much stronger person lunged at you, wrestled you to the ground, and forcibly tried to take your gun from you, what would you do?

There's only one correct answer, and it's this: YOU SHOOT HIM.

Of course, there are other questions here: Did he have a permit for the gun? What specifically provoked the brandishing of the gun, if it did in fact occur? Also, has Dooley been assaulted by teenagers? If so, it would explain why he felt it necessary to bring the gun with him.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Oct 04 2010 08:07 pm

Syd Lexia wrote:

If you had a gun and a much stronger person lunged at you, wrestled you to the ground, and forcibly tried to take your gun from you, what would you do?

There's only one correct answer, and it's this: YOU SHOOT HIM.

I counter with this: If you're having an argument, and the other person pulls out a gun, and there are kids around, I'd say the correct answer is to try and take it from him.

Posted: Oct 04 2010 08:20 pm

UsaSatsui wrote:

Syd Lexia wrote:

If you had a gun and a much stronger person lunged at you, wrestled you to the ground, and forcibly tried to take your gun from you, what would you do?

There's only one correct answer, and it's this: YOU SHOOT HIM.

I counter with this: If you're having an argument, and the other person pulls out a gun, and there are kids around, I'd say the correct answer is to try and take it from him.

Hes 8 year old daughter was close by, i wouldnt want that guy any where near my daughter with a gun, this is a tragedy, if its about something dumb like skateboarding (not saying skateboarding dumb)

Posted: Oct 04 2010 08:43 pm

Natsu wrote:

Read this: http://www.truecrimereport.com/2010/09/david_james_air_force_veteran.php

Goes in a little more depth. Basically the old guy, the shooter, was walking away, and David, the young guy, noticed he had a gun on him and asked about it. So the old guy pulled it out, and shortly after that David lunged for the gun, and in the process was shot. The old guy is off his rocker for bringing a gun and pulling it out in a park that's retarded.

That said, this is a hard case for me because i don't think we're dealing with a murderer here, I think we're looking at a old guy that was stupid for bringing a gun, and a young guy unnecessarily trying to play hero. Perhaps by reaction he shot. Maybe anyone would have shot, by reflex, in that situation. Someone's lunging at you, I think you might just by reflex shoot them. I'd need more context and to know if this old guy has a history of violence. It's a hard case.

Yeah, that's basically my assessment as will. Idiocy on both ends leads to irreversible tragedy. What a waste.

Posted: Oct 04 2010 09:13 pm

If He didn't have damn good reason to draw the weapon ( fear of his life / extreme bodily harm) he's gonna get the book thrown at him. His state's laws in regards to stand your ground VS duty to retreat are also going to play a big part in the fiasco.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Oct 04 2010 09:45 pm

Blackout wrote:

If He didn't have damn good reason to draw the weapon ( fear of his life / extreme bodily harm) he's gonna get the book thrown at him. His state's laws in regards to stand your ground VS duty to retreat are also going to play a big part in the fiasco.

Not so much. "Stand your ground" usually only apply to defense of property, not people. You are always allowed to defend yourself or another.

However, you are not allowed to use deadly force unless your life or the life of another is threatened. An unarmed assailant may not justify a shooting in response.

This is pretty complicated and really a good reason we have juries to decide things like this.

Posted: Oct 04 2010 11:09 pm

Oh yeah, my bad, I forgot they were in a park.

Still, guns are like wieners, you'd better have an awfully convincing reason to whip one out in public.

Posted: Oct 06 2010 12:51 pm

Update:

http://www.push.ca/blogs/sayer_sk/archive/2010/10/04/murdering-skateboard-hater-out-on-bail.aspx

Posted: Oct 06 2010 03:51 pm

Dooley showed James the handle of the firearm in his waistband and kept insisting no skateboarding was allowed.

When Dooley realized that James was not going to tell the teen to stop skateboarding, he cursed at James and started walking away.

James called out to Dooley, asking why he was showing his gun.

Dooley turned around, pointed the gun at James, who lunged forward to grab the weapon.

The two men struggled over the firearm, then fell to the ground and the gun went off, striking James once in the chest.

Doesn't sound like he had a legitimate reason to display the weapon in his pants, let alone pull it and point it at the guy.

Posted: Oct 07 2010 05:40 pm

I love the fact that they keep saying "in cold blood" despite this being an accidental death. Sure he brought a gun to where he really shouldn't have, but he didn't voluntarily pull the trigger. He killed a man and he should go to jail, but this wasn't murder.

Posted: Oct 10 2010 01:21 pm

That's fucked up.

Posted: Oct 10 2010 01:24 pm

Thunderhorse wrote:

I love the fact that they keep saying "in cold blood" despite this being an accidental death.

Yeah but everybody has to put a fucking spin on everything, I bet the pro gun crowd has their own spin on it, and the anti skateboarding clique too (if that is indeed a clique)...