I’m disagreeing with your statement that “you’re only allowed to use deadly force in proportional response,” not with whether this case is being prosecuted rightly or not.

Mate, read that link I put in there. I can tell you, from experience, that if you shoot at someone stealing your property in Texas, where that penal code I posted is from, that exact portion of the statute is going to be used and you will not be convicted. It really is “anyone could have a gun or knife.” At least Texas has it so just theft has to be during the nighttime, so I guess that’s something.

You’ll also get similar worded statutes in many other states in the US, several of which, stating this again, where I’ve had the misfortune of having to research those laws. And that “reasonable belief” part about exposing yourself to risk of serious bodily injury or death? I have seen it applied to people who are simply physically larger than you. Proportional response is a moot concept.

Sorry, but that’s not exactly right, because in several areas, the prevention of death or great bodily harm also includes the scenario where if you were to attempt to reclaim control over your property, you would be putting yourself in those same risk categories. See 9.42 (3)(B) here, where I have had the misfortune of having to research the law before. In other words, if you think the person is stealing your stuff and could harm you if you try to recover said stuff… well, you’re ‘legally’ allowed to start blasting.

I’m not sure about the exact laws where the incident occurred, but in several other states that I know the law of, aggravated assault carries the exact same penalties as attempted murder. Because of the wording of the two laws, aggravated assault is much easier to prove. If you’re a prosecutor, why would you not go with the easier to prove, exact same penalty crime?

You won’t be. If I remember correctly, and I shudder at the memories, you’ll have anthropomorphized versions of the seven sins. Be warned, All hope abandon ye who enter here.

That’s what the beer hat is for.

The photo isn’t great, but my memory of that stretch of road is there is a curve after a bridge. If the load came off and the truck was eastbound, that giant pole would have rolled across oncoming traffic. The poor driver coming the other way never stood a chance of avoiding it.

I wonder about that. Aren’t dolphins and whales non-buoyant, in the sense that they sink when they die?

Looking, I find https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/what-happens-when-whales-die.html

I guess the dolphin may have been at the floating stage?

No, in another article from last week, he had put the amount they wanted in a separate bank account for them. It was more than the settlement amount. The bonder, at the least, isn’t going to lose money from Trump.

Just look at the two paragraphs: "To be sure, millions of these petrified Americans believe the Democrats have gleefully allowed the “woke” left of their party to systematically destroy everything or every institution they depend upon for quality-of-life issues. Be those pertaining to energy independence, higher education, housing, the financial system, the supply chain, border security, the military, the medical and pharmaceutical industry, the media or entertainment. The woke left now dictates — with the blessing of Democratic politician enablers — that all must now be viewed and run through the distorted lens of identity politics.

But when these same millions of hurting Americans turn their eyes toward a Republican Party that promises to reverse all the damage being done by the left, they see only out-of-touch elitists doing the bidding of the corporate elites, while breaking every promise made."

If that isn’t the to-the-t playbook of ‘both sides’ in a more wordy format, I’ll eat my hat. It also manages to place the blame squarely on the democrats for their ‘wokeness.’ Somehow they’ve broken higher education, the financial system, the supply chain, ‘border security,’ the military… good god, what hasn’t been destroyed by ThE demOCraTS!

Hopefully it brings consequences. Every time a bullet is fired, it is required (and I guess that must be in quotes for police officers…) that you be responsible for that bullet’s consequences. If you shoot at a legitimate threat, but hit the bystander, you should get charged. Cop, not-cop, firefighter, good samaritan with a gun, whatever. Charge them.

We actually do know if the kid kept quiet… because it mentioned in the article that he didn’t.

Pfft, sounds like you can fix the snoring problem, even in america without insurance, by having an american 7 year old neighbor. Damn, I love america.

‘Reasonable’ is decided by a jury, ultimately. You can argue all you want, but this happened in Texas. Good luck convincing a jury the grandfather was unreasonable when half of them likely don’t even lock up their guns.

I tried a while ago to get SC2 working, but didn’t have luck. Are there any tricks to it these days?

Wait, is it still a sequel if the other movie is a prequel?

Isn’t alex jones still avoiding paying his settlement, and simultaneously making money off of it? You may not hear of him as much, but his former listeners are still throwing money at him.

I love the little aside about the rust. Some journalists still have fun.

Lol, mostly because I’m playing with the numbers. Kids only have 20 teeth until they’re in double digits. But I was also working with a population that typically had 3-10 teeth missing, so my perspective is skewed ;)

It might be true that the ones you meet online are very vocal, but there are a lot of people in person who will sing his praises, put flags on their car, their house, and everything else they can reach. They’ll deride any ‘liberal’ and come up with every straw man they can to lampoon for the amusement of the circle around them. I see them when I visit family, when I converse with people at the local park, and even in casual conversations in the workplace. They are everywhere, and it’s crazy how comfortable they feel with being open about their vitriol.

You’re still above average! ;)