Stand Your Ground

One thing that bothers me about this is tactically, you've got a ranged weapon and guys who have no ranged weapons.

I realize the average suburban lawn doesn't give you that much space; but I think I would definitely want to maximize that space. Maybe even use that house to create a barrier between me and the problem. This way, I get the maximum amount of notice that somebody is coming at me and it will make it easier to show aggression on their part hopefully.

It also sounds like that second shot was problematic from a forensics standpoint. From the accounts, it sounds like the first shot hit Case in the front; but the second shot hit him in the back. There are lots of reasons that could happen; but I can see why it is a tough case.

Which brings up another point, what may be real clear to you may not be so clear to investigators and if you get several different people saying different things about what happened, well that is why we have a trial system.
 
Which brings up another point, what may be real clear to you may not be so clear to investigators and if you get several different people saying different things about what happened, well that is why we have a trial system.
Click to expand...


Exactly Sir, You have hit the nail squarely. The circumstances vs/ the account of what transpired have made this case what it evolved to be.
 
I found this link (http://bubbaworld.com/2007/09/04/shooting-speeders/) dated from the time of the original incident which quotes the Rogers county sheriff as saying both men (Abshire and Case) may have used alcohol.

I don't know how accurate that is; but it might help explain the DA's actions when you add in the second shot to the back and the two conflicting stories about how it got there.

I would really be interested in seeing the transcripts from the trial. It sounds like there is more going on here than any of the news stories have related.
 
CCW-Double Edge Sword

I have been reading and watching the videos about this incident. This story just reminds me of the fact that CCW can be a double edged sword. Not assigning fault or even saying it will stop me from carrying...because it won't, but this is the type of incident that you can be drawn into that could have possibly been avoided. I know life is not perfect and you cannot control everything, but I hope that anytime I draw my firearm it is due to a direct un-avoidable situation.

I carry most of the time and I have told my wife that I will do more to go out of the way to avoid trouble when I carry than when I am un-armed. Again, not assigning blame in this incident, just saying it makes me stop and give thought to my own situation.

IMO, this is the type of incident that should be part of CCW class lectures.
 
madmag said:
I carry all the time and I have even told my wife that I will do more to go out of the way to avoid trouble when I carry than when I am un-armed.
Click to expand...

That is a wise, wise decision, sir.

He who is armed has a GREATER responsibility to avoid trouble than he who is not armed.
 
He who is armed has the same obligation to defend himself and his family than he who is not armed. The presence of the means to do so makes it easier. With that comes the responsibility to not abuse it.

When you willing give up the obligation to do so, all rights are lost.
 
Wow. I really don't know how I feel about this. I mean, I agree he should have stayed inside and just not gotten involved but that would've left his neighbor out in harms way potentially. So I'll go from that... He goes out to help his neighbor. When he sees trouble, according to accounts from him, pulled his gun and warned them to leave. That's the first part I don't know how to feel about. I think he should have warned them before announcing he had his weapon. To a drunk, no less. They may have seen that as a "challenge" in some way. Next part is the fact that when tackled, he shot the man. That isn't the part that bugs me. The part that does bug me is the second shot to his back. If he shot him in the chest, odd's are the reason the dude "fell onto him" is he was royally messed up and he could have rolled the guy off. There wasn't really a need for a spinal shot that I can see. Hell, he'd have been better off pistol-whipping the guy. That just makes me question his motives at that point. I understand defending ones family because I am the same way. If someone breaks in my home, I will undoubtedly shoot to kill. However on my front lawn I'm going to do my best to make them leave without firing a shot. But he and his wife in this case put themselves into this EXTREMELY dangerous situation. But as I said before, they'd have thrown a neighbor under the bus. It's one big loop of "well if he had done this, then this" that all circles back. Honestly, the person I feel who is at fault for a good portion of it is the neighbor. I understand the speeding issue, but she would have been MUCH better off calling the police then shouting about it on LABOR DAY, a day ripe with drinking, at some potentially drunk drivers.
 
I wish more people would read about this case. So many threads are started by people who want to shoot someone. Yes, the Castle Doctrine is going to save a lot of people from going to jail for a longtime in situations like this, but it is not going to save them the expenses of having to hire an attorney and go to trial.

I am on the side that believes retreat to a safe place and wait for law enforcement (in cases like this). If it was inside the home, then I believe it would be a different story (and I am not going to retreat).

Just because you have the right and the ability (In this case to defend yourself) does not mean it is always the correct choice to make.
 
Just because you have the right and the ability (In this case to defend yourself) does not mean it is always the correct choice to make.
Click to expand...

Indeed. That the law might allow you to do a bad thing isn't a reason to do it.

In addition to the potential legal and financial burden involved in shooting someone, I will also note the frequency of moral and psychological burdens that can follow the event. The act under discussion is facing a a living, breathing person with parents, perhaps siblings spouse and children, and keeping him from continuing all the activities of life we hold dear.

That doesn't mean it is always wrong. I think it means a well sorted individual cannot do it casually.
 
First off, I am in no way assuming or assigning blame. Obviously the outcome of this whole situation is awful for everyone. That said...

Should anyone have to stand down when confronted in front of your own home by thugs? Hell no! Could he have made better decisions and not escalated the situation? Likely. IMO if he wanted to truly defend himself and his wife, he could have done many other things other than go in the house, get armed and go back outside and wait in the driveway for two carloads of guys to return - with his wife! Also, speeding and doing a donut doesn't tell me "go get my gun". Something's missing or someone isn't telling the whole story.

I think the arrest was very much justified and the DA had a very difficult decision to make. He's lucky to have been found not guilty.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top