Stand Your Ground? Texas man kills teacher over noise complaint
Source: RawStory
A Texas man says he was justified in killing an elementary school teacher over a noise complaint because he was “standing my ground.”
Retired firefighter Raul Rodriguez is hoping that a video that he taped himself will prove that he was acting in self-defense when he gunned down P.E. teacher Kelly Danaher outside the victim’s home near Houston in May 2010.
On the video that was presented as evidence in court on Wednesday, loud music can be heard as Rodriguez tells Danaher to “turn it down.”
You need to stop right there,” Rodriguez says. “Don’t come any closer please. I’m telling you, I’m telling you, stop, I said stop right now or I will shoot you! … I fear for my life. I told you to stop, my life’s in danger, you got weapons on you, stay away from me.”
Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/07/stand-your-ground-texas-man-kills-teacher-over-noise-complaint/
= new reply since forum marked as read
I'd get stuck there arguing the meatheads, and never get a chance to get back with you 
Don't suppose you can provide me with what I'm looking for either, though?
of crimes are being committed by people who do NOT go through the trouble of applying to the state for a CCW permit. And that, I hope YOU will admit, is true and obvious.
But thanks for pointing us to that exchange, where you bring up another curious perception--misperception, really--about us Gungeonistas:
the Gungeon and its posters would have us believe that America is in the grips of a murderous crime wave, and everyone, everyone should be armed and afraid.
Is this more of your "absurd" hyperbole? When have you heard ANYONE in the Gungeon say that EVERYONE should be armed?
I will, at present, endeavor to overlook your immature name-calling ("the pack of flippered and bug-eyed mutants"
and hope that you can take a more...shall we say, open-minded view of those of us who support the right to keep and bear arms?
It so happens that Texas keeps detailed records of the convictions of Concealed Handgun License holders and publishes them on the internet, annually. Here is the site for convictions rate for every type of felony. As you can see, for most types of felonies there are zero (0) CHL convictions. For all forms of murder there is only one (1) CHLer convicted in 2009 versus over 600 convictions for the general population. There were over 402,000 people with CHLs in Texas that year. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/reports/convrates.htm
Here is a chart that shows the rate of CHL felony convictions against the general population.
"
Red bars are CHL conviction rates, blue bars are general population conviction rates.
In most states, when a person applies for a CCW, they are heavily screened before the permit is issued. An applicant has to pass an FBI background investigation, (fingerprints taken and checked), take and pass a class that includes self-defense law, and demonstrate proficiency by live fire on a range.
CCWs, in most states, are only given to citizens that have demonstrated that they are law-abiding people. That is why we have such an excellent record.
So, you would expect the number of crimes to be much lower because they are such a small percent of the population. To reveal meaningful data, you'd have to take your raw numbers and calculate whether the deviations from the expected conviction rate of 2% of the non-concealed carry conviction rate were statistically significant--from eyeballing it, many of them probably are. If you did this work and verified statistical significance across a broad spectrum of crimes, you'd then have some convincing data, but again, only for Texas, only for the crimes listed, and only so much as you had evidence that convictions are a reliable proxy for the true underlying rate of law violations.
To you, violent crimes may be the ones of concern. To me, bald statements of moral superiority (such as "CCW'ers are, actually, more law-abiding on average." are of concern -- and this statement was not made by you, but your chart was used to defend it. However, even by your own terms, you don't have a causal relation--people don't become more moral or less violent once they have a gun permit -- they had fewer convictions to begin with. I am sure there are millions of people in Texas who also lack convictions for all the crimes on your list and who also lack gun permits, which again begs the question.
I find no evidence for such overly broad statements of underlying law-abidingness in your data, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.
How they view themselves:
A more accurate portrait:
claim of yours, why don't you spend a few minutes poking around to find some evidence to support this accusation of yours? Because right now all you have is a totally unsupported and unjustified attack against other DUers...
...is that you?
Excuse me while I catch a wave.
you could trespass, even enter my home armed, (on whatever pretext you chose) say you feared for your life, then gun me down and call it self-defense if you used the stand your ground training vocabulary and took pictures. I blame the NRA and its political enablers for this kind of insanity. 
Last time I did I was told that I didn't know anything about the law and that it could never be used as a defense in a shooting such as Trayvon Martin. Boy, do I stand corrected. 
I think this case is a lot more egregious than Trayvon Martin's (in that this idiot was --apparently -- dumb enough to tape his agressive and clearly pre-planned attempt to go use his gun on his neighbors' party). However, the party is not over till the fat lady sings. And in this case SYG is not "irrelevant" to this case until a jury says so--knowing Texas, it is perfectly possible that a jury sides with the shooter. So glad I do not live there.
I wonder where all the gun-religionists are who normally defend their poor widdle guns in threads like this.
Some people do not read the articles/see the videos and then post stuff that isn't true.associated with lynch mobs and vigilante assholes than with any sort of legitimate justice system.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
If only it were used more.
your scenario would be terroristic threats.
The threat is a group of 3-15 people approaching in a hostile manner against a lone man. That is a serious threat of bodily harm. Unless he is Chuck Norris one person cannot fight off a group like that.
The are right in front of him and some of the video indicates some might be trying to get around to the side or behind- the threat is now imminent.
He did say more than I will shoot you. He articulated he was in fear for his life.
At this point rather than talking about getting their own guns or offering that he drop the gun and see how tough he is, perhaps the least intoxicated could address him one on one saying let's talk this out- while someone else calls 911. I have never seen and reference that the men made that call.
You would only have to worry if you were attacking me. I am actually fairly pleasant to be around, if you don't mind sarcasm. I also like to argue both sides of an issue
but could discuss it over a pint without coming to blows
SYG theory is great when bad guy pulls a knife, says gimme your wallet and you pull a gun and say no.
when it is a couple regular Joes who let an argument get away from common sense I haven't seen one law that covers that so nicely.
When in doubt, send it to a grand jury. I think this case is proceeding well. Get the evidence, both sides story and judge guilt.
In my highly removed, sitting at my computer, listening to 70's music I believe R. is guilty of something. I'm just not ready to leap to capital murder without more facts of that night and what happened between them in the past.
Edit: saying the 'magic words' is a factor but a fairly minor one and in no way the deciding factor in judging SD. Sorry I was less than clear before.
Here is an photo of it.
It happened in an apartment complex. You were projecting your situation onto someone else and judging from your projection.
I still agree that the shooter was the agressor.
It looks like he was standing alone, 200 feet away (well, that's what he says, anyway), and then the three guys drive up to him. It's true that Rodriguez wasn't on his own property, and he certainly should have let the police handle the noise complaint, but if it really is correct that three guys drove up to him and one of them said (as appears on the tape) that he was going to go get something that Rodriguez couldn't handle, or whatever the exact words were, well, hmm. I'm not saying Rodriguez was right, not by any means, but the other three guys contributed to the situation's becoming escalated; it's not as though Rodriguez unilaterally started a life-or-death confrontation like Zimmerman did. I should add that I couldn't possibly be more anti-gun unless I were James Brady, and situations like this are one big reason why.
Gosh, all I needed to hear was 'Stand Your Own Ground' and 'Elementary teacher' and my mind was made up.
I hope you enjoy your stay..
