Churchgoer kills churchgoer over 'saved seats' scuffle

[ewq1938]

What state's laws are you quoting? That would be an offense in Texas and Florida.

Actually can you prove showing someone a concealing permit or badge is illegal anywhere?

 

[ewq1938]

My Lord. My sweet Lord.

What would you do if a fellow Christian let you know you were in someone's seat? Violently curse them out or thank them?

I know what I would do. We know what Braxton would do. How about you?

 

[RDKirk]

Actually can you prove showing someone a concealing permit or badge is illegal anywhere?

First, he didn't just show his bogus "I have a permit to carry" badge--which is not the legal permit, btw, he also deliberately printed his gun to show he was wearing one.

In Texas that is considered "disorderly conduct" and will get a person arrested and his carry permit revoked.

In Florida, that's considered "brandishing" and will also get you arrested.

I don't think you have a carry permit yourself, do you, or you'd actually know these things.

 

[RDKirk]

What would you do if a fellow Christian let you know you were in someone's seat? Violently curse them out or thank them?

I know what I would do. We know what Braxton would do. How about you?

The question is, what would you do about someone who was disturbed but willing to sit quietly as long as he was left alone.

I'd do what the ushers, the associate pastor, and apparently the persons who were sitting in those seats did: Leave him alone.

 

[ewq1938]

In Texas that is considered "disorderly conduct" and will get a person arrested and his carry permit revoked.

In Florida, that's considered "brandishing" and will also get you arrested.

I said PROVE didn't I? Anyways, this is getting a little old so I'll go read your other post then I think I'm gonna chill until Storm throws his not-guilty party. See ya there Kirk.

 

[ewq1938]

The question is, what would you do about someone who was disturbed but willing to sit quietly as long as he was left alone.

I'd do what the ushers, the associate pastor, and apparently the persons who were sitting in those seats did: Leave him alone.

They didn't leave him alone, they intervened until he calmed down some...then he wrongly took offense when someone said he was in someone's seat.

 

[ewq1938]

Any suggestions then?
I've read it often; I've heard it preached on in my church several times through my life. NEVER heard about any qualifications so I really need your guidance on where to look. I don't have the time to do a blind running around on the internet (Despite what my activity on CF over the last couple days suggests).

Here is a good work:

http://www.jesuswalk.com/lessons/6_27-36.htm

 

[Belk]

Same verses we are discussing.

And the verse numbers would be?

Yes he was dangerous and self defense was appropriate.

He was on the same level of an enemy as ISIS?

 

[bhsmte]

Same verses we are discussing.



Yes he was dangerous and self defense was appropriate.

If someone swings at you, self defense is certainly in order.

Using deadly force as a matter of self defense, is another matter and requires one to establish, there existed a legit threat of severe bodily harm or death.

I cant wait to see this dude, explain why he was facing severe bodily harm or death.

 

[Murby]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...mns-was-only-armed-with-his-bible-police-say/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...mns-was-only-armed-with-his-bible-police-say/

He still was right to use it to defend himself.

This is wrong.

That's wrong. One may use deadly force to defend yourself or someone else.

Wrong again.

Rightly so. The man was dangerous and disturbed.

And Wrong again.

Or he will be found innocent and justified according to the circumstances and witness testimonies.

And wrong one more time.

. You can't decide how Storm felt. He said he feared for his safety and the law supports that. His defense will use that. A jury of his peers won't convict him. Rage all you want about that.

Not a chance... he's going to prison.

No, it is warning that is he violently attacks him that he will shoot in defense.

Nope.. From reading your postings, I would strongly suggest you tear up the CPL permit you claim to have because you clearly do not understand the responsibility of carrying a weapon in public.

I am licensed, which should have been obvious from my position on this. Wanna see my permit?? lol

Your statements above clearly show that you may not be the type of person who should be carrying a weapon. You seem to lead toward the "defend yourself with lethal force anytime someone upsets you".. And if you ever find yourself in a situation like that, you might want to think much more carefully or you'll end up in prison.. Maybe Mr. Storm will be your cell mate?

No, the guy was out of control, calmed down some, then was told he was in someone's seat and he flipped out and got himself shot after he assaulted a man. Braxton is a criminal, Storm is a victim.

Wrong again.. so wrong..

I already made mine. Guess you weren't paying attention. No surprise there

And it looks like my prediction of a "Manslaughter charge" has now come true.. So far, I'm batting 100 and you're striking out..

In all seriousness, I am very concerned about your attitude towards this. If you really are a legal CPL holder, I would strongly suggest you find another CPL class, preferably one given by an ex-cop, and retake your training.. Its for your own good and the good of your family.
You clearly do not understand or grasp the seriousness of the responsibility of carrying a deadly weapon.

 

[ewq1938]

If someone swings at you, self defense is certainly in order.

Using deadly force as a matter of self defense, is another matter and requires one to establish, there existed a legit threat of severe bodily harm or death.

Actually since he is charged with a crime the burden of proof is on the persecutor to prove he didn't feel his life was in danger or was not in fear of great bodily harm. Good luck finding 12 people who will not think Storm had a legitimate fear of that.

 

[RDKirk]

Here are the pertinent articles of the Pennsylvania law regarding the use of force for self protection. An interesting specific difference between Pennsylvania law and Texas law is that Texas law explicitly permits the defense of others while Pennsylvania law rather clearly permits a person to defend only himself.

TITLE 18, CRIMES AND OFFENSES

PART I. PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS

Chapter 5. General Principles of Justification

§ 505. Use of force in self-protection.

(a) Use of force justifiable for protection of the person.–The use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion.
....
(2) The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat; nor is it justifiable if:

(i) the actor, with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or

(ii) the actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating, except the actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling or place of work, unless he was the initial aggressor or is assailed in his place of work by another person whose place of work the actor knows it to be.

 

[bhsmte]

Actually since he is charged with a crime the burden of proof is on the persecutor to prove he didn't feel his life was in danger or was not in fear of great bodily harm. Good luck finding 12 people who will not think Storm had a legitimate fear of that.

Based on what I have read about the case, good luck finding 12 people, that don't think pulling a gun and shooting, was not called for.

 

[Hank77]

You didn't see these sentences in the linked article? The situation had been brought under control merely by leaving Braxton alone.

No, I hadn't seen this article, somehow I missed that one. However, I did find one from after he was charged and posted it. Thanks posting this one, again.

Yes there was, the man was in someone else's seat.

Good grief, that's a reason to start a fight. Get a gripe man.
Beside that, Storms had no authority to be demanding anything from Braxton, not about the seat or in telling him he had to leave. Only very little men think that a gun makes them a big man. I wonder what a psychological work up on Storms would look like.
It's gun owners like Storms that make responsible gun owners look bad. Worse yet he makes Christian gun owners look like they are either idiots or cowardly thugs.

 

[ewq1938]

Good grief, that's a reason to start a fight. Get a gripe man.

Braxton started the fight and yes, someone should have told him to "get a grip" or perhaps they did and he violently freaked out.

 

[Hank77]

Braxton started the fight and yes, someone should have told him to "get a grip" or perhaps they did and he violently freaked out.

You're not related to this guy Storms, are you?

 

[ewq1938]

You're not related to this guy Storms, are you?

Out of intellectual ammo?

 

[Hank77]

Out of intellectual ammo?

lol Seeing that all of the articles quoted are written at about a 4th grade reading comprehension level, they can hardly be called intellectual material, and that's all I have pointed out to you.

 

[ewq1938]

lol Seeing that all of the articles quoted are written at about a 4th grade reading comprehension level, they can hardly be called intellectual material, and that's all I have pointed out to you.

You lol'd at your own fail and don't even realize it. Why not ask me if I am related to Storms again? Perhaps that is your best option?