It just doesn't stop

[TallTom]

I get to wonder in what kind of world does one shoot someone through a door just for ringing a doorbell?

Race notwithstanding, there is no way anyone should be shot in such a manner regardless of the color of their skin...

I could see this shooting justified if the person was trying to kick down the door or smash a window to gain entry but to just ring a door bell and get shot?

Ridiculous.......and for an arrest to not happen......even more ridiculous......

So here is what so far is not being reported. This was the statement provided by police at the time of the incident. Not saying it's true. But you aren't hearing the reason why no arrest was made at that time.

"According to court documents, a witness told police that a vehicle pulled into Lester’s driveway around 9:30 p.m.

Lester told police during an interview that he had just lay down when he heard the doorbell ring. He picked up a revolver and opened the interior door. He saw a Black male pulling on the exterior door and said he thought someone was trying to break in."

Now this may or may not be true. But it's a matter of legal record that will become part of the proceedings.

A 3rd party witnessed at 9:30P a vehicle pull into his driveway. Yeah I can see how this could look suspicious if everyone knows the habits of Mr Lester.

And an elderly man that was asleep and was awoken.

I'm not 84, and I'm a little groggy when I first wake up. And I have had my door banged on at 6:30A. And I had my pistol on my person when I went to answer it.

I am in no way picking a side here. I'm just making it a point that this above account was readily available to be reported in this story. And gets left out.

I have also heard once on the news that the victim knocked on 2 doors and no one would offer assistance. Will they be charged with something now because a black man who had been shoot was there sometime after 9:30P knocking on their doors?

This entire neighborhood could be elderly white residents. There is a lot we don't know here. So let's not have a public trial. No matter how much the media would like for us to.

But we certainly see the racial fires being fanned.

 

[Bumblebee]

So here is what so far is not being reported. This was the statement provided by police at the time of the incident. Not saying it's true. But you aren't hearing the reason why no arrest was made at that time.

"According to court documents, a witness told police that a vehicle pulled into Lester’s driveway around 9:30 p.m.

Lester told police during an interview that he had just lay down when he heard the doorbell ring. He picked up a revolver and opened the interior door. He saw a Black male pulling on the exterior door and said he thought someone was trying to break in."

Now this may or may not be true. But it's a matter of legal record that will become part of the proceedings.

A 3rd party witnessed at 9:30P a vehicle pull into his driveway. Yeah I can see how this could look suspicious if everyone knows the habits of Mr Lester.

And an elderly man that was asleep and was awoken.

I'm not 84, and I'm a little groggy when I first wake up. And I have had my door banged on at 6:30A. And I had my pistol on my person when I went to answer it.

I am in no way picking a side here. I'm just making it a point that this above account was readily available to be reported in this story. And gets left out.

I have also heard once on the news that the victim knocked on 2 doors and no one would offer assistance. Will they be charged with something now because a black man who had been shoot was there sometime after 9:30P knocking on their doors?

This entire neighborhood could be elderly white residents. There is a lot we don't know here. So let's not have a public trial. No matter how much the media would like for us to.

But we certainly see the racial fires being fanned.

This soft of thing leads me to believe there should almost be some sort of testing after a certain age for a person to have firearms the same as we do here in Canada for driving...

Lots of elderly people (of this age) I know would be very dangerous in this exact same situation if they were armed...

 

[TallTom]

This soft of thing leads me to believe there should almost be some sort of testing after a certain age for a person to have firearms the same as we do here in Canada for driving...

Lots of elderly people (of this age) I know would be very dangerous in this exact same situation if they were armed...

While I don't disagree. That same 84 year old may be totally awake mentally, an hour after he wakes up.

In the case of the accidental shooting of Breonna Taylor, her boyfriend who was asleep, was startled awake, immediately grabbed a pistol and started shooting. And he was not elderly. If anyone were to suggest he shouldn't have been armed, well we know how that would have turned against taking away his ability to bear arms to protect himself. It would have been another racially charged agenda.

I think making things like a Ring doorbell cam become almost mandatory. This whole confrontation could have gone better by both parties had that been in place.

 

[MonkeyButtRides]

The reason nobody calls them out on it is because they are told how to say it. CNN’s ratings are literally in the gutter over the last years of trashing trump instead of saying President Trump. Their purposeful spin on things cost them their integrity. Msnbc even worse. Independent journalism is dead these days. It’s only a handful of people who basically own all media sources. You can go to any site and see basically the exact same story written almost verbatim as any other.

CNN went after Trump in a big way for sure, MSNBC as well but that's to be expected they are a very left agenda channel. The worse of all though has be Fox, caught in court, lying about what they knew. Literally caught saying "It's bad for business" to tell the truth. Now to bandage their wide-open wound they want to settle the lawsuit. Talk about a lack of integrity. 1.6 billion dollars (potentially) paid to Dominion for all of Fox's election lies.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

I get to wonder in what kind of world does one shoot someone through a door just for ringing a doorbell?

Race notwithstanding, there is no way anyone should be shot in such a manner regardless of the color of their skin...

I could see this shooting justified if the person was trying to kick down the door or smash a window to gain entry but to just ring a door bell and get shot?

Ridiculous.......and for an arrest to not happen......even more ridiculous......

Not taking sides and on the face this seems like a hard to justify terrible tragedy. But pics of the door show no holes in it. So he for sure didn’t shoot him thru the closed door. As Tom said we are only hearing the parts the media wants us to hear so we formulate the opinions they want us to.
Could it be when nobody answered the doorbell he banged on the door ‘Cmon let’s go!!’ Could it be he did try to open the door? Yes it could be. Could it be an unfortunate formulated opinion on the part of the homeowner who only watches the tv and sees constant break ins, looting, street takeovers and all else being done by todays youths? Yes it could be.

The other story regarding the kids in car turning around in driveway only to be shot in their car is even worse and even harder to rationalize.

But in response to Fallenarch’s ‘why do you people do this’ I would post this and say same thing.

Four killed, 28 injured in Dadeville shooting

Authorities have confirmed four people were killed, 28 have been injured following the mass shooting in Dadeville late Saturday night. Update 11:28 ET: The president has been briefed on the shootin…

www.wrbl.com

 

[TallTom]

CNN went after Trump in a big way for sure, MSNBC as well but that's to be expected they are a very left agenda channel. The worse of all though has be Fox, caught in court, lying about what they knew. Literally caught saying "It's bad for business" to tell the truth. Now to bandage their wide-open wound they want to settle the lawsuit. Talk about a lack of integrity. 1.6 billion dollars (potentially) paid to Dominion for all of Fox's election lies.

256M paid out to Sandmann by CNN. They still churn the same stuff out.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

CNN went after Trump in a big way for sure, MSNBC as well but that's to be expected they are a very left agenda channel. The worse of all though has be Fox, caught in court, lying about what they knew. Literally caught saying "It's bad for business" to tell the truth. Now to bandage their wide-open wound they want to settle the lawsuit. Talk about a lack of integrity. 1.6 billion dollars (potentially) paid to Dominion for all of Fox's election lies.

We still don’t know the settlement amount cnn paid Sandman for labeling him a White supremacist attacking an old man beating a drum. Truth came out he was the instigator. CNN paid handsomely in that case. Rittenhouse’s case against them is also still pending. CNN will lose that one as well. All media sources slant things. And if wrong they should pay dearly for it.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

256M paid out to Sandmann by CNN. They still churn the same stuff out.

Ha. Was typing same thing same time

 

[MonkeyButtRides]

256M paid out to Sandmann by CNN. They still churn the same stuff out.

Yup, Nicholas is one rich kid now, or his legal guardian is. They tried to sue quite a few others as well. I wonder what their total pay out is?

 

[Bumblebee]

Not taking sides and on the face this seems like a hard to justify terrible tragedy. But pics of the door show no holes in it. So he for sure didn’t shoot him thru the closed door. As Tom said we are only hearing the parts the media wants us to hear so we formulate the opinions they want us to.
Could it be when nobody answered the doorbell he banged on the door ‘Cmon let’s go!!’ Could it be he did try to open the door? Yes it could be. Could it be an unfortunate formulated opinion on the part of the homeowner who only watches the tv and sees constant break ins, looting, street takeovers and all else being done by todays youths? Yes it could be.

The other story regarding the kids in car turning around in driveway only to be shot in their car is even worse and even harder to rationalize.

But in response to Fallenarch’s ‘why do you people do this’ I would post this and say same thing.

Four killed, 28 injured in Dadeville shooting

Authorities have confirmed four people were killed, 28 have been injured following the mass shooting in Dadeville late Saturday night. Update 11:28 ET: The president has been briefed on the shootin…

www.wrbl.com

These shootings just never seem to stop or even slow down......

In the case of the elderly man shooting the young man ringing his doorbell.....that could have easily been someone coming over to tell him his house was on fire or an emergency services person checking in on him for whatever reason....

The willingness of people to shoot someone is troubling...

If this exact same scenario happened here, the first thing the homeowner would do is turn on the outside light to identify who it is and if they didn't, they wouldn't open the door...or talk through it...

 

[TallTom]

But pics of the door show no holes in it. So he for sure didn’t shoot him thru the closed door.

If this is true it doesn't support his argument that he thought someone was trying to break in. You don't open the door. You do the opposite.

 

[Bumblebee]

While I don't disagree. That same 84 year old may be totally awake mentally, an hour after he wakes up.

In the case of the accidental shooting of Breonna Taylor, her boyfriend who was asleep, was startled awake, immediately grabbed a pistol and started shooting. And he was not elderly. If anyone were to suggest he shouldn't have been armed, well we know how that would have turned against taking away his ability to bear arms to protect himself. It would have been another racially charged agenda.

I think making things like a Ring doorbell cam become almost mandatory. This whole confrontation could have gone better by both parties had that been in place.

It says a lot about a society where a civilian gets woken up and feels the need to immediately grab for a gun.........then even worse, start shooting without identifying their target or the necessity of even firing.

 

[TallTom]

Yup, Nicholas is one rich kid now, or his legal guardian is. They tried to sue quite a few others as well. I wonder what their total pay out is?

WSJ settled. I know they were going after "several other sources of news" that made the same inflammatory statements.

It would be helpful if they forced Fox, CNN, et all to be forced to publish the paid out awards to keep the sheep informed. Instead they get to sweep it under the rug.

 

[TallTom]

It says a lot about a society where a civilian gets woken up and feels the need to immediately grab for a gun.........then even worse, start shooting without identifying their target or the necessity of even firing.

So I don't know enough about how Canada works. But here property rights and ownership are a pretty thick foundational bedrock law.

Whether a person owns 400 acres or 400 feet, if someone crosses over into that property, they are at a legal disadvantage. It's Trespassing. And laws favor the landholder first.

Is shooting someone reasonable? There are lots of gray shades now. Like if you shot them in the back. Or if it was a kid that simply crossed over to make a shirtcut. Etc. Etc.

But use of deadly force is also incorporated into those laws fairly commonly. If a kid has woken me up in the middle of the night, regardless of it being an accidental reason, there is some peril involved on his part.

 

[MonkeyButtRides]

WSJ settled. I know they were going after "several other sources of news" that made the same inflammatory statements.

It would be helpful if they forced Fox, CNN, et all to be forced to publish the paid out awards to keep the sheep informed. Instead, they get to sweep it under the rug.

I still say we need to reinstate an old law that required all news reporting to objectively tell the whole truth, not just the part that enforces a specific agenda.

 

[Bumblebee]

So I don't know enough about how Canada works. But here property rights and ownership are a pretty thick foundational bedrock law.

Whether a person owns 400 acres or 400 feet, if someone crosses over into that property, they are at a legal disadvantage. It's Trespassing. And laws favor the landholder first.

Is shooting someone reasonable? There are lots of gray shades now. Like if you shot them in the back. Or if it was a kid that simply crossed over to make a shirtcut. Etc. Etc.

But use of deadly force is also incorporated into those laws fairly commonly. If a kid has woken me up in the middle of the night, regardless of it being an accidental reason, there is some peril involved on his part.

We have trespass laws but no "castle or stand your ground" laws, nor do we have any weapon carry laws...and have strict weapon storage laws.

If someone trespasses here, the law also favors the landowner but the land must be posted land unless it is a dwelling or structure on the property as it is an implied trespass area.

If a person is in their own home behind a locked door, what justification do they have for shooting someone when they could have simply kept the door closed and turned on the light to identify who's out there.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

Her stupidity knows no bounds…Lightfoot defending this IS the problem with our society. She can’t see the crime because of their color. There is zero excuse for this, ZERO.

Moment group of teens attack woman in Chicago

A group of Chicago teenagers were captured on video attacking a woman Saturday night as she tried to enter her apartment.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Why do THEY do this???? Flip the colors and races and tell me how loud the uproar would be.

 

[TallTom]

We have trespass laws but no "castle or stand your ground" laws, nor do we have any weapon carry laws...and have strict weapon storage laws.

If someone trespasses here, the law also favors the landowner but the land must be posted land unless it is a dwelling or structure on the property as it is an implied trespass area.

If a person is in their own home behind a locked door, what justification do they have for shooting someone when they could have simply kept the door closed and turned on the light to identify who's out there.

We have no need to post when it's obvious. If you own a lot of land and there are no points of reference (Think open land with no visible fences etc. then postings are more mandated. The edge of my drive for example is recognized as an access to my property. If it's zoned single family, then you begin to trespass as you go across that boundary. If it say an apt house, then trespassing is outside your entry door. You don't have to post that fact.

I often see No Tresspassing signs posted that include the added condition of. "Violators shall be shot. If that is posted, unless the trespasser can argue they can't read or can't see, they are in peril of being able to yell "foul" if they get shot.

Some people are way stricter at how they handle trespassers than others.

We sometimes have to transport from rural areas. They answer the door wearing a sidearm. I don't treat them any differently than anyone else. They have a different culture when they view an outsider coming into their property. I've never had a problem. But I also train everyone, to knock and step back away from the door and be seen. They want to see we are not openly armed. We are after all about to come into their homes and take a loved one away.

 

[TallTom]

I still say we need to reinstate an old law that required all news reporting to objectively tell the whole truth, not just the part that enforces a specific agenda.

You can't. The Internet has caused legitimate media to have to outrun what gets posted online. There is more $$ in ad revenue if you can herd the right group of sheep together in a more organized means. Otherwise it fragments into 10,000,000 Internet sources of "info".

Our media has become largely a National Enquirer model now.

 

[Bumblebee]

We have no need to post when it's obvious. If you own a lot of land and there are no points of reference (Think open land with no visible fences etc. then postings are more mandated. The edge of my drive for example is recognized as an access to my property. If it's zoned single family, then you begin to trespass as you go across that boundary. If it say an apt house, then trespassing is outside your entry door.

I often see No Tresspassing signs posted that include the added condition of. "Violators shall be shot. If that is posted, unless the trespasser can argue they can't read or can't see, they are in peril of being able to yell "foul" if they get shot.

Some people are way stricter at how they handle trespassers than others.

We sometimes have to transport from rural areas. They answer the door wearing a sidearm. I don't treat them any differently than anyone else. They have a different culture when they view an outsider coming into their property. I've never had a problem. But I also train everyone, to knock and step back away from the door and be seen. They want to see we are not openly armed. We are after all about to come into their homes and take a loved one away.

Our trespass postings are the same...

....and rural areas are similar...even though we have no castle or stand your ground laws, some people in rural areas keep weapons handy-even ignoring our strict storage laws.....(I know my brother does....).

Speaking of brothers....mine got pulled over because he has a sticker on the back of his truck that reads "keep honking while I reload" with a picture of a gun on it.......the cops didn't like this sticker....

....and my brother is the firearms officer for his region and the president of the local gun club....