Hey everybody!!! OVER HERE!!!
One thing is clear. We have noticed the lies.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hey everybody!!! OVER HERE!!!
So....you were applying logic?
Are you capable of answering simple questions?well, you sure as hell are not.
No. I approve of using it of there's an imminent threat situation that you, as the gun carrier, didn't create and can't escape.
He created the situation when he grabbed the gun and went to confront the situation.
If he'd had the gun holstered on him at the time of the altercation and didn't go to retrieve it, it would be justified as he wouldn't have had a way out.
As it was, he could have avoided the conflict, he did not.
He had knowledge his alleged assailant did not believe his firearm was real. He could have proven the point by discharging it safely. Then, if the the guy continued at him shoot him.
You have an obligation to NOT shoot people while carrying. He failed in many ways.
it was the 17 yr old that physically came at Weiss, not the other way around; it was the 17 yr old who tried to grab the gun and take it away; Weiss even stepped back (which one lawyer said could be legally deemed retreating) and told the 17 yr old to stop
^This right here. Grabbing a gun is certainly escalating the situation. He could have retreated to his vehicle (sounds like he actually did this to retrieve his firearm) and called authorities with his gun by his side. He had options.
Care to place a friendly wager??????We shall see.
It will come down to the law and applying facts and testimony to the law.
I don't think this is an easy case at all; I would not be surprised if there is a hung jury.
He can answer simple questions...just not honestly. He already knows he's wrong. He's trolling now to see how long he can keep you arguing with him. Give it up.Are you capable of answering simple questions?
All according to Weiss
He can troll me by putting his money where his mouth is.He can answer simple questions...just not honestly. He already knows he's wrong. He's trolling now to see how long he can keep you arguing with him. Give it up.
Truth. No telling where it will end up.I agree with everything said except a warning shot. On paper a warning shot sounds good but in reality a warning shot should never be fired.
Are you capable of answering simple questions?
Bet the money.Only logical ones. You have yet to present one.
He'd never pay up. Like I said, he knows he's wrong. He'd make the bet to string you along then say, "awww, I was just messing with you" if he lost. But I'd never bet on a jury...especially in cases like this.He can troll me by putting his money where his mouth is.
He can answer simple questions...just not honestly. He already knows he's wrong. He's trolling now to see how long he can keep you arguing with him. Give it up.
LOL...I would never question your honesty...I already know the answer.Its been shown you have lied in this thread and you question my honesty?
Wow.
it will be interesting to see when the witness arrived, how long she was there, and what she saw and what she heard;
you are some anonymous poster and you want me to bet you and then count on you paying up? that seems illogicalHe can troll me by putting his money where his mouth is.
Wasn't it obvious when the gun was presented?
Why was it presented?
Answer that please.
you are some anonymous poster and you want me to bet you and then count on you paying up? that seems illogical
Unfortunately, none of that means a jury will convict him. And it's possible there are facts that are still unknown. But on the face of it and by his own testimony to the police it certainly seems he had the opportunity to get in his car and call the police and chose instead to arm himself and then threaten the other men. By his own admission, he escalated the situation.OK, I'm on the jury and my mind has been changed.
For the first time ever, I agree with @tarheelbybirth.
Weiss went to his car, grabbed his loaded handgun and then returned to the situation. He wasn't under threat of severe bodily harm when he shot an unarmed man.
Weiss chose to get his gun and shoot an unarmed man that wasn't pummeling him or anything. Weiss is guilty.
Another reason I know Weiss is guilty is because @TheTradition believes he's innocent and @TheTradition is literally wrong about everything all the time.
Just name the amount. If nothing else, I can point out that the judge/jury agreed with my logic, rather than yours. I'd be shocked if he didn't take a plea deal.you are some anonymous poster and you want me to bet you and then count on you paying up? that seems illogical
He'd never pay up. Like I said, he knows he's wrong. He'd make the bet to string you along then say, "awww, I was just messing with you" if he lost. But I'd never bet on a jury...especially in cases like this.
I pay my bets.I can personally vouch for @ScoutRefugee paying his bets.
I pummeled him in a bet a few months ago, and he paid up via PayPal within a week.
The deceased never grabbed for the gun. Didn't you read your own article?Wrong about what?
I just don't think this is a cut and dry case.
I can easily see how a defense attorney could make a case that this was a 2 on 1 situation, there was retreat (which the law requires for self defense) and there was self defense.
The only thing that could change that is we don't know what happened between when the deceased grabbed for the gun and when Weiss stepped back and told the deceased to "stop."
It will be interesting to see his answer to "Why did you grab your gun?"
Did he fear for his safety? Why? What did the deceased and his friend say and do to make Weiss fear for his safety?
The gun was in his pocket. Didn't you read the article?The problem that you fail to see here is that IT DOESN'T MATTER IF OR WHY he feared for his safety. I fully believe he did.
The point is that once he got to his vehicle, HE WAS SAFE. He had the barrier of his locked doors and a gun in his possession. By exiting the vehicle, he put himself into harms way. He made a choice to pursue an altercation at that point and it is the reason it's murder.
I agree with everything said except a warning shot. On paper a warning shot sounds good but in reality a warning shot should never be fired.
I pay my bets.
OK, I'm on the jury and my mind has been changed.
For the first time ever, I agree with @tarheelbybirth.
Weiss went to his car, grabbed his loaded handgun and then returned to the situation. He wasn't under threat of severe bodily harm when he shot an unarmed man.
Weiss chose to get his gun and shoot an unarmed man that wasn't pummeling him or anything. Weiss is guilty.
Another reason I know Weiss is guilty is because @TheTradition believes he's innocent and @TheTradition is literally wrong about everything all the time.
The gun was in his pocket. Didn't you read the article?
Just channeling Franisdamoran for you.
Bet. I get the Eagles +6.You wanna bet on the Super Bowl?
I'll take the Pats - 6.
$25
?
Unfortunately, none of that means a jury will convict him. And it's possible there are facts that are still unknown. But on the face of it and by his own testimony to the police it certainly seems he had the opportunity to get in his car and call the police and chose instead to arm himself and then threaten the other men. By his own admission, he escalated the situation.
Nobody who knows guns would fire a warning shot. It's just not done. The bullet could ricochet if you fire into the street and firing into the air is no better. There's no telling where a bullet might end up.In most situations, I'd agree with you and even in this situation, it would be questionable. The difference in this situation is that the alleged assailant supposedly did not believe the gun was real. So you fire a warning shot to prove the weapon's validity and it stops the assailant in his tracks. I understand, though, that by doing this you provide the chance for another party to shoot you when you take your aim off the target and fire.
Having said that, Weiss shouldn't have even been standing there with the weapon in the first place. He should have never exited the vehicle.
Did he ever really leave and come back from the situation? Remember that the deceased backed into Weiss' car; the cars may not have moved (its not clear).
I see a hung jury on this case. It was 2 on 1, the 2 threatened to beat Weiss up. The deceased was aggressive towards Weiss. It could easily be argued that Weiss retreated from an aggressive confrontation, meeting the definition of what would be self defense. All Weiss needs is a good attorney and this is a hung jury or an acquittal.
its not clear how long she stuck around"A driver who was passing by the scene at the time of the confrontation said she didn’t see Rahim raise a fist, advance or assault Weiss before he was shot."