WRAL: We Really Are Liberal (and we really hate guns)

MostWanted

MostWanted

I used to be JustInCase
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
2,309
Location
Wake County
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Those "journalists" over at Channel 5 have outdone themselves this time.

Castle Doctrine: Self-defense or license to kill?
https://www.wral.com/fear

Gentlemen, the NC general assembly has 120 seats in the House. We had 76 seats. We lost 11 this time, so now we're at 65/55. Flip five more, and Castle Doctrine in NC is lost.
 
Just a BS "hit piece" full of he was a good boy, turning his life around, on his way to choir practice when he was gunned down. Throw in a bunch of crap about having a mix race kid out of wedlock and the racist parents not being happy with it ... Blah blah blah.
 
noway2 said:
Just a BS "hit piece" full of he was a good boy, turning his life around, on his way to choir practice when he was gunned down. Throw in a bunch of crap about having a mix race kid out of wedlock and the racist parents not being happy with it ... Blah blah blah.
Click to expand...

I was thinking about how to respond to this post and you pretty much summed up what i wanted to say. He sounded like an upstanding young gentleman. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Liberals believe that when someone steals from you that this a "Robin hood like " moment. This is how the underprivileged in their mind get even because they don't have a job. They think we owe them this right for some reason.

These are some twisted beliefs in my mind. Don't seal from me or threaten my life and I won't have to use deadly force, seems simple.
 
Waiting on the circumstances surrounding the shooting.
 
premise said:
We live in a world where a publication is romanticizing the pointless, frivolous life of a dumbass criminal that was served his comeuppance.
Click to expand...

59B417FA-5833-4222-B334-0277E4F2F071.gif
 
The wrongful death lawsuit is scheduled to begin today. It will be interesting to see how this turns out.

I hope I’m never involved in a S.D. shooting, but if I am, I’d be more worried about a civil suite than a criminal trial.
 
old bear said:
The wrongful death lawsuit is scheduled to begin today. It will be interesting to see how this turns out.

I hope I’m never involved in a S.D. shooting, but if I am, I’d be more worried about a civil suite than a criminal trial.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know how they're gonna try to get around the qualified civil immunity clause in our castle doctrine. Any half-wit lawyer with a UNC school of law book should be able to state the law, and sit down in his seat and wait on dismissal.
 
Last edited:
When that series first came out a few weeks ago, I read about a quarter of the first story and had to stop. WRAL is rivaling HuffPo and some of the others who cannot even conceal bias.
 
Chuckman said:
When that series first came out a few weeks ago, I read about a quarter of the first story and had to stop. WRAL is rivaling HuffPo and some of the others who cannot even conceal bias.
Click to expand...

I knew that a decade ago when they tried to publish the names and addresses of conceal carry permit holders. I was considering advocating some violent reprisals against some so-called journalists but...I was young and dumb :D
 
Ikarus1 said:
I knew that a decade ago when they tried to publish the names and addresses of conceal carry permit holders.
Click to expand...
I remember that. I also remember the dude that did it and stuck to his guns about it, proverbially speaking. His obituary, which came not too long after, was one that I didn't mind seeing.

In a way, I think he made a major contribution to the fact that the database is now non public.
 
Last edited:
Wow, it's been 10 years since I started my WRAL boycott?
It hasn't seemed that long, nor have I missed a dang thing.

Sent from notthedroidyourelookingfor
 
old bear said:
The wrongful death lawsuit is scheduled to begin today. It will be interesting to see how this turns out.

I hope I’m never involved in a S.D. shooting, but if I am, I’d be more worried about a civil suite than a criminal trial.
Click to expand...
Any updates on this? I could not find anything on the web.
 
"Any updates on this? I could not find anything on the web."
The only update I've seen was WRAL covering day two of the trial, they only showed a short video of a Witness inspecting a rifle. I'd like to know how this turns out.
 
WRAL announced that the jury has found for the plaintiff, awarded $250,000.00 in damages. Plaintiff made a big deal of the fact that the actor, ( I will not refer to him as a victim) was shot twice in the torso and four times in the back. There are several lessons to be learned from this; first don’t count on a standard .22 caliber firearm to stop a threat. Second if follow up shots are necessary; flip them over before you shoot them again.
 
Ikarus1 said:
I'd like to know how they're gonna try to get around the qualified civil immunity clause in our castle doctrine. Any half-wit lawyer with a UNC school of law book should be able to state the law, and sit down in his seat and wait on dismissal.
Click to expand...

The father was never charged with a crime nor had to defend his actions in a criminal case (to date), so he isn’t protected by the immunity clause, from my understanding.
 
WRAL banned me as I was not complying with their liberal bent with my comments.

That's my story anyway
 
old bear said:
WRAL announced that the jury has found for the plaintiff, awarded $250,000.00 in damages. Plaintiff made a big deal of the fact that the actor, ( I will not refer to him as a victim) was shot twice in the torso and four times in the back. There are several lessons to be learned from this; first don’t count on a standard .22 caliber firearm to stop a threat. Second if follow up shots are necessary; flip them over before you shoot them again.
Click to expand...

Criminal got what he deserved. I really like the last sentence!!!!
 
I've been wondering for days how this was even tried, given that our Castle Doctrine explicitly says you're immune from civil liability. So I read the whole thing carefully and this seems to be why:
  1. No one except the shooter and the dead man witnessed the shooting.
  2. The dead man's fingerprints were not found on or around the window that the shooter claimed was being used to enter the home.
  3. The location of the wounds suggest that either Mr. Griggs was on his hands and knees and shot from behind or laying down and shot from behind," Denney said. "Because we know he didn't go anywhere after those two hit his spine."
  4. The body wasn't found directly in front of the window, but off to the side, and the spinal injuries wouldn't have allowed him to take a step away, and bullets don't make fly out a window and turn right.
  5. Only three of the six casings were recovered, and it is extremely unusual to not recover all casings when the shooting is in a confined area like a living room. Lose one maybe, but lose three?
  6. On average, only a third of bullets shot in self defense hit their target, and two thirds miss. However, the shooter was six for six. This could suggest that it could have been more calculated. (I know, it was a rifle, not a pistol, shooter was braced behind a chair, at very short range. I didn't write this, I'm just explaining it).
  7. The three casings that were recovered were found neatly lying together in one place in the living room, as if they had been placed there.
  8. The investigators never attempted to confirm whether the trajectory was consistent with the shooter's story.
  9. Together, all this suggested to some that the shooting may have occurred on the porch, the dead man never attempted to enter the home, and that the shooter had altered the scene.
  10. With this uncertainty, the DA didn't feel that the standard of "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" could be met and didn't file criminal charges.
  11. But the civil case only requires that he was more likely than not to have staged the scene.
 
Last edited:
They are pushing the idea that if it wasn't for Castle Doctrine, he'd be in jail. But the DA said he's out because she couldn't prove he staged it. Castle Doctrine didn't make it harder to prove it was murder. If the dead man was found some place where Castle didn't apply, like behind a Wal-Mart, she still couldn't have prosecuted for murder with the evidence she had. WRAL is using a non-Castle case to advocate for weakening / abolishing Castle.
 
MostWanted said:
Only three of the six casings were recovered, and it is extremely unusual to not recover all casings when the shooting is in a confined area like a living room
Click to expand...
MostWanted said:
Together, all this suggested to some that the shooting may have occurred on the porch, the dead man never attempted to enter the home
Click to expand...
MostWanted said:
But the civil case only requires that he was more likely than not to have staged the scene
Click to expand...
Hmmmmmmmmm. That lost brass is a stumper...….
 
Well, I have a sock monster that eats my socks. Maybe there is a brass monster at the victim's house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom