Is CSGV “lighting a candle” for a Felon?

Here we go again:
Now, you may want to take a couple of minutes and read the whole account at Ocala.com but the cliff notes goes like this: Dan Daley goes over Willie Chester’s house, does not enter the property and asks him if he could do something about a barking dog that apparently he owned. Apparently words were exchanged and Chester told Daley to leave which he did. Then Chester left his property, went in the street, chased Daley and began beating on him. Daley cries for help, nobody responds and he produces a gun and shoots Chester four times resulting in his death. That is the narrative (minus some details) given by eye witnesses and the fact that Daley was not placed under arrest gives credence that the shooting might be treated as self defense.

Now, since Daley had a Florida Concealed Weapons Permit, CSGV automatically developed an erection against him. I think they pretty much stopped reading the whole article after that revelation so they are, once again caught with their panties in a wad and halfway down their legs.

But to make matters even worse, I did a quick check with the FDLE’s Offender Data Base and came up with a Willie Chester, age 53, felon and lives in Ocala. Chester’s address given at the FDLE’s website is about a mile from where the event happened, but then again information has not been updated since 2005 and Chester apparently was not on probation or supervised release.

I am not saying just yet that the attacker and the felon are one and the same, but it would be a funny thing to see CSGV backtracking their righteous indignation.

Or the post may just disappear…

21 Replies to “Is CSGV “lighting a candle” for a Felon?”

  1. Yeah even if the whole thing began with Daley confronting Chester about a dog, the fact that he deescalated and left peacefully means it’s all on Chester. It’s no longer ‘a dispute over a noisy dog’, it’s about Chester wrongfully attacking another person.




    0



    0
          1. Miguel..I basically run CSCSGV it’s the Coalition to Stop the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. Type that in the FB search box. 🙂 My friend started it and made me co admin..I’m the one doing almost all the posts though..because he actually has a life. 🙂




            0



            0
  2. Did you see the latest comment on there?

    John Donnaruma: Sean, if the shooter did not carry a gun to talk to his neighbor, he wouldn’t have likely provoked a violent confrontation. These were two older men who should have known better than to fight like kids. But if they did fight like kids, no one would have died. Obviously, the shooter was no physical match for an older man who had had a stroke and heart attack, but his gun gave him the power he did not otherwise have. There is no reason to kill another human being over a barking dog, or for getting one’s ass kicked.

    The beating victim somehow “provoked” the attack (blame the victim), because he was armed. But provocation aside, he should have just submitted to a merciless, brutal beating.

    Is that sniveling punk Donnaruma unaware that beatings can and do prove fatal?




    0



    0
    1. The contradictions are strong with that one.
      if the shooter did not carry a gun to talk to his neighbor, he wouldn’t have likely provoked a violent confrontation
      How did you know that the Chester knew Daley had a gun? And if he did and still went after Daley, the guy was deranged! What rational human being thinks, “Well, that guy has a gun so I am gonna beat him up just for chuckles?” Suicide by stupidity?

      Obviously, the shooter was no physical match for an older man who had had a stroke and heart attack, but his gun gave him the power he did not otherwise have.
      Welcome to the principle of Armed Self-Defense. What you just said is that Chester saw that Daley was physically infirm and no match for him, an easy target. That is how a criminal thinks: Pounce on the weak. He chose poorly and paid the price.

      There is no reason to kill another human being over a barking dog,
      He got killed because a) Probably his Ego was bigger than his Reasoning. b) Thought he was going to confront a weaker person and c) The other person turned out not being that weak after all.

      or for getting one’s ass kicked.
      He may want to Google “Beaten to death” before uttering such nonsense




      0



      0
  3. Not to far removed when they were attacking the CCW guy who defended the woman that had her purse snatched. Never any mention of the pistol-whipping the woman received or that the perp drew on the CCW first.




    0



    0
  4. Typical. I saw a similar line of “reasoning” about the elderly man in Pennsylvania who was knocked of his bicycle and beaten by three teenagers. The old man used a handgun to defend himself, but the authors at Mikeb302000 and Odious Bubbleson insisted that he should have just given them his wallet. Better yet, I suppose he shouldn’t have been out in public in the first place. After all, we wouldn’t want thugs to feel crowded.




    0



    0
  5. Change of subject here, but check out a comment on another CSGV Facebook post, in which the commenter seems to be arguing that child porn is less evil than online commerce in guns:…but, by golly, let an otherwise quiet and introspective guy use the same computer to look at images of sixteen year old girls online and the entire nation is ready with torches and pitchforks. I’m not excusing child pornography, but there is definitely an imbalance in our priorities across the country.There can be no common ground, no compromise with such people.




    0



    0

Comments are closed.