Where a Redneck Jew, a Hispanic Catholic, and a Computer Geek write about Gun Rights, Self Defense and whatever else we can think about.
In short, the evidence supports a compelling narrative that Alexander fired a deadly bullet at her husband and step-children while in a state of malice induced by their just concluded verbal argument–a classic example of aggravated assault (three counts).
More than the mere sum of its parts. The Narrative can be too persuasive…it must be fought or we also fail.
Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.
Comments are closed.
Mistake number one, not being the first to call the cops.
Mistake number two, “i fired a warning shot”
Shoulda been “He came at me, and I was afraid he’d kill me, so I shot. I missed him, but he ran. I didn’t think I was in anymore danger, so I didn’t shoot again.”
As far as the “Narrative” the linked article, I don’t know enough about the events to really judge, but I’m suspicious of it, based on what I’ve read about the case. I can’t vouch for the accuracy of what I’ve read, but I was under the impression that he forced his way into her home. That doesn’t fit with her being the Aggressor.
Legal Insurrection has a good article on the case including the court documents that are partly quoted from above. The link is here http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/09/the-myth-of-marissa-alexanders-warning-shot//#more
Reading through the court document attached at LI it’s clear that neither Ms. Alexander nor her estranged husband are any prize. If the account in the court document is correct the man did not force his way into the house and it doesn’t sound like at any time was she in fear of life or limb.
Again, none of the people involved seem at all trustworthy, but the stories don’t add up to a defensive shooting. It sounds, to me anyway, like she tried to shoot the guy in a fit of temper.
Hey there, I’m the guy who wrote the piece on this over at Legal Insurrection. That piece pretty much lays out my view of this issue based on the facts in evidence, but I’d be happy to answer any question anyone might have.
Wow! Andrew Branca visiting!
As I understand it and to unprofessionally summarize it: If you shoot a warning shot, you were not in fear of life or grave bodily harm. Would I be right in presuming that?
I do have another question somewhat related to this case. How good would be a law that allowed a citizen to draw his/her weapon to warn an attacker to stop? I find myself ambivalent on the issue.