Amen.

CatFish Driver · Post by **CatFish Driver** » June 11th, 2012, 10:37 pm

LINK

If this was New York or Illinois the father would probably be in jail and the scumbag in question would have had his "rights violated".

Normally I think some Texans go over the top with the whole 'God Bless Texas' thing, but in this case I have to admit they got it right.

colt1rgr · Post by **colt1rgr** » June 12th, 2012, 12:23 am

Besides the fact that it was his inherent "God given" right as a man to protect his child, here in Florida we would call this "justifiable homicide". Of course as you say some bleeding heart commie pinko would cry foul.

Jim · Post by **Jim** » June 12th, 2012, 12:49 am

Concure. I doubt a jury would find him guilty of anything.

IEDmagnet · Post by **IEDmagnet** » June 12th, 2012, 1:54 am

Jim wrote:Concure. I doubt a jury would find him guilty of anything.

....unless they found him guilty of not intending to kill him when he started beating him. This is Texas we're discussing, and he should have meant to do it.

RangerX · Post by **RangerX** » June 12th, 2012, 2:03 am

IEDmagnet wrote:
Jim wrote:Concure. I doubt a jury would find him guilty of anything.
....unless they found him guilty of not intending to kill him when he started beating him. This is Texas we're discussing, and he should have meant to do it.

Or drawn it out longer. Outside the Nambla-tards, I don't think you'd find a lot of liberals who would put up with what he saw.

Lefty · Post by **Lefty** » June 12th, 2012, 2:24 am

I know about the arguments against 'vigilantism' and the need for due process and all, but this was one of those situations where "he needed killing".

Had this offender been handled in the legal system, he would have served some time, maybe, or maybe not, but he eventually would have done this again. Think of how many potential victims have been saved from this creep.

CloakAndDagger · Post by **CloakAndDagger** » June 12th, 2012, 5:51 am

One of the arguments I've seen the libtards spouting is "he would then have the right to defend [her], and hit him enough to have him stop" (Link to Foxnews). The whole problem of this line of thought is that one has to be well-trained on how to subdue someone without killing them. Being level headed enough to carry it out, even when trained, is yet another matter entirely.

Untrained dad + rage = dead perp.

RangerX · Post by **RangerX** » June 12th, 2012, 5:52 am

CloakAndDagger wrote:Untrained dad + rage = dead perp.

Reasonable formula if I ever saw one.

KW Driver · Post by **KW Driver** » June 13th, 2012, 1:56 am

Hey, Catfish!

Baseplate · Post by **Baseplate** » June 13th, 2012, 2:26 am

Can I just invite my arch-enemy over to my house and then beat hm to death and then say he was molesting my daughter? I

mortar_guy78 · Post by **mortar_guy78** » June 13th, 2012, 2:49 am

Baseplate wrote:Can I just invite my arch-enemy over to my house and then beat hm to death and then say he was molesting my daughter? I

Only if you live in Texas.

Jim · Post by **Jim** » June 13th, 2012, 4:34 am

mortar_guy78 wrote:
Baseplate wrote:Can I just invite my arch-enemy over to my house and then beat hm to death and then say he was molesting my daughter? I
Only if you live in Texas.

Can you imagine the number of fathers of teenage girls who are going to move to Texas?

Baseplate · Post by **Baseplate** » June 13th, 2012, 5:13 am

"Son, the last man that touched my daughter got beat to death right here in this living room. I expect her home before 930"

mortar_guy78 · Post by **mortar_guy78** » June 13th, 2012, 5:35 am

My daughter is 5. Maybe I should move 50 miles west. Then again, I'm pretty sure Louisiana would be the same.

ArmyRanger.com

Amen.

Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.

Re: Amen.