Actually it still does, because anywhere inside that 21 feet is still a danger zone. Basically less than 21 feet is even more dangerous, this kid was more like 10 to 12 feet from the officers, a distance he maintained throughout the video. So being closer than 21 feet can effectively negate the advantage of having a firearm unholstered.
 November 25, 2015 at 7:25pm
What is true here is that you don’t have to right to not be offended and unless you are a resident of that county then your opinion or feelings don’t matter just like mine don’t matter.
@Gremlin1974 Why must you speak when you have nothing to add?
 November 25, 2015 at 7:16pm
Technically correct, but laws change and nothing in the law says that the states have to make it easy. Also all it takes is one judge to agree with the states to tie this up in court for years, which I encourage the states to do.
Bingo, Gremlin. Odd how one of the most lawless administrations in recent memory is concerned about the law. Well, not odd at all with Obama as more often than not we are told "do as I say, not as I do."
Mr Obutthole, do we need to remind you that you have a constitutional obligation to defend this country?
"The letter says states that do not comply with the requirement would be breaking the law and could be subject to enforcement action, including suspension or termination of the federally funded program. The letter is signed by the director of the federal resettlement office, Robert Carey."
Big deal, so the states don't get funding or lose the program for refugees by not taking refugees. Win-Win
Since the lawless executive doeswhatever the hell he wants, so will we militia at the state border? You want it bitch, you got it! May I remind you that the fed gets its authority from the states, not the otherway round. Watch out! Th
Since the lawless executive does whatever the hell he wants, so will we militia at the state border? You want it bitch, you got it! May I remind you that the fed gets its authority from the states, not the other way round. Watch out! The citizens are coming.Add your comments
Islama not really a religion. Don't understand why they don't use that tactic.
When is somebody going to ask this P.O.S why for 3 years he stood silent while 100s of thousand Christians were slaughtered but we have to rush to rescue Muslims?
Technically not correct. The same law this administration is citing that they allege doesn't give the States the authority to block refugees actually does give the States authority to block refugees from their States. The statute says the states will provide agencies to work with the federal government, but it doesn't say "shall" or "must". So the States can simply choose to no provide those agencies.
The states need to refuse any more dollar bills from the criminals in a small self designated territory.
To hell with their 'chosen' laws, block these people out! There comes a time when you must be disobedient. A time like now.
Obuma doesn't inforce the existing Immigration laws himself - so if these 30 states chose to refuse these muslims - there really isn't much he could do about it!
this is the thanks we get for generously giving
cant wait to see what barry gives us for christmas
If enough governors get together on this they won't need a judge, they will have the authority provided them by the constitution
So, now Obama wants to obey the law? What a fraud.
This is the Tyrant and Tyrannical government our founders warned us about.
Double standard. Why is obummer preaching about being lawful while simulataneously ignoring laws he doesn't like?
Further, what about article 4 section 4 of the US Constitution protecting us from invasion?
BUT sanctuary cities that do not comply with federal law regarding illegal aliens get help from the executive branch to keep breaking the law!?
Gremlin, Technically not correct! Governors from Florida and Texas interviewed and explained the laws that apply to this situation. And they clearly have a say on the placement of Obama's terrorists. Money, validation, and security of the states are all factors. They will win in court. However, Obama will win in the end because he will place them in terrorist friendly states then they will simply migrate to other states.
Since when did following the law matter to Barack Hussein Obama?
What's Obama going to do arrest governors and state legislatures? I believe there would be a clash between law enforcement agencies.
Couldn’t governors decline to participate in the programs, call BO’s bluff and let him terminate the federal funding for the programs and then close their state’s borders to refugees? Isn't that federalism? It would almost be like living in a constitutional republic again.
I will proudly defend The United State of Texas!
Come and take it.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF US SCOTUS
This is what we have been waiting for, Fort Sumpter and Bunker Hill
We will oppose them and you can do what you want. If there is going to be a Civil War let it start this year. Lets see if your homosexual US Army can win this Civil War.
You will find out the temper of our steel just like the King, Kaiser, Furer, and the Emperor of Japan. This is America not Indonesia.
He has no authority to do thousands of things he's done.
There is no rule of law. Only the Rule of Man.
And that takes the Gun.
Understand this: It is Coming.
Republicans are planning on cutting social security hurting millions of Americans, including veterans. And millions of U.S. citizens are unemployed. Yet while Americans are struggling, President Obama and Democrats are allotting U.S. resources such as food, housing, medical, and jobs to Syrian refugees. The billions of dollars that will be used to house, feed, educate, and employ refugees should instead be provided to U.S. citizens in need.
The states just need on usher or impeachment. Enforcement actions are an act of war, governors should call up the guard and push all federal law enforcement out of their state
Trying financial blackmail is he.
Article 2, Section 1 – “…will preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution…”, Section 4 – “…shall protect each (state) against Invasion, and Section 3 – “…shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…” are serially violated and attacked by Obama and his agencies, which defines insurrection. Using powers of office and armed color of law enforcement agencies as well as the DOJ to obstruct justice to overthrow Constitutional law steps beyond rebellion into war against the Constitution.
Article III. – Section 2 “…all Crimes, except Impeachment, shall be by Jury… shall be… in the State where Crimes committed”, mandates state and local justice, especially when federal agencies are in a state of rebellion and overthrow with and by officials betraying allegiance!
Amendment 14 Sections 3&4, “3- “No (oath bound) person shall … hold any office… (who has) engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the (Constitution), or given aid or comfort to (its) enemies…” (NO EXCEPTIONS and impeachment ISN’T A CONSIDERATION!)! The “trigger” is ENGAGEMENT IN INSURRECTION OR REBELLION, PERIOD! Section 4 establishes personal liability!
Article 6 supremacy and 2nd oath individual allegiance to defend without ANY reservation against anyone breaks any chain of command or status powers relative to insurrection, rebellion, and treason. Failure to defend joins the crime! Defiance of “shall make no law” requires prosecution by EVERY CITIZEN LOCALLY against each official engaged in it!
No states' rights are #1 and the feds DO NOT have the right! Read the Constitution and Bill of Rights and then sign up with the Convention of States Right to be further educated on our Founding Fathers who were truly smarter than you and way smarter than Obama has ever been. Obama can spout stupidity but we do not have to buy into it. So not technically correct. The feds only have 3 rights granted by the Founding Fathers: 1) make a common currency (which our legislators have worked hard to bring down and take away the gold standard, 2) assist in international trade, and 3) defense of America (and no one else)! That it's in a nutshell so the feds needs to be reminded they are OUR employees and we can have our state close doors against any invasion, imposition, etc. and we are the national militia that this legislation keeps putting down because they know it is true!
Since whem has "the law" ever been a concern of Obozo and her administration? The states are just following your lead, you putz "with a pen and a phone."
And let me remind you, Barry- you lack the authority to do a great many things you have done as well. But you did them, nonetheless. So bite me.
[-1] November 24, 2015 at 1:25pm
“but it really looks like he wasn’t a threat to bodily harm, he was just a thief.”
Exactly, no imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to you are someone else you don’t shoot.
“hard to tell what’s in the background, so I can’t say whether that was a “safe” shot or not.”
Well lets think about that for a moment. In the modern times are there really that many “safe backgrounds” left? Especially in the middle of a modern town or city? Especially in or near the parking lot of a major store?
I would say no.
 November 24, 2015 at 1:21pm
Yea, the one that clearly says “at night time”, so since this happened in broad daylight you would be incorrect.
From that statute:
“(A) to prevent the other’s imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
P.S. From someone who completed Sapper training I seriously hope that yours came out of a cracker jack box if you are truly that ignorant.”
November 24, 2015 at 1:16pm
No lettuceRebel is just ignorant of the actual law.
 November 24, 2015 at 1:16pm
Uhh, I suggest you take a course on Texas self defense law. And yes I know the part of the law to which you are referring and it clearly says during the nighttime or at night. This happened in broad daylight so no she would be committing murder if she had “dispatched the SOB.
I would recommend this book to help educate yourself.
I have. Texas penal code 9.33 provides that a person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect a third person, if a person reasonably believes that the intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person from the commission or attempted commission of aggravated robbery. Aggravated robbery is defined in Texas penal code 29.03 as when a theft occurs against a victim 65 years or older.
November 24, 2015 at 1:11pm
So basically she fired a bullet indiscriminately into the public? That makes her doubly stupid since she endangered the public and fired when she had no right to be firing.
 November 24, 2015 at 1:10pm
Exactly, I carry daily and while not an instructor I have trained with guns most of my life. “Warning shots” are for hollywood and TV. What a warning shot is in the modern day is basically firing a bullet into the public indiscriminately. It is stupid dangerous.
Also, I doubt even by Texas law that she was justified in even drawing her weapon. If the guy was running away there was no “imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to yourself or another” which is something there must be in order to justify it as self defense or defense of another. Also, when that threat is imminent you don’t shoot to scare the person and you don’t fire a damned warning shot, you shoot the threat, not the freaking air around the threat.
In Texas a perp can be chased until your shoe shoes wear off or until he goes into a structure. Shooting in defense of property is entirely legal here.
Agreed. One of the first things we taught our Marines (aside from weapons safety) was that if you fire a "warning shoot" you will be in the Brig. Fire a "warning shot" and it kills someone else, it's Leavenworth. We always taught that if the threat is such that you present your weapon, it is serious enough to kill someone (as civilians the proper terminology is "stop" someone)
 November 24, 2015 at 1:00pm
That was my thought, it should read “If convicted madden “should” or “will” get the death penalty.
In my preferred world he would be sodomized to death while being repeatedly water boarded and never asked a question, but then again I am an old softy.
November 23, 2015 at 5:27pm
LOL, Its Teva, I am willing to bet they employ an attorney who is qualified to handle this case and will do so aggressively. Might be why Avis’s statement is no longer available it doesn’t take long to get the first filing done.
 November 23, 2015 at 5:10pm
We do discuss gun law at the table during thanks giving. Well we discuss what guns we are going to buy next in case progressives try to make them against the law, does that count?
"Josh Earnest said that the Republicans are afraid of the National Rifle Association."
Not me. I'm afraid of the Democratic Party, whose philosophy is akin to Stalin's, Mao's, and Hitler's of the 20th century. All powerful, centralized, governments have caused much pain and suffering to humanity, second only to disease.
Will the next dem ad, take pajama boy and put him in a turkey suit?
I hope families talk about the turkey we have in the White House.
GOP fears the NRA?
That's a lie of a lie!!
That's code for the ruling class fears the rest of us real Americans...now, that's the truth!
I'm going to talk about how much of a worthless turd obamalamadingdong is. I'm gonna talk about how corrupt his entire administration is.
I'm gonna talk about how much worse we will be if the queen B Hillary gets elected.
I'm also going to talk about getting right with God cuz the poo is goi g to hit the fan!
Hey Josh, tell Obama not to sweat it. When President Trump takes office he will correct all of Obama's screw ups.
Pork flu Tamiflu symptom ciprofloxacin Examples of words that can get you on terror watch list. I should have looked to see if Duck Dynasty was on there too.
The GOP fears the NRA Josh, that is like saying the Democrats fear CAIR.
oh and Guns Josh, Guns, Democrats are especially scared of those black ones that possess people to pull their triggers....
and here I thought we were suppose to be talking about Obamacare around the Thanksgiving table and why the 40 million uninsured have not signed up....
We will be discussing the "sitting duck laws" of Gun Free Zones: what imbeciles leftists are who think banning guns makes anyone - other than the criminals - safer...
We will be talking about what new guns and ammo we want Santa to being us
We will be strategizing as to how to survive an islamist attack and what we will do if in a public place when it happens.
We will be determining how, LEO will be able to tell us from the terrorists - I am counting on my WHITENESS - blonde hair and blue eyed femaleness to give me a leg up
The government and their lies are not welcome at my Thanksgiving table.
Josh should get on that TV dance show ...
cause he sure knows how to twist and shout ...
Maybe instead of watching where the guns are coming from
we should watch where the terrorists are coming from.
I will do my best to make sure king o doesn't come up in any conversation
Where in the Constitution of the United States of America say that all citizens and non citizens have the same rights in our country? Why are we supposed to believe that our 2nd Amendment gives the right to a non citizen the right to own or have a gun in our country? This govt is using OUR right in OUR country as a tool against us by giving OUR rights to those illegal immigrants and to the refugees they are bringing over from terrorist ridden countries. These people are not citizens and should not be treated as such until that time comes if in fact it ever does.
“Talk About This Gun Law at the Thanksgiving Table”?
I thought we were supposed to sip cocoa in our onesies while discussing Obama Care and why it is that liberal men are women.
@paulbrown, And the best way to pluck him!
Josh Earnest is a thoughtless BOOB! The only gun talk allowed at my table will be fun hunting stories. I spend weeks prepping for this meal, get up at 5:00 AM to start cooking the turkey that I baste every 20 minutes for at least 5 hours, you better be talking about the food and entertaining me with some great stories if you want another outstanding meal the next go round.
November 22, 2015 at 1:39am
He sounds like a pretty solid Blue Dog Democrat.
 November 22, 2015 at 1:37am
He will also have the republicans in the state house to deal with, so he won’t have it his own way. I also think the Lt. Gov. was won by a Republican.
Hopefully, they can hamstring what will certainly be a Marxist agenda. Anyone who is a Democrat at that level in today's world has to have evil intent and the morons of Louisiana apparently bought Edward's snake oil.
[-1] November 22, 2015 at 1:36am
Wonder if Vitter isn’t running for Senate again to make way for Jindal to run?
Where did you read that? I checked the story over again and didn't see it.
You’re right it doesn’t. I didn’t know that. That makes ALL the difference. Can you imagine that conversation at home while they are cutting her hair? Sick. That child needs to instantly be removed from that home.
 November 9, 2015 at 10:56am
Press charges and have the thief arrested. Oh and ripping it out of their hands is assault as well dont’t forget to charge him with that either.