• AFK BRB Chocolate
      link
      English
      289 months ago

      The shooting, or saying he wasn’t home? Seems like the shooting was pretty justified given they were actively trying to break down his door.

      • @DocBlaze
        link
        English
        33
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        deleted by creator

        • AFK BRB Chocolate
          link
          English
          169 months ago

          For sure a concern, but still seems like a reasonable action given that those guys didn’t look like they wanted to sell Tupperware.

        • vanderbilt
          link
          fedilink
          139 months ago

          It’s a definite possibility and so is the resulting liability. However, unless that concrete is a facade or otherwise very thin it will probably stop handgun rounds up to even the .45 caliber size. If he’s using defensive rounds (hollow points), then penetration through concrete is reduced even further as they are made to expand and dump their kinetic energy within a very short distance after the expansion is triggered. The bullet damage to the wall is something he will certainly be liable for though, also his new screen door lol.

          See the following for an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFwntHIWjaw

        • @psycho_driver
          link
          English
          89 months ago

          I’m wondering if this is why they shot out their door at an angle instead of straight out. Not very likely for the bullets to go through concrete, but the door across the way? Yeah, a definite possibility. If the guy had that much presence of mind in that situation then good on him.

        • AFK BRB Chocolate
          link
          English
          169 months ago

          The one cop said there were shell casings outside, so they were shooting too

      • @Death_Equity
        link
        English
        159 months ago

        The gamble was shooting through the door and possibly hitting someone in the apartment across the way.

        Hopefully that cholo got perforated and nobody else.

        • @abbotsbury
          link
          English
          -129 months ago

          No need to use racial terms

          • @Death_Equity
            link
            English
            119 months ago

            You don’t even know what “cholo” means.

            • Bleeping Lobster
              link
              English
              109 months ago

              Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s a reference to a subculture, not an ethnicity. Though most cholos are probably hispanic, being a ‘cholo’ isn’t down to your racial genetics, it’s a subculture.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -3
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                It meant someone who has indigenous ancestry… ie, a racial term, since there are many American indigenous ethnicities.

                You could argue it doesn’t mean that anymore, but do you often hear it being applied to non-Hispanic people?

            • @abbotsbury
              link
              English
              -239 months ago

              Racializing was unnecessary

          • ChapolinColoradoNZ
            link
            English
            69 months ago

            Always thought that this was how my fellow Mexicans called their gang members by but hey, thanks for caring about our gang member’s feelings.

              • ChapolinColoradoNZ
                link
                English
                19 months ago

                Cabron! That wiki page clearly states (“gangster” in Mexico). It is a stereotype we use all the time and have no issues with. Same as you using “white men” to describe, I don’t know, caucasians? I don’t feel offended by it and so shouldn’t you on behalf of “mexican looking latino americanos who commit crimes”.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  Not really the same thing, I think. Though one could certainly note with some interest how all common slurs equating white ethnicities with crime have fallen out of style. In the 1920’s I’m sure we’d have had all kinds of ways to call someone an Irish criminal or whatever.

                  The only one I can even think of is if you called some vaguely Italian crook a goombah or Guido, and the first one would probably just confuse people who didn’t watch a bunch of Mafia movies.

                  And I’m not offended by the usage, just the pretense that this racial term isn’t a racial term. Not a huge fan of either intellectual dishonesty or just casual ignorance in general.

            • @abbotsbury
              link
              English
              -239 months ago

              Racializing was unnecessary

              • ChapolinColoradoNZ
                link
                English
                -29 months ago

                I can only imagine the comedy-sketch-like exercise that would be you at the station trying to describe the person who robbed you.

                • @abbotsbury
                  link
                  English
                  19 months ago

                  You can state facts without using weird racial language

      • teft
        link
        fedilink
        English
        59 months ago

        the shooting was pretty justified given they were actively trying to break down his door.

        Especially in texas.