Myles Garrett

[RVACane]

I opened this thread on this page and saw race and shooting unarmed robbers in you home. I’ll skip race as I knew that was coming and the dude can’t use a helmet like that. There’s no self defense. I’m not sure what the race issue is. I don’t want to know either.

As for the killing an unarmed robber in your home, for one, I don’t know how you have time to determine whether a robber is armed or not, especially when adrenaline is flowing. Secondly, I never practiced criminal law, but I remember this from law school, and if a person breaks into a domicile (home) that is occupied, there’s essentially a presumption of threat to life and a right to ensure your safety and that of your occupants in your domicile. If the criminal doesn’t rape or kill someone and runs out of the house, I do not think you can shoot them in the back in the street as the threat to life and limb is lifted. That will actually get you prosecuted.

That said - Don’t be a criminal breaking into people’s houses and you don’t have to worry about it. Lol at anyone feeling bad for the scumbag that gets killed robbing homes occupied by people and then crying victim. I’m pretty liberal and I’d shoot the fûcker as dead as a troll that Inday gobbled up on CIS.

 

[Suhrthing]

I opened this thread on this page and saw race and shooting unarmed robbers in you home. I’ll skip race as I knew that was coming and the dude can’t use a helmet like that. There’s no self defense. I’m not sure what the race issue is. I don’t want to know either.

As for the killing an unarmed robber in your home, for one, I don’t know how you have time to determine whether a robber is armed or not, especially when adrenaline is flowing. Secondly, I never practiced criminal law, but I remember this from law school, and if a person breaks into a domicile (home) that is occupied, there’s essentially a presumption of threat to life and a right to ensure your safety and that of your occupants in your domicile. If the criminal doesn’t rape or kill someone and runs out of the house, I do not think you can shoot them in the back in the street as the threat to life and limb is lifted. That will actually get you prosecuted.

That said - Don’t be a criminal breaking into people’s houses and you don’t have to worry about it. Lol at anyone feeling bad for the scumbag that gets killed robbing homes occupied by people and then crying victim. I’m pretty liberal and I’d shoot the fûcker as dead as a troll that Inday gobbled up on CIS.

It depends on what state you live in. Unoccupied states have 'castle' laws which actually let you protect your home and family. Other communists states have 'duty to retreat' laws, which make it illegal to protect your family and belongings as long as you are able to flee your own home.

 

[Donny Donowitz]

No a baseball bat would be equivalent. If he threw the football at his face then maybe you'd have a point. Lol at a helmet not being a lethal weapon. Nice to know who never played football around here.

By your logic a blender is a lethal weapon so watch out for chefs

Lmao at people on here truly taking sides because they're the same r

Yeah.... but you forgot Rudolph being slammed to the ground on a roughing the offset long after the ball was thrown. Love how you conveniently left that out.... don't be a horse's ***.

If that is what you call a slam then you're the biggest wimp on here. Rudolph landed on top of Garrett before the skirmish. Get real.

 

[Negro-Wan Kanobi]

By your logic a blender is a lethal weapon so watch out for chefs



If that is what you call a slam then you're the biggest wimp on here. Rudolph landed on top of Garrett before the skirmish. Get real.

There was a flag on that play for him putting his body weight on him, dip****.
We all know that Rudolph acted like a baby, but YOU. DON'T. SWING. AND. HIT. OTHER. PLAYERS. IN. THE. HEAD. WITH. A HELMET.

Are you not getting that?

 

[jw410]

Am I the only one who couldn't care less about this? Albert Haynesworth stomping Gurode's head was worse than this. 5 games. Hefty fine. Move on.

Media 'gon media.

Exactly especially the angry violent narrative. Then the next Jeffrey Epstein case will dominate the news cycle. Seen this movie a thousand times.

 

[classiccane12]

Exactly especially the angry violent narrative. Then the next Jeffrey Epstein case will dominate the news cycle. Seen this movie a thousand times.

Agree with the premise but the Epstein case did not dominate anything. It was buried. Multiple times for years.

And Epstein didn't kill himself

 

[Negro-Wan Kanobi]

Nobody is or should be, this is what I don’t get. Everybody is taking sides instead of just saying Rudolph was being a b**** bc he played awful and Garrett took it way too far in retaliation. It’s pretty simple.

This

 

[Negro-Wan Kanobi]

Big clown. If you don't want no smoke then sit the **** down, QB. Popped up like his little *** wanted a piece of some grown man ****, but you know he would have stayed back if he didn't have his two banana boys with him. Dumb peckerwood thought he was safe behind his boys but didn't realize he was running up on a real ************ that was not playin games with his ***. Lucky he still breathing. Respect to Garrett for popping off and not backing down from ****.

So you went and created another handle???

 

[westcoastcanes]

I never said anything about excuse. My quote was about accountability of how can person start a fight (Rudolph) but everyone only want to punish Garrett because he went extra during the fight. Shouldn't both people be subject to punishment and criticism because both their actions were wrong.

Can you, or any of the other developmentally challenged individuals in here that keep saying "everybody only want to punish Garrett" point me to where anyone actually says Rudolph should be off the hook completely? Granted I am only 240 posts into this thread, but I have still not seen that yet.

 

[RVACane]

It depends on what state you live in. Unoccupied states have 'castle' laws which actually let you protect your home and family. Other communists states have 'duty to retreat' laws, which make it illegal to protect your family and belongings as long as you are able to flee your own home.

That’s insane that there would be a duty to retreat in your own home in some states. Shoot em dead and good luck convicting a guy with a family in the home.

 

[Dwinstitles]

What he did was bad period but everything is tailored to divide people.

 

[RVACane]

Can you, or any of the other developmentally challenged individuals in here that keep saying "everybody only want to punish Garrett" point me to where anyone actually says Rudolph should be off the hook completely? Granted I am only 240 posts into this thread, but I have still not seen that yet.

I haven’t read the thread and I saw a video of the play. What did Rudolph do before that because solely on that play the dude flung him down late, grabbed his face mask and yanked it off his head... now after being assaulted Rudolph went at Garrett and Garrett used the helmet as a weapon. Rudolph’s only risk is going after the guy who assaulted him but it definitely would be a mitigated heat of passion type thing. Garrett caused all kinds of assaults including with a deadly weapon. More importantly, it doesn’t matter what happened before that play. It’s not a legal defense. There was no danger to Garrett, he caused the situation. It’s an easy case.

 

[NC_Canes_11]

It depends on what state you live in. Unoccupied states have 'castle' laws which actually let you protect your home and family. Other communists states have 'duty to retreat' laws, which make it illegal to protect your family and belongings as long as you are able to flee your own home.

That’s interesting. I thought Erwin vs State in the Supreme Court made it clear that no one had the duty to retreat. Im not a lawyer so idk for sure, maybe that’s changed at the state level? I’ve never lived in a state without the castle doctrine so I haven’t read too much into that.

Also is that just in public places or does that pertain to ones home as well?

 

[RVACane]

So you went and created another handle???

He said that KrazyCane is SaneKane compared to him. I actually enjoy Krazy on here but this will be like Krazy unchained.

 

[westcoastcanes]

Both players are wrong. But to act like Rudolph did nothing is mind boggling.

Focused on the wrong things fellas.

Suspend both and maybe the guy who hit Rudolph late and Pouncey. Call it a day. Some fines. Keep it pushing.

Reading thought this thread, across the board, nobody is saying Rudolph did nothing wrong. Did I miss something?

 

[RVACane]

That’s interesting. I thought Erwin vs State in the Supreme Court made it clear that no one had the duty to retreat. Im not a lawyer so idk for sure, maybe that’s changed at the state level? I’ve never lived in a state without the castle doctrine so I haven’t read too much into that.

Also is that just in public places or does that pertain to ones home as well?

I never did criminal law but there are special protections and inferences of imminent bodily harm if someone breaks into an occupied home.

When si was younger there was a case of a guy in Miami setting up a gun to a mechanism so that if a robber broke in to hi store (I think), that the gun fired. It did and killed a robber when no one was in the domicile and the store owner was convicted of 2nd or 3rd degree murder.

It’s not because it’s your home that you can kill at will. It’s because it’s occupied and there’s the. A presumo of self defense essentially to avoid death or imminent bodily harm.

Better if a criminal lawyer lays this out. I never worked in that area. This is what I remember from years back.

 

[Trafficante]

Here's the bottom line, that EVERYONE in this hopeless & pathetic thread is missing:

1.) The NFL has already made a conscious decision to interject race into their organization when they have decided to disproportionately pay QBs relative to other positions. The majority of which are White. Not only that but the rules framework is heavily biased & skewed in their favor as well.

2. ) Therefore the entire argument & question about whether or not Garretts retaliation was justified is completely IRRELEVANT.

3.) If he were able to exercise a little self-control & discipline and not get caught up in the heat of the moment, he would've eventually realized that the cons far outweigh the pros in whether he should retaliate. Not only that but he was 3-0 against Rudolph for the night. Him & the Browns d-line were kicking Rudolph's & the Steelers o-line's *** all night. The Browns won the game 21-7. And lastly..in the altercation he was the one who actually managed to remove Rudolph's helmet.

 

[HarrietTubmanCane]

I opened this thread on this page and saw race and shooting unarmed robbers in you home. I’ll skip race as I knew that was coming and the dude can’t use a helmet like that. There’s no self defense. I’m not sure what the race issue is. I don’t want to know either.

As for the killing an unarmed robber in your home, for one, I don’t know how you have time to determine whether a robber is armed or not, especially when adrenaline is flowing. Secondly, I never practiced criminal law, but I remember this from law school, and if a person breaks into a domicile (home) that is occupied, there’s essentially a presumption of threat to life and a right to ensure your safety and that of your occupants in your domicile. If the criminal doesn’t rape or kill someone and runs out of the house, I do not think you can shoot them in the back in the street as the threat to life and limb is lifted. That will actually get you prosecuted.

That said - Don’t be a criminal breaking into people’s houses and you don’t have to worry about it. Lol at anyone feeling bad for the scumbag that gets killed robbing homes occupied by people and then crying victim. I’m pretty liberal and I’d shoot the fûcker as dead as a troll that Inday gobbled up on CIS.

U haven’t read the thread. “There’s no self defense”, but you are now asking what happened to precipitate the incident. U also said you don’t care about race, but you brought up race twice (despite not caring) and dismissed it twice, all in one paragraph.

Trump energy and the political climate it’s made has people in weird quagmires where sociopolitical issues are concerned. There is no where to hide. I love it.

 

[HarrietTubmanCane]

I haven’t read the thread and I saw a video of the play. What did Rudolph do before that because solely on that play the dude flung him down late, grabbed his face mask and yanked it off his head... now after being assaulted Rudolph went at Garrett and Garrett used the helmet as a weapon. Rudolph’s only risk is going after the guy who assaulted him but it definitely would be a mitigated heat of passion type thing. Garrett caused all kinds of assaults including with a deadly weapon. More importantly, it doesn’t matter what happened before that play. It’s not a legal defense. There was no danger to Garrett, he caused the situation. It’s an easy case.

The ref was stand literally right over the play and there was no roughing call, so we can’t create one.

 

[westcoastcanes]

Joke aside. I see what you are saying. Good looking on taking the time to educate a brotha like me.

I see what you mean.

You may find not as many people are out to insult you as you think, if you aren't observing it through a lens expecting attack.