Dad pulls gun to stop son from being removed from life support, saves son's life

quote:

---

he did save his son's life

---

I mean I get that part of it, but anytime you enter a 3 HOUR standoff, with a gun...in a hospital...you deserve some pretty serious punishment.

Good for the son though.

eta: what was it that so convinced the dad that son was alive when apparently doctors thought it was over?

quote:

---

Darth_Vader

---

I found him


(someone had a thread looking for you earlier)

judge will let this go.

The DA should drop the charges. No jury should convict him for saving his son's life.

I had a friend in a bad bike wreck die after being pulled off support, they declared him brain dead and pulled the plug an hour later.

I always wondered though.

quote:

---

A very interesting case, should it go to trial.

---

No self-respecting DA in TX will go hard on this. They will probably wait until the hubub dies down and let it quietly die. He might get a slap on the wrist. If Gary Plauche can shoot his kid's killer on live TV and walk, this guy will be ok.

John Q

quote:

---

Need more details.

You arent allowed to pull someone off life support unless the power of attorney grants it, doctors cant just do it because they want to.

---

According to the story the mom had already signed off on it.

quote:

---

Never thought of it that way but that is very interesting.

---

It is. While making no value judgment, in Louisiana, citizens can use deadly force to protect innocent people in certain situations. I would imagine Texas would provide a similar privilege to its citizens.

See La. R.S. § 14:19

quote:

---

Use of force or violence in defense
A.(1) The use of force or violence upon the person of another is justifiable under either of the following circumstances:
(a) When committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person's lawful possession, provided that the force or violence used must be reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense.
(b)(i) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40) when the conflict began, against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person using the force or violence reasonably believes that the use of force or violence is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.
(ii) The provisions of this Paragraph shall not apply when the person using the force or violence is engaged, at the time of the use of force or violence in the acquisition of, the distribution of, or possession of, with intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance in violation of the provisions of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law.
(2) The provisions of Paragraph (1) of this Section shall not apply where the force or violence results in a homicide.
B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of force or violence was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur:
(1) The person against whom the force or violence was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.
(2) The person who used force or violence knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.
C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using force or violence as provided for in this Section and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.
D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used force or violence in defense of his person or property had a reasonable belief that force or violence was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a forcible offense or to prevent the unlawful entry.

---

Down vote


Didn't read