re: Chud the Builder case will be a referendum on self defense in America.

quote:

---

This whole “proportional force” issue is such bullshite.

If a twenty-something man is assaulting a 65 year old man, is the 65 year old supposed to just take the arse whipping because using proportional force would be “unfair?” If a trained fighter is assaulting a wimpy guy, does the wimpy guy just need to take the asswhipping? If someone punches me from behind and stuns me to the point that I can barely defend myself, am I supposed to just take the asswhipping?

---

Read the next post:

quote:

---

But there is a conflation going on with this concept and what he did in response. He had every right to respond with fists, proportionately. If that situation escalated to a legitimate threat of severe bodily harm or death, he may have been justified in using deadly force.

---

Also if you keep reading, I cite a very popular example:

quote:

---

There are differences state to state, but proportionality is pretty universal, for situations just like this.

This was something discussed at length during the Trayvon Martin trial, which is why TM's attack and the violence involved (specifically mounting GZ and slamming his head on the concrete) was such an important variable. It's also why stand your ground didn't even come into play.

---

LINK

None of that was present in this interaction with "Chud the Builder" though, from every report I've read, so those details aren't really relevant or responsive here.

quote:

---

There are more whites than blacks on EBT. I automatically assume its loaded with MAGA voters.

---

I agree they are mostly MAGA voters which perplexes me when I see all the uproar about people not getting their SNAP benefits or being told they can't buy twinkies with SNAP or you name the complaint. NO MAGA voters seem to complain...

quote:

---

MemphisGuy

---

Oh, that.

I get it.

I tried to watch that movie but I hated that little bastard so badly no more than 10 minutes into the film that I couldn't watch any more than that.

quote:

---

He's rage baiting for clicks. This pussy isn't racist, prejudice, or anything. Hes doing it for likes. I'll say if he got jumped he should be Scott free. Freedom of speech has consequences but not in the court of law. He's a douche but he shouldn't be in prison.

---

The guy's a scumbag, that's pretty factual. But if it's found that he was attacked, he'll walk. ...regardless of what he may have said.

I think he's trying to make a point between races to be honest. Idgaf about his message but he has a point. He's proving what people need to see. I don't agree with him but get it. It needs to be done. I hope he walks because if not, he did all that shite for nothing.

Damn you are quite the moron

Yep, this is why Chud is done. Your video is the *perfect* example, and you're too dumb to pick up on it.

"Chud says he didn't start shooting until he was hit, but the video shows him pulling his gun out before he was touched."



There's going to be no objectivity here. Black fragility is real. Say one of a few magic words and you're literally the worst of society, perhaps even worse than child rapists. Society has a duty to fudge any law or policy or standard to put you away.

Not saying ChudtheTurd is innocent, just pointing out how him saying magic words makes emotional people, like yourself, just lose your minds. All objectivity and rationality go out the window.

quote:

---

I think he's trying to make a point between races to be honest. Idgaf about his message but he has a point. He's proving what people need to see. I don't agree with him but get it. It needs to be done. I hope he walks because if not, he did all that shite for nothing.

---

he's trying to make a point, which, whatever...i see what he's saying

but he's not going to walk if surveillance footage shows he flashed a gun or even pulled a gun prior to being attacked. nor should he.

quote:

---

There's going to be no objectivity here

---

CHUD went looking for a violent reaction, he lied about the sequence of events...he's screwed..

Case update

quote:

---

Dalton "Chud the Builder" Eatherly case update Affidavit of Complaint just made public. Andrew Branca (self-defense law attorney) breakdown:

• No racial slur alleged. Zero. The state's affidavit contains not one word of Eatherly provoking Fox with a slur. That was the biggest threat to his self-defense claim. Gone.
• Affidavit describes zero criminal conduct. Not one sentence states what Eatherly did that was unlawful.
• "Verbal altercation" is not a crime. At most a misdemeanor that would apply equally to both men. Neither is charged with it.
• "Bladed stance" is not a crime. Taking a defensive posture against an angry antagonist is legal.
• "Reached for his firearm" is not a crime. Preparing to defend yourself is legal.
• "A physical altercation ensued" is written in passive voice. The state does not allege Eatherly started it. By omission, the inference points to Fox as the initiator.
• "Discharged his firearm, striking Fox multiple times" is not inherently unlawful. Thousands of lawful self-defense shootings fit this exact description annually.
• Ricocheting rounds near bystanders is not a crime absent recklessness. The affidavit alleges no recklessness. Police miss roughly 70% of shots in lawful shootings.
• Lawful self-defense shots are, as a matter of law, not reckless.
• Affidavit does not contest any element of self-defense. Not Innocence, Imminence, Proportionality, Avoidance, or Reasonableness. Not a single one.
• Charges: attempted murder, aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, employing a firearm during a dangerous felony.
• Branca's verdict: "Hard to recall the last time I saw an Affidavit of Complaint so utterly lacking in legal substance." Sees no realistic path to conviction beyond a reasonable doubt on these facts.

---