Hacker News Reader

Comment by FrustratedMonky | Hacker News Reader

So if two people have legal guns.

They can start shooting at each other.

Completely legally because they are both standing their ground?

Texas is wild west. Of course they would probably dig that characterization and think nothing is wrong with this situation.

View on HN

"Texas" means crazy/outlandish in Norwegian. Like "Det var helt Texas" - "It was completely crazy". And, yes, it refers to the state.

Had to check this to be sure. Wow, that's pretty Texas.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/texas-slang-crazy-norway/

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34622478

Hah. I'm Norwegian, but I get the wish to double check. We also used to - it's not as common any more - often talk about "American conditions". It was often used especially in the 1980's. If you wanted to dismiss your opponents policy, you might imply they might cause "Amerikanske tilstander".

Shoot before the other guy does. Bonus points if your politics align with the Governor.

Considering who the Governor just pardoned, you don't need the other guy to be armed or threatening, just shoot and you're good.

I agree that pardon is deplorable, but the other person was armed in that case.

Yes, but the particulars of the case are that the guy decided to seek out a BLM crowd, drove his car up to a side street where the crowd was, shot into the crowd, and managed to kill a guy with a gun. Even WITH clear motive, his behavior to even get into that situation, eyewitness testimony, and a jury conviction, he was pardoned anyway.

> drove his car up to a side street where the crowd was, shot into the crowd, and managed to kill a guy with a gun

Not EXACTLY how it played out.

He was upset the crowd was blocking an intersection. So he ran a red light, driving into the crowd, and then shot a guy who yelled at him for it because the yelling guy was carrying a gun.

> So he ran a red light, driving into the crowd, and then shot a guy who yelled at him for it because the yelling guy was carrying a gun.

So one can't exercise their first and second amendment rights simultaneously in free Texas? Or is that reserved for the good ol' boys?

I wasn't defending him. Just pointing out that the killer did a lot more than "park on a side street and fire into a crowd". He ran a red light to commit vehicular assault, so he could intentionally provoke a reaction, and then killed the first person that he could think of an excuse to.

Texas is also a "constitutional-carry" state. The other person being merely armed should not be material (if Texas were consistent in applying the law.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com