CWunvzugAGQ/?utm_medium=copy_link

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

CWunvzugAGQ/?utm_medium=copy_link

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Dead link.

Dead link.

Az becuz da buggah wen mahke.

Lesson, don't argue with a guy who has a gun.

The people who understand this don't need a lesson.

The ones who don't get it can't be taught.  They push beyond the point of civility until the consequences of reality come crashing down on them.

At some point, you have to accept that getting through to people who've been brainwashed their whole lives is futile. 

They say a conservative is just a liberal who hasn't been mugged yet.  That's often what it takes.

Az becuz da buggah wen mahke.

Dead ☠️ 

Az becuz da buggah wen mahke.

Dead ☠️ 

Mahke.  Die.  Dead. 

is this the one?

https://100percentfedup.com/get-off-my-property-tx-man-not-charged-for-shooting-death-of-girlfriends-ex-husband-during-angry-child-custody-confrontation-on-front-porch-video/

is this the one?

https://100percentfedup.com/get-off-my-property-tx-man-not-charged-for-shooting-death-of-girlfriends-ex-husband-during-angry-child-custody-confrontation-on-front-porch-video/

BINGO.



Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I get it.
But do you guys know the story ?
It’s pretty messed up by most accounts.

I get it.
But do you guys know the story ?
It’s pretty messed up by most accounts.

Child visitation that went south when the grown ups got into an argument.

I get it.
But do you guys know the story ?
It’s pretty messed up by most accounts.

Story is moot, dont argue with someone who has a gun.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Story is moot, dont argue with someone who has a gun.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Amen, live to fight another day.

Amen, live to fight another day.

The guy starting the fight and trespassing was the one shot.

You think he should be able to threaten his family another day?

Seems like the ex wife often did not have their kids ready for pick up at 3:15.

Custody battle……and messing with your ex on the pickup time…..in a way…I can see why the ex was redlining

The ex, if he had a cooler head, should have called have called the cops or whatever about his kid not being there to be picked up.

The new boyfriend, did he brandish a gun because he feared for his life or his gf’s life…..or was he trying to intimidate the ex into leaving since the ex wouldn’t leave without his kid?

What a mess up.   For the kids, the mom’s bf killed their dad because their mom kept the kid from his dad.

I wouldn’t want to be the bf ….. id have my head on a swivel  expecting payback from the ex husbands relatives

That a lot of lives that were affected by the mom keeping the kids from their dad.

In my opinion everyone in that scenario was:

Selfish
Immature (making big body)
Disrespectful of child custody laws (and each other)
Stupid
Regretful right now (too late fackahs...)

They're ALL losers.
But the biggest loser is the poor kid.
 

They're ALL losers.
But the biggest loser is the poor kid.
 

My mother used me as a weapon against my father, I remember it well.
Since now talking to her is optional.  I exercise my option.
 

 

Domestic issues are always bad and if a gun involved even worse, just run away!

The guy starting the fight and trespassing was the one shot.

You think he should be able to threaten his family another day?

Whatever issue that guy had could have been resolved later through other channels.

Walk back to the curb, call the police, and let them resolve the issue. If the ex-husband had a legal right to his son then that means the ex-wife and her BF had no right to keep the son from him. So you potentially have a man protecting his property while simultaneously preventing another man from his child. The father shouldn't have been aggressive but at the same time you also can't kill someone who is just trying to get what is rightfully theirs.

Imagine if someone were keeping your kid from you.

Whatever issue that guy had could have been resolved later through other channels.

Walk back to the curb, call the police, and let them resolve the issue. If the ex-husband had a legal right to his son then that means the ex-wife and her BF had no right to keep the son from him. So you potentially have a man protecting his property while simultaneously preventing another man from his child. The father shouldn't have been aggressive but at the same time you also can't kill someone who is just trying to get what is rightfully theirs.

Imagine if someone were keeping your kid from you.

This happens every day in America -- a parent somewhere keeps their child when visiting hours/days are over.  Even if the other parent consents, it's not legal.  A court order mandates when the child will be with which parent.  If either one deviates, they are potentially in contempt of court unless they clear it in advance with their case worker.  Otherwise, it would be constant accusations of "He kept Sam an extra day without telling me;" "She agreed to it;"  "No, I did not!"  It could easily be a way of getting the other parent in trouble with the court, possibly as a ploy to gain full custody.

If a parent refuses to give the child to the parent that has legal custody, that can become kidnapping, which involves the feds if they take the child out of state.

You can't separate trespassing from "someone who is just trying to get what is rightfully theirs."  Unless the child is in danger, you wait for the Cops, and then maybe the courts.  Breaking a trespassing law, and maybe disturbing the peace or terroristic threatening, to try and enforce a visitation order is poor optics.  You'll be looked at as a bad role model for your child -- using force rather than peaceable means.  And, if arrested and convicted, you'll be on the path to "unfit parent."

Everyone has a cell phone that records voices, images and video.  Just use it to record actual events and statements, and you'll have law enforcement and child welfare workers on your side. 

Nothing that happened before, during or after the shooting can possibly be good for the child.  That's the bottom line.

This happens every day in America -- a parent somewhere keeps their child when visiting hours/days are over.  Even if the other parent consents, it's not legal.  A court order mandates when the child will be with which parent.  If either one deviates, they are potentially in contempt of court unless they clear it in advance with their case worker.  Otherwise, it would be constant accusations of "He kept Sam an extra day without telling me;" "She agreed to it;"  "No, I did not!"  It could easily be a way of getting the other parent in trouble with the court, possibly as a ploy to gain full custody.

If a parent refuses to give the child to the parent that has legal custody, that can become kidnapping, which involves the feds if they take the child out of state.

You can't separate trespassing from "someone who is just trying to get what is rightfully theirs."  Unless the child is in danger, you wait for the Cops, and then maybe the courts.  Breaking a trespassing law, and maybe disturbing the peace or terroristic threatening, to try and enforce a visitation order is poor optics.  You'll be looked at as a bad role model for your child -- using force rather than peaceable means.  And, if arrested and convicted, you'll be on the path to "unfit parent."

Everyone has a cell phone that records voices, images and video.  Just use it to record actual events and statements, and you'll have law enforcement and child welfare workers on your side. 

Nothing that happened before, during or after the shooting can possibly be good for the child.  That's the bottom line.

Depends on the stipulation of the divorce decree. Sometimes they are vague, just saying one parent gets the kid half the time while some divorce decrees spell it out to the specific date and time. I knew a military guy who had to exchange his kid at the police station on specific dates and times so it could all be documented and monitored.

As for the rest, like I said, live to fight another day. He should have called the cops and waited for them. Then, if he was in the right, he could have the smug satisfaction when the cops make the ex-wife hand the child over.