Father and Son, Both Armed, Shoot and Kill Neighbor Over Trash Dispute

In this extremely disturbing video out of Abilene, Texas, a heated dispute over the disposal of a mattress leads to gunfire. The shooters, Johnnie and Michael Miller, have both been charged with the first-degree murder of the third man in the video, Aaron Howard. Howard apparently had a baseball bat (not obvious in the video) but was otherwise unarmed.

The person recording the video is Howard’s fiance, Kara Box. Threats were exchanged on both sides before John Miller fired his handgun. His son then followed up with a shotgun blast.

When District Attorney Jim Hicks saw the footage, he said: “Video evidence like this is always graphic and very difficult to watch. But, it is consistent with the charges.”

Both Miller men are currently out of jail on a $25,000 bond.

“You [the Millers] deserve to spend your lives in prison,” said Ms. Box. By the looks of it, there’s a good chance of that.

Here’s a news video featuring an interview with her:

comments

  1. avatar Andy Buckmichael says:

    Nice shooting.

    1. avatar FB says:

      Can you elaborate more what you mean by “nice shooting”?

      1. avatar Sgt Bill says:

        They were all a-holes for the way they handled this but the father son duo are toast. They were not on their property and had a duty to retreat, call the cops, and handle it that way. If the dead guy was on their property a different story. Three low gene pool idiots are now out of circulation.

        1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          “the father son duo are toast”

          Depends who’s on the jury. I can easily see a hung jury. The father was very calm and kept telling the guy to calm down and back away. The dead guy was out of control and threatening to kill them.

        2. avatar Anonymous says:

          Depends who’s on the jury. I can easily see a hung jury. The father was very calm and kept telling the guy to calm down and back away. The dead guy was out of control and threatening to kill them.

          I don’t see it happening Danny. They shot him over a mattress. They could have just walked away at any time.

          Stand your ground is to defend against assault, not to take a shirtless fatty stroll to go confront the neighbor over trash while brandishing, hands on guns.

          A gaggle of trailer tards is what this is.

        3. avatar DDay says:

          Stand your ground is to defend against assault, not to take a shirtless fatty stroll to go confront the neighbor over trash while brandishing, hands on guns.

          I agree with this. They were all running their mouths for a long time. Stand your ground is about defense when you’re life or great bodily harm. These people stayed around and around and around. They were not in fear.

          This was a murder, they are trash and should be in prison for decades to life. Completely unnecessary.

        4. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          They were not in fear

          Maybe, maybe not. But when the dead dude grabbed a baseball bat and came after them, all bets were off.

        5. avatar DDay says:

          Danny, you can’t sit there and escalate a situation as all involved did and claim you were in fear. If shirtless fatty threw a punch at orange shirt and orange shirt defended himself with the bat, orange shirt would be arrested for assault and battery or murder if he killed him with the bat.

          If you start a fight with someone, then that person attacks you or puts you in fear for your life, you don’t have the legal right to defense because you started the fight. In this situation, it looks like all 3 were the instigators, so none would be able to claim self defense.

        6. avatar Ted Unlis says:

          Why am I not surprised that Danny L Griffin doesn’t seem to have a problem with two armed shirtless imbeciles “standing their ground” in an alley way behind their residence and asserting their constitional right to set their equally imbecilic new neighbors straight on the life and death issue of whether or not a set of twin size box springs should be disposed of in the trash dumpster. Dumb and his dumber offspring chose to remain and further confront and taunt the obviously unhinged raging idiot. Daddy & Junior could have easily just turned around and waddled their fat @$$€$ back into the house. Nothing even remotely reasonable about their actions

        7. avatar California Richard says:

          I agree with Danny…. this could easily be hung jury or conviction depending on the jury. I’d say not guilty, only because orange shirt guy threatened to murder them several times then acted acording to that threat. If shirtless guys went there to murder orange shirt guy, there never would have been a conversation. They made it clear that they had weapons for self defense and any time they referenced using their weapons in the conversation it was in the context of self defense. Self defense (shirtless guys’ intentions) and murder (orange shirt guy’s intention) are two very different things. DA will have to prove that shirtless guys went out there with the intent to kill orange shirt guy and that will be hard to sell that to a jury when the victim is screaming over and over again that he is going to kill them both.

        8. avatar Lowell says:

          Gonna agree with Danny, the baseball bat throws a monkey in the wrench. They might have to plea it down because of that bat and the threats to kill them. The fact that they walked over brandishing both a handgun and a shotgun means there’s no way they get a hung jury, though. They walked over to intimidate the guy, and ended up gunning him down when that didn’t work and he attacked them with a bat. No good guys here.

        9. avatar MLee says:

          @ Sgt Bill
          Stand your ground law in Texas doesn’t dictate that you have to be on your property or you have a duty to retreat. Where did you pull that line of BS out of? Let me take one guess.
          The law says that you have no duty to retreat from the area where force was used as long as you had a right to be there. He had a right to be in the alley.
          In my view, they were threatened with bodily harm repeatedly. If they had not be armed, they would have been assaulted.

        10. avatar LarryinTX says:

          “Stand your ground” and “castle doctrine” are constantly confused.

    2. avatar Jim Brown says:

      The stupid out of control dead guy deserved what he got. He was doing all the threatening both physical and verbal. I really don’t have a problem with this shooting. The father, I will predict, when a jury sees and hears all of the evidence they’re going to decide that this was a self defense shooting because the dead guy kept threatening to kill both of them and put bullets in their head. The only place I have a problem is the son letting loose with the shotgun. His actions do not look defensive, unless there’s something that we do not see, that’s out of frame in the video that prompted him to shoot.

      1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

        How was what the son did any different from what a cop would do? If someone attacks a cop with a baseball bat and the cop shoots, the assisting cop with his gun out would shoot as well, no?

        1. avatar Sgt Bill says:

          if you listen again you can hear the old guy say, “…if you…I will kill you”. In most jurisdictions he and his son would have a duty to retreat and not stand there with guns over a mattress dispute on public property. They don’t look like the types that can afford a high priced attorney. Public defender is going to have them plead guilty to 2nd degree murder or 1st degree manslaughter and each get 10+ years.

        2. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Depends. If you come at me with that bat I’m going to shoot you. Sounds reasonable. Did the dead dude raise the bat to swing at the father’s head? He obviously thought the father wasn’t going to do anything. The girlfriend obviously thought the father wasn’t going to do anything because she recorded the video instead of calling 911. They were both wrong. They both chose poorly.

        3. avatar Anonymous says:

          You guys are missing a key ingredient.

          The shirtless man boobs duo, didn’t just happen to be at the trash can with guns. They came to the trash can, shirtless, with man boobs, with their hands on the guns already. They were not shouldered, they were not holstered. The guns were in their hands, and they took those to the trash can. That makes them the instigators. Yes, the guy that was shot was asking for it – begging for it. And their mistake was they gave it to him, and now they get to go to prison – I would make bets on it. Confident solid bets.

          When I go armed outside my house, I don’t go shirtless with a gun in hand. Big no no.

        4. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Not exactly. The father had his gun holstered originally. Apparently when he drew it and held it by his side the son retrieved the shotgun.

        5. avatar JMR says:

          Yea I was just going to say, that according to multiple articles I’ve read the guys firearm was hidden.

          Not to mention this women has a SERIOUS credibility issue, a list of lies already told:
          They weren’t they’re children
          He wasn’t her husband
          He didn’t just throw the bat over their heads (it hits the dude in the video)

          The dead dude also had according to his Fiance “Intermittent Explosive Disorder” so who the hell knows what he was going to do, he could have simply walked away himself, instead he threatened to kill, shoot, and hurt people.

          It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out (in like 2 or 3 years) I could easily see a hung jury.

        6. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          So he was literally a walking IED. Or is that figuratively? 😀

        7. avatar Anonymous says:

          Guys. They are defending a trash can. If he is that psycho, why push him over the edge over a trash can? Just call the authorities and let them handle it.

        8. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          You talking about the woman? Because she was the only one with a phone and apparently she thought World Star Hip Hop fame was in her future.

        9. avatar Anonymous says:

          Yea I was just going to say, that according to multiple articles I’ve read the guys firearm was hidden.

          Are we watching the same video???

          Whatever happened to don’t draw your gun until you plan on using it. He stands there, both of them, for minutes with guns in hand, fingers on triggers.

        10. avatar Azics says:

          “How was what the son did any different from what a cop would do?”

          He wasn’t a a cop. Nor was the loser father he was supposedly protecting. Neither am I or most of you. But even if I or any other upstanding law-abiding citizen opens fire as a secondary after a primary shoots, the secondary is going to have a hard time claiming self defense; even if the primary is justified.

        11. avatar JMR says:

          Anonymous, if you read what I said, “Yea I was just going to say, that according to multiple articles I’ve read the guys firearm was hidden.” This was at the start of the confrontation before the video was rolling.

          The video by the way which is intended to paint the Orange shirt guy in the best possible light, yet he still comes of like a lunatic.

          Several articles I’ve read stated that shirtless father took the trash out with his pistol, given orange shirt guys history this is no surprise if the neighbor knew anything about him, he then removed the bed out of the dumpster since according to local laws furniture isn’t suppose to go in the dumpster, Orange shirt dude then came out and started going psycho, Shirtless father drew his firearm, Orange shirt dude keeps being psycho, Shirtless son comes out to back his father, Orange shirt’s fiance comes out and starts filming.

          Again, this is what I’ve read from several sites.

        12. avatar Anonymous says:

          Anonymous, if you read what I said, “Yea I was just going to say, that according to multiple articles I’ve read the guys firearm was hidden.” This was at the start of the confrontation before the video was rolling.

          Then that’s fine. He should have kept it hidden. and not taken it out to hold it finger on trigger. Skippy shouldn’t have fetched a shotgun either. To prevent escalation, you keep your gun open carried holstered, or concealed – not in your hands. Pretty sure the law reflects that concept too.

        13. avatar JMR says:

          Anonymous, you have no idea what happened before that tape started rolling, there are plenty of scenarios that would warrant the gun being pulled out, by all accounts the aggressor was orange shirt dude, who has a history of violence. Brandishing isn’t illegal everywhere, and pulling a firearm can be seen as defensive.

          Orange shirt guy could have walked away at any time as well, he didn’t, he escalated it until he got shot due to his own actions, of course had orange shirt guy followed the laws none of this would have happened.

          Every time these cases come up I am absolutely horrified by the people who ignore evidence, it only goes to prove that the old adage “better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6” is absolutely bunk, if Anonymous and sich were doing the judging you might as well be carried by 6. You two have not only ignored evidence, but you don’t even seem to understand why people would carry to begin with.

      2. avatar Sich says:

        Both of the Shirtless Wonders were Armed, the Bellicose Guy wasn’t. Do the phrase “Stick and Stones” come to mind. When does Shouting at someone else become Lethal Force. Shirtless Father Shot First, Twice. Before the Baseball Bat even began to move…

        1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Well, the Bellicose Guy won’t be so bellicose next time, will he?

        2. avatar Sich says:

          I wonder how the Two Fat Ones felt when the Police took away their Guns from their “Live Warm Hands” and Handcuffed them…

        3. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          That’s immaterial. The dead dude is dead because he was an out of control idiot.

          A couple of years ago a man and woman here in Michigan thought a pickup truck was driving too close on their tail, so the husband slams on his brakes and brake checks the guy a couple of times (which is beyond stupid). When the opportunity arose the pickup truck went around them quickly. They all got stopped at a stop light ahead so the husband exits his vehicle and confronts the old dude in the pickup, yelling at him, and takes a swing at the old guy through the truck window. The old guy shoots the husband dead in the middle of the street in broad daylight.

          We were discussing the incident on a Michigan gun forum and the wife learns of it and begins posting in the thread. She said that it doesn’t matter what her husband did, it didn’t warrant him being shot dead. The point is that is immaterial. She kept saying, “but he [the old guy]can’t do that.” I told her, “yes he can and he did. What happens to the old guy, whether he gets convicted or not, doesn’t matter. Your husband is still dead because he acted like an idiot.” She never got it and kept saying, “but you can’t do that.”

          Maybe she gets it now. I wonder if bellicose guy’s girlfriend and brother get it now. It’s too late for the dead dude to get it now. Don’t act like a raging lunatic and threaten other people. You want to get shot? That’s how you get shot.

        4. avatar Sich says:

          And the Two IDIOTS with Guns weren’t. As someone else said, the two had the option of walking away, they DIDN’T and only Escalated the problem to the Final Conclusion. Somebody getting KILLED…

        5. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          You know who escalated the problem? The dead dude when he kept yelling and threatening armed men. And then he further escalated it by retrieving a weapon. As I said before, he won’t do that again.

        6. avatar Sich says:

          All the Dead guy was doing was “Yelling”, the Two Beauty Queens had the Firearms. They were in control of the situation. I suspect they were also Drunk. It was Their Call all the way through the confrontation…

        7. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Really? They were in control of the dead dude? He wasn’t even in control of himself. The dead dude could have walked away, too. But for the sake of argument let’s say you are 100% correct. So what? Dead dude’s still dead. You need to understand that important point. Maybe the father and son get convicted, maybe they walk. That’s immaterial to the guy getting shot multiple times and assuming room temperature. As I said, he won’t act like that again.

        8. avatar Sich says:

          They had the Guns! Bellicose Man “Didn’t”. Somebody getting in your face yelling at you “Isn’t” a Threat, if your the Only Ones that are Armed…

        9. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Dead dude was armed with a bat. He was not shot until he retrieved a weapon and came after the father and son. Had he not began an attack on the armed pair he would have lived to be an a-hole to someone else another day. Like I said, he won’t be doing that again.

        10. avatar Sich says:

          But at which time. For the Five or so minutes before the Shooting, or JUST before the Shooting…

        11. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          But at which time. For the Five or so minutes before the Shooting, or JUST before the Shooting…

          Dear God you are thick.

        12. avatar Sich says:

          Loosen your Tie a little, so more blood flows to your brain…

        13. avatar JMR says:

          If having guns in hand is all it takes to control people why would cops or military’s have to shoot anyone?

          oh and the dude had a bat, a weapon, something all involved parties agree on.

        14. avatar Sich says:

          You just made the argument! If there’s a Police Force all decked out with Body Armor and Protective Shield and Helmet. And some “Schmuck” starts Yelling at you. Do you have the Right to Kill the Schmuck for “JUST” Yelling At You…

        15. avatar JMR says:

          Some Schmuck wasn’t just yelling, he was armed and threatening to kill, talked about getting a gun as well. A point that all involved parties admit to, but you keep ignoring.

      3. avatar DDay says:

        So, you completely ignore the treats of the father and son saying they’ll shoot the guy? All three were idiots but only 2 of the idiots fired shots. This was not self defense. At a minimum they were mouthing off back at the guy and provoking him as he was to them. They’ll be convicted and they should be.

        1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          DDay, read my transcript of the video posted here. Then rethink this.

  2. avatar Don says:

    So wrong. Some were wronger than others, but all were wrong. Unbelievable.

    1. avatar DJ says:

      No one just walked away. Handgun, shotgun and baseball bat how did they think it would end?
      Everyone gets a stupid prize.

      1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

        If you’re holding a bat and repeatedly threatening to kill two guys who both have guns in their hands and you just keep pushing, what do you expect to happen? Even without knowing how this confrontation ends, it’s 99.9% predictable.

        There are ways to solve conflict without violence. This ain’t it. This is a textbook example of how to wind up dead or in prison.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Maybe rule suicide?

      2. avatar Anonymous says:

        I agree with Don and DJ. Massive altercation over a trash can. A gaggle of tards these are, all of them.

        They all mutually escalated the situation.

      3. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        Proves the old adage, stupid is as stupid does.

  3. avatar Mister Fleas says:

    You left out a whole bunch of the story. The dead man was a dangerous nut. This is his interaction with a mailman from his Facebook page(sorry in advance for the wall of text; that is the way he wrote) :

    “So this afternoon Right as I wake up and before My medications I am checking On house Walk into the kids Room And see a Person In front Of the kids window..So me I go outside find out its the mailman and tell Him for the last time stay away from the kids windows We have asked you multiple times not to walk between cars an windows because You might get shot …….Being as How we have 2 girls that are children not to mention a little boy ..I believe its in my right to Protect these children from Perverts an Pieces of shit in this world. I also live down the street from a place where thefts murders an assaults have happened in the past. He told me because I wouldnt let him walk that way that he would not deliver the mail and would just send it back I tried calling the usps before walking down to make sure to get him On recording refusing to give me my mail he refused to say anything. so I called him a Bitch an a coward for not repeating what he said and I went Home….15 min later My home was swarmed with Police banging on my door Scaring Emegail so I had Kara leave with Emegail because my medications had not kicked in and I was getting overly anxious with the police.Tried calling Grandma only to realize well shes out of town. I asked if they had warrants they said they didnt need one as they continued to bang on my door profusely an hide away from my sight which I called them on multiple times. I told them I have a mental issue they needed to leave I did not want to talk to them and they insisted on causing me emotional and mental strain along with the physical strain of my heart not being able to slow down over an over.I told them you can call my caseworker I have the files verified of my disorder all you have to do is leave my property because you do not have a warrant I walked thru them and left MY OWN HOME because I did not feel Safe. I left long enough to allow my meds to kick in and calm me down before coming back discovering they were still there SO I showed them the video of exactly what I said when I walked down the street to him.. They are now reporting that I made a terroristic threat when I told the mailman to stay away from the girls windows because he might get shot..I also have had Adult Protective Services called stating that I am not in my right mind 3 hours after all transpired I told them I am fine and asked why they were calling they said because Abilene Police Department called saying I was a danger to myself.. Not anyone else to myself.. I am so sick of the harassment everytime APD shows up to my door …I DO NOT HAVE TO ANSWER MY DOOR I DO NOT HAVE TO TALK TO YOU IF YOU DONT HAVE A WARRANT GET THE FUCK OFF MY PROPERTY …..then louder then louder then louder till I HAVE no hold back. They stand there laughing as I have a breakdown they refuse to leave stating they dont have to have a warrant..I need a Lawyer I have the videos Im tired so tired of them not allowing me to calm down…I told them I would talk to a detective after the report was made…and still they woiuld not leave…I am tired of losing my mind to stressful situations So I went and got medicine for it only for APD not to allow me to stop an take to walk away from situations they refuse everytimeI got arrested a year or so going thru withdrawals from my meds telling the officer I needed them only for him to refuse an charge me with a disorederly conduct which I cannot control without my meds.. I admit it I take my meds I do whats right only to have APD numerous times keep me in mental Strain..”

    https://www.facebook.com/kristopher.robinson2/posts/2098646950159761?__tn__=K-R

    It seems the dead man also has an arrest record as long as my leg.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      $25,000 bond in first degree, I think the Judge may know the victim.

    2. avatar DaveL says:

      Am I the only one who couldn’t help but read that in the voice of “Milton” from Office Space?

      1. avatar riker says:

        Well, I wasn’t getting Morgan Freeman.

      2. avatar Gerald Fleming says:

        I was hearing Newman from Seinfield. Also, people who are that crazy need custodians or institutionalization.

      3. avatar Ing says:

        Milton was the sanest character in that movie. This guy was drunk on rage. I’m getting a Benson kind of vibe, myself.
        https://youtu.be/hcDFFIuVUS0?t=2m26s

    3. avatar KTR says:

      Sounds like he was a loose cannon. Implied threat with a firearm against a postal employee. I bet if he could go back in time he’d wish they had thrown him in jail for that.

    4. avatar Ranger Rick says:

      I love the parts where self-identifies as a nut job us is waiting for his “meds to kick in”.

    5. avatar DDay says:

      Mister Fleas – that will not be admissible in court. It’s also irrelevant. Just because someone is a nut, that doesn’t mean you can’t walk away and call the cops on the guy. If you take it into your hands, you’ll wind up in prison.

  4. avatar American Patriot says:

    Life behind bars or an eye for an eye, sounds good to me.

  5. avatar LarryinTX says:

    Dunno about Mz Box, but my main feeling about the menfolk is, I don’t think I’m gonna miss any of them. In her case, I have suspicions that she would have done better to use her phone to dial 911 from a removed location.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      I had the same thought. Why were the police not called when the neighbor allegedly pointed a gun at this guy’s son and yelled at him? I really think, especially with all of the nonstop threats, that the decedent had an anger management issue and a screw loose or two. I suspect his daily meds may have something to do with the latter. On the other hand, the neighbor could have clearly walked away and called the cops instead of shooting this maniac. The murder charges are appropriate, although a self-defense argument will undoubtedly be raised. Is this a “stand your ground” state?

      1. avatar Kroglikepie says:

        True, but Orange Shirt also threatened them repeatedly that he would relieve them of their arms and use them against them. The man was unhinged. He clearly was not stymed by the presence of two armed men, so what would leave you to believe he would drop the issue if they turned their backs to him? The moron also charged them head on with a bat, and was shot for it.

        You can’t ascribe normal people logic to enraged morons.

  6. avatar Sich says:

    Where was the Baseball Bat again? I looked at Both of the Hands of the Orange T-Shirted Guy and saw NO Baseball Bat or anything else that could be described as a Bat…

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Sich,

      In most of the video, the deceased has no bat in hand. Around the 1 minute, 56 second point of the video you can hear the deceased say, “Give me that gun.” and then a couple more words and then you can clearly hear him say, “baseball bat”.

      I believe the baseball bat was a few feet away in the first part of the video while the deceased was ranting and raving. Then, I believe the deceased picked up the baseball bat and moved toward the two suspects.

      1. avatar Sich says:

        So Two guy with Guns are less of a threat then a bellicose guy with a Baseball Bat just out of reach. Uhhh Huhhh. Doesn’t paint a better picture than the Video of the Actual Incident…

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Sich,

          In my comment above, I never portrayed anyone as anything. I simply explained my understand of where/when orange shirt guy acquired a baseball bat.

          A baseball bat is an extremely deadly melee weapon. Countless people throughout history have used large clubs similar to baseball bats to severely injure/kill countless people.

        2. avatar Sich says:

          Some grabbing for a Baseball Bat is a Threat, while Two People with Guns in Plain Sight and Not Holstered ISN’T…

        3. avatar JMR says:

          You can see the bat hit the older man after the first shots, what happened before the first shots we don’t know, this video only shows what the two shirtless men were doing. Though even the fiance admits that he had a bat, though she lied and said he threw it behind him, even though her own footage shows it hitting one of the men.

        4. avatar Sich says:

          Was the Bat in Bellicose Man’s Hands “Before” the Shooting? Or were the Shots Fired, “After” Bellicose Man reached for the Bat…

        5. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Was the Bat in Bellicose Man’s Hands “Before” the Shooting

          Yes, he obtained the bat and then was shot when he went to attack the father and son. Do you think he was blasted several times, including from a shotgun, then went for the bat? Did we watch the same video?

        6. avatar JMR says:

          He’d be the first dead man to throw a bat in all of history.

        7. avatar DDay says:

          As long as it’s not a head shot or spine, getting shot several times will not stop a person instantly. You still have enough oxygen in your blood stream for 20 or 30 seconds. The shotgun blast is different than the pistol rounds though. That would stop him quickly.

    2. avatar Blakeg says:

      I think, right after the first shot(s) from the dad’s pistol, you see him try to duck as an object comes flying toward him. I’m guessing while off-camera, Howard picked up a bat. I can’t tell from the video whether the dad’s shots even hit Howard, but I’m guessing the son’s shotgun blast made contact. (Looks like he fired just after the flying baseball bat might have hit his dad.)

      1. avatar Sich says:

        Seems like to me, that the First Shot was from the Shotgun. Kinda hard to believe that “Bellicose Guy” with Bat would be taking a swing at anyone. After being shot. But the again with all the Shots fired, why was the Wife not Injured, if she was just behind Bellicose Guy…

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Sich,

          I am nearly certain the first two shots were from the shirtless father’s compact semi-auto pistol. Note that the father could have easily missed with those two shots. Second of all, even if the shirtless father did connect on both shots, they could easily have had almost no immediate effect on the unhinged orange shirt guy. (Handgun hits in general often have almost no immediate effect. And coming from the short barrel of that compact handgun the bullets would have had even slower velocity and been even less impactful.)

          I believe the third shot was from the shirtless son’s shotgun followed-up with two more shots from shirtless father’s handgun.

        2. avatar Sich says:

          So Shirtless Guy [Shot First], before Baseball Bat was swung! Stand you ground, again?

        3. avatar Ronald says:

          MIght want to pay more attention when watching the video. You might see more than “what you want to” see

        4. avatar Sich says:

          Once the Gun Shots were Fired, Video was Far Less illuminating than before Gun Shots were Fired. Unless you have access to a Video not shown…

        5. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Sich,

          We don’t know if shirtless guy shot before unhinged orange guy swung the bat because orange guy and the bat are out of frame.

          And that may not matter. If orange guy grabs the bat and starts walking decisively toward shirtless guy after declaring that he was going to kill shirtless guy, I believe shirtless guy was justified at that point to use deadly force to defend himself.

        6. avatar Sich says:

          The Bathing Beauties were already armed. And the Father Shot First. That’s not Standing your Ground…

        7. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          It is if the dead dude raised the bat to knock the father’s head off and kill him.

        8. avatar Sich says:

          So you can Point a Gun at Me and Not Be A Threat, but as soon as I Reach for a Baseball Bat I become an Immediate Threat which allows you to Kill Me. That’s your logic…

        9. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Dead dude is dead. Dead dude didn’t choose wisely.

        10. avatar Sich says:

          Neither did the Fat Shirtless Duo…

        11. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          You still don’t get it You can be dead right and still be dead. (Not that the dead dude was right, but the point still stands).

        12. avatar Sich says:

          So “He who has the Gun controls”…

        13. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          As I said, you still don’t get it. The point is don’t be an out of control ass. It doesn’t matter if you are armed, if you are an out of control ass someone else can and might kill you, even if you have a gun. Get it?

        14. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Actually, Sich, that last was pretty close! Maybe you’re learning! Regardless of who is “right” or “wrong” according to you, if you fuck with the guys who have guns you just may die. In which case you will get precious little satisfaction from anything which might be done to those who killed you. So, yeah, the guy with the gun is in control. Unless you are really stupid, or suicidal.

        15. avatar Sich says:

          Is it still SYG if the only means of defense is a Baseball Bat! Or do you defer to the Shooter with the Gun instead…

        16. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Sich,

          I did not see the shirtless father or son ever point their firearms at Bellicose Orange Shirt guy until the end of the video when both shot at Bellicose Orange Shirt guy. Up to that point, they simply had a firearm in hand pointed at the ground or sky.

          Now let me spell it out for you. Having a firearm in hand which is pointing at the ground or sky is NOT a threat of any kind — just like having a club (baseball bat) in hand is NOT a threat of any kind. A person holding either item (firearm or bat) only becomes a credible threat AFTER he/she announces his/her intention to kill you and proceeds toward you in an aggressive manor — especially after you have said “back off” or “stay away from me”.

          This all boils down to who acted first. If Bellicose Orange Shirt guy grabbed the baseball bat and proceeded toward shirtless father and son BEFORE shirtless father and son aimed their firearms at him, then Bellicose Orange Shirt guy was the attacker. If shirtless father and son aimed their firearms at Bellicose Orange Shirt guy BEFORE he picked up his bat and moved toward them, then shirtless father and son are the attackers. Unfortunately, the video does not show the actions of Bellicose Orange Shirt guy so the video does not tell us who acted first. Thus, from the video alone, we don’t know if shirtless father and son were the attackers or if they acted in self-defense.

        17. avatar Sich says:

          @ uncommon_sense.

          Texas Penal Code 22.05: Danger of Harm
          (a) A person commits an offense if he/she recklessly engages in [conduct] that places [another] in imminent danger of serious [bodily injury].
          (b) A person commits an offense if he/she knowingly discharges a firearm at or in the direction of:
          (1) one or more individuals; or
          (2) a habitation, building, or vehicle and is reckless as to whether the habitation, building, or vehicle is occupied.

          Take you’re pick…

        18. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Sich,

          Note the requirement that an offender has to put someone in imminent danger in the Texas Penal Code that you referenced. Having a firearm in-hand which is pointing at the ground or sky, without announcing any intention to offensively harm someone and without shooting, is NOT putting someone else in imminent danger. The standard is imminent danger, not potential danger. If the standard were potential danger, then every body builder would be in violation of that Texas Penal Code because every body builder could easily kill an average person with their bare hands.

          Shirtless father and son would not meet the standard of that Texas Penal Code until after they pointed their firearms at Bellicose Orange Shirt guy for offensive purposes. And the video itself does not provide enough information to know whether shirtless father and son acted offensively or defensively — just like we don’t know from the video whether Bellicose Orange Shirt guy acted offensively or defensively.

        19. avatar Sich says:

          @ uncommon_sense.

          Texas Penal Code 22.50
          (b) A person commits an offense if he/she knowingly discharges a firearm [at] or [in] the direction of:

          Nowhere in that statement do it say that the Firearm has to be Pointing [directly] at the person, and/or whether it’s pointing at the ground or into the sky. “In the DIRECTION OF”…

        20. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Sich,

          Nowhere in that statement do it say that the Firearm has to be Pointing [directly] at the person, and/or whether it’s pointing at the ground or into the sky. “In the DIRECTION OF”…

          If Shirtless father and son are pointing their firearms at the ground or sky, then by definition they are NOT pointing their firearms in the DIRECTION of Bellicose Orange Shirt guy. Therefore, Shirtless father and son did NOT violate that Texas Penal Code while they were pointing their firearms at the ground or sky.

          Shirtless father and son could not have possibly violated that Texas Penal Code until they moved the barrel of their firearms toward Bellicose Orange Shirt guy. And even then, Shirtless father and son would only be in violation of that Texas Penal Code if they were not acting in righteous self-defense.

          Simply having a firearm during a heated discussion is NOT imminent danger and is NOT a crime regardless of whether or not that firearm is in a holster, on a sling over your shoulder, in a scabbard, or in your hands — assuming that you are not pointing that firearm toward the other party or bystanders and you have not verbally threatened offensive harm against them.

          Stop relying solely on your emotional brain and try critical THINKING.

        21. avatar Sich says:

          @ uncommon-sense.

          Except that’s NOT what definition (b) states, does it. All “Shirtless Guy’ has to do is point the gun in “Orange Guy” general direction, regardless of whether its pointed UP, DOWN, LEFT and/or RIGHT of him…

        22. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Sich,

          A lost person comes up to an intersection and asks a pedestrian whether the grocery store is left, straight, or right. Under your standard, the pedestrian is providing useful information when he/she points down at the ground or up at the sky since that pedestrian is somehow “pointing in the general direction” of the grocery store.

          Thank you for illustrating how disconnected from reality gun-grabbers really are.

        23. avatar Sich says:

          @ uncommon_sense.

          Congratulations Sir, you don’t understand the meaning of Texas Penal Code 22.05 any better then you understand the meaning of the Second Amendment…

    3. avatar Icabod says:

      On the Facebook link Mister Fleas posted there is mention that the man’s brother was there and handed the bat to him.
      https://m.facebook.com/kristopher.robinson2/posts/2098646950159761?__tn__=K-R

      1. avatar Sich says:

        And brother [Handed] (i.e. Not Armed) Bellicose Guy the Baseball Bat, while Two Too Fat and Stupid were [Already] Armed. How does “Stand Your Ground” apply again! Or is it significantly different meaning in Abilene, Texas…

        1. avatar Blakeg says:

          We don’t see from the video, but I’d imagine Howard (the orange shirt guy) was charging at the father and son with his recently acquired bat. Also known as a weapon (blunt instrument). As unhinged as he was, as big as he was, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume a genuine fear of grievous bodily harm from a baseball bat. I’m not saying everyone involved here made the best choices, but as dumb as everyone seems, I think the dad showed as much restraint as possible before Howard raised his bat.

        2. avatar Sich says:

          So two gun Not moving with Guns, are less of a Threat than guy moving with a Baseball Bat. And how long were the two shirtless guys standing Armed in the Driveway, before Bellicose Guy started moving with newly acquired Baseball Bat by Brother-In-Law…

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          No, Sich, two armed guys are a bigger threat. But when a lunatic is out of control and attacking you with a deadly weapon, threats are no longer a player, it is time to act, and they did. You seem to think you are some kind of superlawyer, and if you can prove that guns are bad this useless doofus will suddenly come back to life. Not gonna happen, his stupid finally caught up with him. You get into arguing like a demented loon in person, you may want to keep that in mind.

        4. avatar Sich says:

          Caught up with the neighborhood “Beauty Queens” too…

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Sich,

        So two [guys] Not moving with Guns, are less of a Threat than guy moving with a Baseball Bat.

        Your statement is correct if:
        (1) Guys with guns have never aimed guns at Baseball Bat guy.
        (2) Guys with guns have never verbally stated their intention to offensively harm baseball bat guy.
        (3) Baseball bat guy verbally stated his intention to offensively harm gun guys.
        (4) Baseball bat guy moves AGGRESSIVELY TOWARD gun guys.

        Your hatred of firearms is blinding you to reality. A reasonably fit average man can impart fatal injuries to a victim with a single strike from their hands or feet alone; with countless blunt-force objects like rocks, bricks, hammers, crowbars, pipes, and baseball bats; and with knives, machetes, swords, axes, and broken glass bottles. Any average, reasonably fit person who states their intention to offensively attack and kill you and then proceeds toward you aggressively — especially when they have just about any object in hand — is a credible, imminent threat of death or great bodily harm in my opinion.

        A person who merely has an object — including firearms — in hand is not a credible, imminent threat. That person only becomes a threat when they announce their intention to offensively harm you and then proceeds toward you in an aggressive manor. Note that aiming a firearm at someone would be equivalent to proceeding toward someone with a knife or baseball bat in hand in an aggressive manor.

        1. avatar Sich says:

          @ uncommon_sense.

          Unfortunately Texas Penal Code 22.05 covers “Firearms”, NOT a Bellicose Man with a “Baseball Bat”…

  7. avatar Accur81 says:

    So deeply stupid on so many levels.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      Agreed. This was painful to watch, in all sorts of ways.

      First, the staggering stupidity of all involved. And finally, the anguish of a woman seeing someone she loves killed right in front of her. Her husband (fiance?) needed to be shot at that point — when a guy says he’s going to kill you and then comes at you, it’s best to believe him — but it was still a gut-wrenching thing.

      None of it had to happen. The tiniest shred of good sense from any one of those four people would have let everyone walk away. But no…

      1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

        Very well said! IMHO, your comment should be made an addendum to the article.

        1. avatar darkstar says:

          Agreed. This is a perfect example of avoiding stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things.

      2. Imagine the two armed (enter your own derogatory remark here) were uniformed police officers. Almost every single comment on here would say “good shoot”.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          Probably so. A double standard is a heck of a thing, isn’t it.

  8. avatar Michael says:

    I once knew cop. A real harness bull who’d worked himself up to a position of homicide detective. He told me once that about 90% of the time, there was no difference between who got carried out toes up and who did the perp walk. Helped me keep my hands in my pockets while I walked away more than once. I’m not saying that’s the case here. If I can walk away, I will. Very few things in this world are worth dying or killing over. 30

    1. avatar jimmy james says:

      Amen brother. After having just read 2 pages (on another 2A site) of rants and macho BS from a bunch of arm chair bad asses, your post was refreshing and reassuring that there are some calm and sane people left in this world.

    2. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      Oh absolutely. This whole dispute was over, arguably, over a mattress that needed to hauled to the dump. How foolish to get worked up over what literally is a piece of trash, much less commit violence over it.

    3. avatar Anonymous says:

      Michael has got it. Words of wisdom.

      They had every opportunity to just walk away. They all mutually escalated the situation. And over a trash can. Ridiculous.

      “Stand your ground” was for defense, not confrontation, not instigation.

    4. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      I once knew cop…who’d worked himself up to a position of homicide detective.

      Don’t most PDs work their officers through the positions? First you’re a prospect, then you’re a full-patched officer, then you work your way up and get other endorsements as you go, garnering more respect and authority.

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        hahaha, that’s precious. (from a second city perspective, which is atypical).

  9. avatar Timothy K. Toroian says:

    WTFF!!!!!

  10. avatar Samson Simson says:

    Games, prizes, etc.

    1. avatar DJ says:

      And they ALL won. You can’t fix stupid.

  11. avatar Grace12 says:

    Good grief, thinning the herd

  12. avatar Ardent says:

    Just wow. All I can think is that the shirtless guys with the guns had entertained the now dead moron before, and were having none of it. Murder? Perhaps, but legalities aside, I see a big, mean, stupid man well used to using intimidation to get his way, get killed when the other party had the power and the will to use it. Ugly? Oh yeah! Extreme? Maybe…but how many of us would applaud had they simply beat him senseless and left him alive? He certainly seems to have had it coming.

    1. avatar Kroglikepie says:

      I’d be willing to bet money he has threatened them before over this issue and they were having none of it.

      When someone threatens to kill you, you believe them. Period.

    2. avatar Sich says:

      But then again these neighbors have been living side-by-side of years. And after all that time, knew virtually nothing about each other…

      1. avatar FedUp says:

        Box (woman who recorded video) claims they moved there in April and never said a word to the Millers before the fatal day.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        They seem to have accurately pegged him as violently deranged, to the point of dangerous and beyond. OTOH, in that situation I would certainly have reported his transgressions and stayed out of it, I am not the garbage police.

        1. avatar Sich says:

          And yet they lived Side-By-Side for over 5-months. What was the Mattress! The Set Up excuse of Getting Ride of an Unpopular Neighbor, by calling it SYG. And see if they could get away with it. Unfortunately, there’s the Video of the Whole Scene. I wonder for how many days, the People of Abilene Saw the Shooting play out on local TV. And Did Help the Father and Son, or Hurt them and the Neighborhood in which they live in…

  13. avatar Kroglikepie says:

    I fail to see this as murder in any sense of the word. Murder requires intent, and Orange Shirt was being a raving lunatic threatening two armed men. It is obvious from the video that there is some kind of history between these two groups. Instead of calling the police at literally ANY point in this confrontation, Ms. Box thought it was a better idea to start filming. Also, Orange Shirt literally charged two armed men with a baseball bat. The stupidity of everything present here is almost palpable.

    Wow. After watching the news report, I have zero sympathy for Ms. Box. Aside from her egging on the situation, she made sure to make public statements against the defendants AND is totally okay with the video being edited to show them in the worst possible light. Disgusting.

    1. avatar JMR says:

      not only that but she gave the tape to the media before the DA? And has lied multiple times.

  14. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    had a baseball bat (not obvious in the video) but was otherwise unarmed.- Ummmm…so he was ARMED.

    1. avatar DaveL says:

      Yes, but apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?

  15. avatar JasonM says:

    The orange shirt threatened to kill the shirtless duo multiple times, then advanced on them. There’s far more stupid in that video that any video I’ve ever seen. But seeing that video as a juror, I’d vote to acquit, unless the prosecution can prove that they organized the the situation to provoke an attack.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      Involuntary manslaughter, maybe. The shirtless dirtheads had *so many* chances to avoid shooting…until they didn’t. Some guy comes at me like that, I’m shooting him too.

      The police are going to have reconstruct the situation that led up to the events in the video — and that will make the difference. I think it probably comes down to whether the armed duo had a good reason for bringing guns into it. If not, if they actually provoked the confrontation, they could be in deep shit.

      1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

        “The police are going to have reconstruct the situation that led up to the events in the video — and that will make the difference.”

        Yep, and apparently this is supposedly what he said on Facebook earlier :

        From above, by Mr. Fleas –

        “You left out a whole bunch of the story. The dead man was a dangerous nut. This is his interaction with a mailman from his Facebook page(sorry in advance for the wall of text; that is the way he wrote) :

        “So this afternoon Right as I wake up and before My medications I am checking On house Walk into the kids Room And see a Person In front Of the kids window..So me I go outside find out its the mailman and tell Him for the last time stay away from the kids windows We have asked you multiple times not to walk between cars an windows because You might get shot …….Being as How we have 2 girls that are children not to mention a little boy ..I believe its in my right to Protect these children from Perverts an Pieces of shit in this world. I also live down the street from a place where thefts murders an assaults have happened in the past. He told me because I wouldnt let him walk that way that he would not deliver the mail and would just send it back I tried calling the usps before walking down to make sure to get him On recording refusing to give me my mail he refused to say anything. so I called him a Bitch an a coward for not repeating what he said and I went Home….15 min later My home was swarmed with Police banging on my door Scaring Emegail so I had Kara leave with Emegail because my medications had not kicked in and I was getting overly anxious with the police.Tried calling Grandma only to realize well shes out of town. I asked if they had warrants they said they didnt need one as they continued to bang on my door profusely an hide away from my sight which I called them on multiple times. I told them I have a mental issue they needed to leave I did not want to talk to them and they insisted on causing me emotional and mental strain along with the physical strain of my heart not being able to slow down over an over.I told them you can call my caseworker I have the files verified of my disorder all you have to do is leave my property because you do not have a warrant I walked thru them and left MY OWN HOME because I did not feel Safe. I left long enough to allow my meds to kick in and calm me down before coming back discovering they were still there SO I showed them the video of exactly what I said when I walked down the street to him.. They are now reporting that I made a terroristic threat when I told the mailman to stay away from the girls windows because he might get shot..I also have had Adult Protective Services called stating that I am not in my right mind 3 hours after all transpired I told them I am fine and asked why they were calling they said because Abilene Police Department called saying I was a danger to myself.. Not anyone else to myself.. I am so sick of the harassment everytime APD shows up to my door …I DO NOT HAVE TO ANSWER MY DOOR I DO NOT HAVE TO TALK TO YOU IF YOU DONT HAVE A WARRANT GET THE FUCK OFF MY PROPERTY …..then louder then louder then louder till I HAVE no hold back. They stand there laughing as I have a breakdown they refuse to leave stating they dont have to have a warrant..I need a Lawyer I have the videos Im tired so tired of them not allowing me to calm down…I told them I would talk to a detective after the report was made…and still they woiuld not leave…I am tired of losing my mind to stressful situations So I went and got medicine for it only for APD not to allow me to stop an take to walk away from situations they refuse everytimeI got arrested a year or so going thru withdrawals from my meds telling the officer I needed them only for him to refuse an charge me with a disorederly conduct which I cannot control without my meds.. I admit it I take my meds I do whats right only to have APD numerous times keep me in mental Strain..”

        https://www.facebook.com/kristopher.robinson2/posts/2098646950159761?__tn__=K-R

        It seems the dead man also has an arrest record as long as my leg.”

        So, yeah, he kinda laid it out in public he wasn’t very balanced.

        They may very well walk on this one…

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Well, for the past 10-15 years, whenever I wheel my garbage out to the curb, I am armed. If some raving lunatic begins screeching at me, my *plan* is to never draw, ever. Instead, my action will be drawandfire, from concealment, never waving it around or even warning someone off, I am not that good, and will be getting less good as I age further. The idea there is anything wrong with these guys being armed is in TOTAL conflict with 2A, period, show me how it is not!!!!! Or, since I have a gun and he has a bat, I am supposed to let him beat me to death? I don’t think so, and you should not plan on it, no matter how good you are at virtue signaling.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          There’s much more to this incident than what’s in the video, and it will go a long way toward determining what happens legally. That’s not virtue signaling; it’s the plain truth.

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      ??? I don’t know. They were at a trash can and brought guns. The guns weren’t holstered. They were shirtless, with hands on guns, sometimes fingers on triggers. My guess is, they didn’t just happen to be at the trash can carrying guns when this happened. Instead of calling the police, they got their guns and went to the trash can to have an altercation. And psycho dude begged them do shoot him and he did all he could so they would.

      All three of them are losers.

      1. avatar JMR says:

        The father went to the trash armed with a holstered weapon.

        The story starts before the video, do a little research on it maybe.

        1. avatar Anonymous says:

          Then that’s fine. He should have kept it hidden. and not taken it out to hold it, finger on trigger. Shirtless man boy Skippy shouldn’t have fetched a shotgun either to hold it behind his neck. To prevent escalation, you keep your gun open carried holstered, or concealed – not in your hands. Pretty sure the law reflects that concept too.

        2. avatar JMR says:

          The law where you live does maybe, but not everywhere.

          Orange shirt guy is the one who confronted shirtless father, not the other way around, orange shirt guy was the aggressor.

        3. avatar Anonymous says:

          Orange shirt guy is the one who confronted shirtless father, not the other way around, orange shirt guy was the aggressor.

          If the shirtless guy was taking the mattress out of the trash can and the orange shirt guy came over and started this up with them, then sure, I’ll agree with you.

          If the shirtless man boob squad carried their guns, unholstered, in hand, to the trash can to argue about a mattress, then no.

          We don’t know the whole story.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Pretty sure (not positive, literally!) that there’s nowhere in USA where you are legally required to keep your weapon holstered when you are being attacked and murdered by a lunatic with a deadly weapon. Normal expectation would be you should shoot the mofo. Probably twice.

        5. avatar Anonymous says:

          Pretty sure (not positive, literally!) that there’s nowhere in USA where you are legally required to keep your weapon holstered when you are being attacked and murdered by a lunatic with a deadly weapon. Normal expectation would be you should shoot the mofo. Probably twice.

          They weren’t attacked until the end. For the duration of the conversation, their guns were unholstered, with fingers on triggers. There is nowhere, anywhere, in the US, anywhere, where I can walk around with my gun in my hand, shirtless or not.

        6. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          You are wrong. You can absolutely unholster your firearm if you are threatened. As a matter of fact, you can actually walk around with unholstered firearms in many/most states. I can post dozens or possibly hundreds of pictures of this exact thing you say we can’t do. Sometimes cops are even around. Imagine that.

  16. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    This may not be as clear-cut as everyone thinks. Watch the video near the 1 minute, 56 second mark and listen carefully to how the deceased discretely says to his fiance, “Give me that gun.” And then the deceased says something about “baseball bat”.

    I don’t know whether or not the suspects heard that comment or whether the deceased actually possessed a firearm or a baseball bat. That could have a very important bearing on the subject.

  17. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    This case could actually be righteous self-defense. The deceased was obviously unhinged and threatened to kill the two suspects multiple times — whereas the two suspects appeared to be fairly calm and were simply telling the deceased to back-off. If the deceased indeed had a baseball bat in hand and then proceeded toward the two suspects, I would say that the two suspects were justified at that point to use deadly force. This would then be a case of, “Don’t bring a baseball bat to gunfight.”

    I guess we will find out after the trial.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Oh, this gets even more interesting. At the 2 minute, 13 second mark of the video you can see the father (who had the handgun) duck because the deceased swung and let go or threw the baseball bat at him. At the 2 minute, 14 seconds mark you can hear the baseball bat hit/bounce off the ground.

      Thus, there is no question that the deceased had a baseball bat. If there is any hint of evidence at all that the deceased was advancing on the father and son with that baseball bat, I think the jury will find the father and son not guilty.

      The only sticky part in this for the suspects is that the father calmly stated that he would kill the deceased if the deceased came at him. It would have been far better if the father had simply stated that he would shoot — not KILL — if the deceased stepped forward.

      1. avatar J.T. says:

        I think what this is going to hinge on is why guns were introduced to an argument over whether or not a mattress should be in a dumpster. Did the deceased threaten to kill them before the guns came out or did the Millers escalate an argument by introducing the guns first?

  18. avatar Jon in CO says:

    Let’s assume the issue is actually about the mattress being dumped (in the alley BEHIND property that belongs to neither party). How easy could it have been to just figure out how to come to a compromise about the dumpster?

    This is why I back down. I’ll be the “pussy”, etc, if that’s the case. If that’s what it takes to not kill someone, and not go to jail for life, it’s an easy trade off. If there is no other option, shoot. Here, there were plenty of options, on both sides.

  19. avatar former water walker says:

    A baseball bat can be lethal. Saw this whole thing on FB yesterday. Had no problem with shooting the lunatic loudmouth. Would I do the same??? Probably not but I’ve had a few crazy neighbors in my time…

    1. avatar Sich says:

      People near me get bellicose all the time, but I can’t remember one time where a Firearm was drawn to counter the Shouting of words…

      1. avatar GapharmD says:

        It’s obvious that you refuse to admit fact about this shooting. Guns weren’t pulled for shouting or yelling. The fact is they were pulled for defense against the bat and terroristic threats. Both of which are defensible positions. But please continue your fact less opinions and completely wrong hypothesis. It gives me a lot of laughs!

        1. avatar jwm says:

          I’ve read all his comments. sich is either drunk, crazy as orange shirt guy or he’s one of those ‘if nobody had guns but the police….’ kind of guys.

        2. avatar Sich says:

          Then what were they Pulled For Then! I can’t believe that Trash Day in Abilene, Texas, that the Trash is SOOO Valuable that it requires an Armed Escort to the Street…

        3. avatar David says:

          I usually take my pistol when I take trash to curb. When I do so, I do not feel like I am escalating any situation. I also believe all 4 individuals should have walked away or called police.

          I also believe a man yelling, making threats & advancing aggressively with a bat is more threatening than a calm man holding a pistol at his side.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Sich, your arguments are just silly. Let me point something out for you. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. No mention of holstering, which is a really good idea, which requiring would be an infringement. No mention of “not at the trash can”, which would be an infringement. Yes, if the fat boys had stayed in Minnesota, this would not have happened, or whatever your next stupid assertion states, but that is beside the point! If you attack armed men with a deadly weapon, you may die.

  20. avatar raptor jesus says:

    Fuck em all. One is off the street. Let’s get rid of the other two.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      This! I love it.

    1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      This guy said he was proud of his past.

      1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

        Danny, you have to admit –

        It’s gonna be an *entertaining* trial…

        1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Actually I don’t think it will be. I wrote an entire lengthy post about how this will not be nearly as entertaining as the George Zimmerman trial which I watched every minute of live, and then decided not to post it. (The benefits of working from home sometimes). It was hilarious at times. There were a few of us, including a prominent attorney, who were PMing each other in real time during the trial. It was quite festive. This will not be the same.

          Zimmerman will probably forever be the gold standard.

    2. avatar Jaykob says:

      I do not like to make a lot of contribution online but sometimes credit needs to be given.
      I just wanted to say you have common sense sir, I appreciate your contribution to online society, I hope you have a great day, God bless!

  21. avatar FB says:

    The two guys armed could have walked away at any point regardless if the guy was 5150.

    1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      Don’t turn your back on an armed man threatening you.

      1. avatar FB says:

        I never said to turn your back and walk away. I said walk away.

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          It’s the smart thing to do, but they’re under no legal requirement to do so.

          If John Miller or Aaron Howard had backed off there wouldn’t have been any violence.
          Michael Miller and Ms. Box did nothing to encourage anybody to back away. Instead, they both inflamed the situation.

          It’s fools like this that give credibility to the opponents of SYG laws.

        2. avatar Anonymous says:

          Little confused. Did they just happen to be at the trash can with guns when this altercation occurred??? Or did they go back to the house, get guns, and then go to the trash can??? I think it makes a difference.

          If they went back to the house to get guns, then they could have STAYED at the house with their guns.

        3. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Anonymous, no offense, but after reading a dozen or so of your recent posts I agree, you do seem confused about what happened.

        4. avatar Anonymous says:

          Anonymous, no offense, but after reading a dozen or so of your recent posts I agree, you do seem confused about what happened.

          Then tell me what happened.

        5. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Then tell me what happened.

          Or you could watch the video and read the existing news stories before spouting opinions based on incorrect facts. Your opinion may not change but at least understand what happened before you form one.

        6. avatar Anonymous says:

          Or you could watch the video and read the existing news stories before spouting opinions based on incorrect facts. Your opinion may not change but at least understand what happened before you form one.

          LOL – I watched the video and I read the article and we don’t know what happened because what happened outside the video isn’t shown and the article doesn’t explain it. This was my question:

          Did they just happen to be at the trash can with guns when this altercation occurred??? Or did they go back to the house, get guns, and then go to the trash can??? I think it makes a difference.

          Read below. JWTaylor had exactly the same question, and others have too. Were they at the trash can with their guns by happenstance? OR did they get the guns and go to the trash can so they could argue with the neighbor about a mattress???

    2. avatar G.Smithy says:

      True but with the same token they ALL should have walked away instead of living out your walking dead fantasy, or hoping to record your Bellicose husband beat two armed men with a bat and post it to world star (he might still be alive if she would have just called 911 instead of hitting record).I carry every day and you must know when and when not to get involved and avoid confrontation if possible in this political climate (unfortunately). Don’t really know the law in this state but the armed men clearly weren’t protecting their home, but a dumpster … There are only 3 things worth my life or prison 1) my kids 2) my life 3)my home. Where I belive the 2 gun owners got confused depending on the state law is yes 1st make the assailant know you are uncomfortable with their encroaching of your personal space and that you will defend yourself this is if you are intruded apon your property or in general, not however drawing on someone for using your dumpster

  22. avatar FlamencoD says:

    Orange shirt threatens death to shirtless fat guys multiple times, then off camera orange shirt asks someone to hand him a gun and a baseball bat. A few seconds later he gets shot and killed. It’s not hard to figure out he likely advanced aggressively toward the shirtless fat men after threatening to kill them both. At the very least that is reasonable doubt for a jury against murder.

    OFWG was right though, when he kept telling orange shirt he “doubts” orange shirt would kill him.

    Orange shirt is an idiot, yelling at two armed men that way and being physically aggressive and intimidating.

    OFWG showed restraint most of the video keeping his pistol pointed at the ground until he must have felt physically threatened.

    1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

      “OFWG showed restraint most of the video…”

      Yes and no.

      Drawn and pointing down still qualifies as ‘brandishing’, doesn’t it?

      In the laws of that state, could that be considered antagonizing or ‘escalating the situation’?

      1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

        Do you know what the brandishing law is in Texas? Do you even know if Texas has a brandishing law? You need to educate yourself before commenting here.

        “But in New Jersey…” doesn’t cut it here. Use facts.

        1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

          I was ASKING if that was the case, Danny…

          “In the laws of that state, could that be considered antagonizing or ‘escalating the situation’?”

          *ASKING*…

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I don’t seem to recall ever hearing about a brandishing law in TX, but then I’ve only been licensed since around 1998. Don’t really care, brandishing is stupid, if you need to draw, shoot the mofo. OTOH, I don’t think there is any such thing as brandishing a shotgun.

  23. avatar Shoot first says:

    Stand your ground in the hands of the average joe

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      No. Just no. no.

      Way below average joe. Way Way wayyyyyyy way below – the average Joe.

    2. avatar jwm says:

      shoot first. Still another that will make a second term by Trump possible. Thank you.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Probable.

  24. avatar BJ says:

    I’m just here for the comments.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I’m just here looking for a BJ.

  25. avatar jwm says:

    Once again. For the smarts impaired out there. This is America. We are armed. To the teeth. If you think it’s ok to lay hands on another person or threaten another person then you are just one bad day away from being a news story.

    Take heed bullies. There is no place in America where you can assume that your intended victim is unarmed.

    Proceed at your own risk.

    1. avatar Beerfarticus says:

      I agree, completely. However, the optics for this case are going to be terrible. The stereotypical hillbillies with guns are going to feed the anti-gun narrative even more.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        This. This is the first thing that came to my mind.

        Stand your ground is for defense, not confrontation, not instigation.

      2. avatar jwm says:

        Doesn’t matter. Spouting gun control is hurting, not helping the dems.

      3. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Screw the “optics”! What JWM is saying is that *whatever laws you pass*, there is no place you can assume your target has been disarmed. And there will never be again. I have carried in every state except AK and HI, would never shoot anyone unless needed. But if you tried to carjack my ride in downtown NYC I would have shot you in the face and driven away.

  26. avatar Ark says:

    Not remotely self defense. Both will be going to prison for a very long time.

  27. avatar bighippie says:

    What this news report doesn’t say or show, is that there was another person there. It was the woman, her husband (Orange), and his brother (briefly visible at the 2:17 mark of the original video). His brother handed Orange the bat, as the woman claims in this article from yesterday ( https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article218728710.html ). It is not clear what caused old shirtless to fire, but after the first two shots, you can see the baseball bat come flying at him, right before young shirtless fires the shotgun.

  28. avatar FedUp says:

    As best as can be pieced together:
    Aaron was on meds for intermittent explosive disorder and had quite a criminal record.
    Aaron’s most recent LE interaction was for threatening to kill the mailman for walking on his yard.
    John had a record for assault with a deadly back in the 1970s.
    Michael’s police record was clean.

    City trash regs require you to put furniture on your property for pickup, not in the dumpster.
    Aaron put a mattress in the city dumpster.
    John put the mattress in Aaron’s yard.
    Aaron put it in the dumpster.
    John took it out again.
    Aaron caught him doing it, ordered him to put it back.
    John refused.

    When Aaron started threatening John, John drew his sidearm.
    Then Michael retrieved his shotgun to back his dad up.
    John repeatedly ordered Aaron not to approach him.
    Michael taunted Aaron. Is ‘cocksucker’ a fighting word?
    Aaron made repeated threats, many of them silly, some potentially deadly.
    Both sides seemed to be daring the other to initiate violence.

    At the end, Aaron asks his brother for the bat.
    John shoots, Aaron throws the bat at John.
    Michael blows Aaron’s head off with the shotgun.

    Like the handicapped parking space shooting, the shooters don’t look too good here, but the dead guy plainly initiated violence.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Then, after killing Aaron Howard, the Millers proned out Box at gunpoint while she wailed in grief.
      I’d expect a jury compromise to let them go for killing Howard and convict them of assaulting/kidnapping Box.

  29. avatar strych9 says:

    The real crime here is that two guys who both need a bro (a bra for fat guys with man boobs, a real thing, look it up) are wandering around shirtless.

    5 years for the shooting. 25-life for assaulting my eyes by going around half nude and that fat. An extra 10 years for being this stupid in public.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      And you the one that gets all butthurt when somebody disses tats. 🙂

      1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

        JWM kinda has a point on that one, Strych… 😉

      2. avatar strych9 says:

        I don’t get butthurt by it at all. I don’t much care.

        I just like fucking with people who are dumb and if you say something like “I would never hire…” you’re pretty dumb (or trolling pretty well).

        1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          I know a guy who sells his services to GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, etc. He has a ponytail wearing skull tattoo (or some type of skull tattoo, I forget now) on his forearm. Know what he does? Even if it’s 95 degrees out and 100% humidity he wears a long sleeve shirt with sleeves down and cuffs buttoned because he knows it can and will cost him business. Expensive business. He’s a nice guy but people form opinions, and when it comes to things like good judgement, people are careful about their money.

          Would you hire someone with neck tattoos and eyelid tattoos? Piercings all over their face? Split tongue? I would not.

        2. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

          Danny, you and I likely wouldn’t, but a whole lot of younger people just might.

          Tats really are a generational thing, it seems. Folks of Strych’s generation don’t consider it anywhere near a big a deal as we do.

          But I do agree, just because you can, doesn’t mean you should, and if you do, be prepared to have it cost you business…

        3. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Not only would you and I not do it, but the US Marines won’t allow it, either. They’ll kick you out for being too stupid to exist. (Not that they are the model to follow, they are messed up as well). I currently don’t have the power to hire and fire, but I am always asked my opinion on new hires because the engineering managers have no idea. Fortunately I’ve not seen any engineers with Maori tattoos or gauges in their ears. Probably because people who do that stuff aren’t that intelligent. If cops could do calculus and differential equations and Fourier transforms, etc. they wouldn’t be cops.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Danny, I might hire somebody like you describe if I was looking for a hit man!

  30. avatar Warlocc says:

    A whole lot of concentrated stupid, all packed into one place.

  31. avatar Paul says:

    White trash, literally. Well, I guess these two geniuses will have plenty of time in lock up to hit the gym.

    1. I don’t think those two shirtless guy know what a “gym” is, unless they both have a friend with a name that sounds like “gym/Jim” …

    2. avatar FlamencoD says:

      Uh, no. Not literally. You mean figuratively. Literal white trash would be garbage that is white. Like a sheet of paper, white styrofoam cup, etc. I’m just annoyed at people not understanding the difference between literal and figurative.

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        literally, hitler.

  32. avatar Icabod says:

    Wondered about the mattress in the dumpster. Box said if it wasn’t in the dumpster the city wouldn’t pick it up.
    When you go to the city website and search for “mattress” you find it’s a special pickup and it’s curbside.

    “The City of Abilene offers curbside pickup of old furniture and mattresses. Pickup will go according to the schedule available here under the “Bulk & Brushy Collection Service” tab. Please call (325) 676-6053 for an up-to-date location of the crew or to schedule a special pickup for a fee. Do not place your items at the curb more than 10 days before the scheduled pickup.”

    The alley pickup service uses 300 gallon containers. Up to 4 households can use one container. When four people use a container, each gets 1/4th of it. One of the “don’ts” is putting bulk items like furniture in the container.

    Clearly dumping a mattress into the container is not allowed. Dumping the mattress there would cause an overflow and the pickup might be skipped. Instread, couple would have to pay for a curbside pickup.

    https://www.wayfair.com/furniture-disposal-guide/abilene-tx-c901
    http://abilenetx.gov/city-hall/departments/public-works/solid-waste-services/collection-services

  33. avatar jwtaylor says:

    One thing I can’t get from the video or the articles is,

    Did the shirtless men have firearms on them when confronted by the deceased, or did they go and get them and return?
    Or, did they confront the deceased with a firearm first?
    Who brought the bat?

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      John Miller pulled a mattress out of the dumpster.
      Aaron Howard confronted Miller, not the other way around.
      Howard’s girlfriend/fiance/common law wife said Miller took the gun out of his shorts (obviously in response to Howard screaming threats, but she doesn’t say that).

      Viewers have said they can see a holster on Miller.
      Miller’s son came along later, but plainly the shotgun wasn’t his EDC.

      One account says Howard’s brother handed him the bat right before he was shot. You can see he threw it (or swung it and let go) at John in the middle of the shooting.

      1. avatar jwtaylor says:

        So Miller already had the gun on him when he pulled the mattress from the dumpster, and Howard was unarmed at the time Howard confronted miller.
        We don’t what they said to each other before the camera started rolling. We don’t know how long they were there before the camera stars rolling.
        Then, while Miller and Howard were shouting at each other, Miller’s pulled the gun and stood there with it by his side, and his son came out with a shotgun.
        At some point, Howard’s brother and his fiancé show up, with a bat, and maybe a handgun.
        Howard and Miller are both heard threatening each other.
        At some point, Howard gets a hold of the bat.
        Miller shoots twice. We don’t know the result of those shots. After those shots, a bat is thrown, or as the result of a swing and a release, is hurled near Miller.
        Miller’s son shoots with the shotgun, striking and killing Howard.

        Is that all in accordance to what we know so far?

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          Just two points:

          When did you hear John Miller shout?
          He appears to be the only calm person here.
          Howard goes into a foaming at the mouth screamfest that would embarrass a WWF wrestler, and that’s after Box started recording a video they planned to use to have the Millers arrested.

          When did you hear John Miller threaten?
          The worst I heard is along the line of ‘if you keep advancing, I’ll kill you’.
          That sounds like a warning, not a threat to me. (but I’m sure his lawyer would have much preferred he didn’t use the word kill)

          Absent any evidence to the contrary, I’m going to have to assume all the yelling and threatening was coming from Howard in the entire incident, just like it was in Howard’s girlfriend’s entire video.

          Now, MillerJr, I’d like to know what the Texas legal definition of instigating the conflict is, because it sure sounded like he uttered fighting words in an attempt to bait Howard into physical violence.

        2. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          I don’t remember exactly what the son said, I’d have to watch the video again, but the dead dude was threatening to kill his dad, so…maybe understandable.

        3. avatar jwtaylor says:

          You’re right, watching it again, all the screaming is from Howard and Miller’s son.
          But there is a few times that Miller says, tauntingly, take your swing.” He’s definitely taunting Howard.
          Howard also tells him to put the gun away and go home, giving him the opportunity to leave. Miller does not. Instead he tells him, “take your swing.”
          Those three words, and the fact that he did not leave, will likely get Miller convicted of murder.

        4. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

          “But there is a few times that Miller says, tauntingly, take your swing.” He’s definitely taunting Howard.”

          That may be the angle the prosecution is gonna take on this. Does claimed self-defense evaporate if antagonization is in the mix?

        5. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Father says take a swing once. Dead dude says he’s going to kill the father and son a hundred times. The father was as calm as ice during the entire time. He’s calmer than the police are in such a situation.

          What will the jury say? Who knows, but your analysis is anemic.

        6. avatar Anonymous says:

          Danny, Howard threatened murder and looks to have assaulted them with a bat and they shot him dead.

          But! it’s soooooooo blatantly obvious they are there for an altercation. For an argument. They had every opportunity to leave. And instead they said “take your swing.” Bad move. Really bad move. Stand your ground is not for intimidation and not for confrontation. It’s not like they were walking home and were assaulted. They brought the fight to the trash can. And it ended with them blasting the neighbor dead. Bad move.

        7. avatar Anonymous says:

          Father says take a swing once. Dead dude says he’s going to kill the father and son a hundred times. The father was as calm as ice during the entire time. He’s calmer than the police are in such a situation.

          It doesn’t matter if he was calm or not. His calmness has nothing to do with it.

          They actively provoked Howard instead of walking away. The whole reason anti-gunners passed the “duty to retreat” law was to avoid this kind of circumstance. And “duty to retreat” sucks, because it can be abused by the anti-gun crowd. Here we have a “stand your ground” case which is being abused. They weren’t walking home and suddenly got assaulted. Instead they picked up their guns for the sole purpose of an altercation specifically with Howard at the trash can.

          Epic disaster on all sides.

        8. avatar Mister Fleas says:

          “Howard goes into a foaming at the mouth screamfest that would embarrass a WWF wrestler…”

          LOL, I’m stealing that line!

        9. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Danny, listen closer. He actually says “take your swing” on three separate occasions throughout the ordeal.

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      Jwtaylor,

      my thoughts exactly. I mentioned the same above. And this detail matters. Matters a great deal. If they went to get firearms so they could confront him, that is going to be a big problem for them on court day.

  34. avatar anonymoose says:

    Garbage day!

  35. avatar VerendusAudeo says:

    An argument over trash leads to three pieces of human garbage being taken off the street. Sounds fine to me.

  36. avatar John says:

    I don’t see murder. We can all question their choice to stand there and not walk away, but they are in no requirement to do so. If they can afford a decent attorney, they should be able to be found not guilty.
    I must wonder why the headline doesn’t say, “Violent, bat-wielding felon is shot by neighbor?”

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      Context matters. Did they just happen to be there with guns when this altercation occurred? Or did they go to their house, get guns, so they could confront the neighbor? Huge difference. One is defense. The other – instigation.

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        is there somewhere that you regularly go unarmed?

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Not me! I’m armed everywhere, legal or not.

  37. avatar Eli2016 says:

    I don’t think there’s any argument about the orange shirt guy being deranged. That’s more than obvious in the video. Still, the shirtless dudes should’ve backed up slowly and walked away. Then, IF the guy attacked they would’ve been justified for putting him down. With his mental record any judgment would be tossed.

  38. avatar goober willy says:

    well I read some of the comments, and thought this will be a good case for lawyers to argue about. Where the line is to act. Personal opinion, both could have easily walked away, someone could have called the cops. leave it for the courts to decide what’s right.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Well, that *is* what’s going to happen, regardless of our final verdict here. Only problem will be the question of whether Fat Family can afford reasonable attorneys. I suspect their appeal on GoFundMe will be very limited.

  39. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Way too many unhinged idiots running around without supervision. Time to thin the herd.

  40. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Looks like Mr. screamer played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      I think the name of the stupid game is “bringing a baseball bat to a gun fight.”

  41. avatar rdsii64 says:

    Its the victim’s own fault he took the room temperature challenge. The smart thing would have been to go back into his house and call the police. Standing there arguing with an armed person is just plain dumb.

  42. avatar Matt says:

    Both of those fucks need to hang. You don’t bring guns into an argument. I sincerely hope they get the needle; they give gun owners a bad name.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        Fedup,

        I think he is assuming the fatty shirtless duo purposely brought guns to confront the neighbor. If that is the case, then they are in trouble.

        If they just happened to be by the dumpster when this altercation occurred, then this is a stand your ground/self defense scenario. And these details matter.

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          I didn’t realize anybody in the USA was still unclear on the broad circumstances of how it began, but here it is again:

          Dad was removing furniture from the dumpster.
          Howard, who put it there in the first place, came out, presumably threatened him, and according to his girlfriend ordered Dad to pick it up and put it back in the dumpster.
          Dad stepped away from the dumpster and the lunatic and pulled a mouse gun. In the video he’s holding it at a one handed low ready, I presume that’s where it always was when he had it in hand.
          Son saw/heard the confrontation and retrieved a shotgun to provide backup to his dad. In the video he’s first seen with it casually placed over his shoulder.

  43. avatar Weapon Of War says:

    Fat bastards should always wear shirts. They should have their throats slit for that crime alone.

    1. avatar Gralnok says:

      So, would you like me to use a bowie knife, a razor, or a scalpel on your throat? =P

      1. avatar Weapon Of War says:

        You could try. Not a fat bastard though. And I wear shirts.

  44. avatar Eng says:

    I suspect all those involved are idiots… But what if they didn’t walk away because they felt the violence with the raving lunatic was inevitable, and they would rather it occur in the alley instead of back at their house where their loved ones are?

  45. avatar J.T. says:

    I’m looking forward to the Active Self Protection video for this.

  46. avatar Ralph says:

    Are we sure that this didn’t happen in Florida?

    1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

      That was my reaction

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Looks like FL to me.

    2. “Florida Man…” is how this article should have began.

  47. avatar Bubba’s guns says:

    These idiots have no idea what the law requires (and some here in the comments as well)

  48. avatar Dantes says:

    Anyone who thinks this shooting was justifiable has no business with a gun.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      It looks to me, they purposely brought guns for an altercation over a trash can. That isn’t self defense.

      I would be in deep trouble, if I took my shirt off, slung my fat out, and then walked to my neighbors house (or the space between) with a gun in hand to argue about a trash can.

    2. avatar DDay says:

      Agreed.

      This isn’t self defense, it started as morons mutually verbally attacking each other. Fatty and his son took guns to an argument, neither fatty or fat son were conceal carrying, they purposely brought guns and brandished them. Orange shirt purposely brought a baseball bat. They are both guilty of creating the situation but since orange shirt is dead, he escapes charges.

      You can intensify a situation like this then claim self defense. If you think this was a justified shooting, you are incredibly foolish.

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Try this; everyone should be armed, 100% of the time. When a murderous asshole attacks, he should be put down like a mad dog. Now, what were you saying? “Brandishing” is constitutionally protected, STFU about it, it’s not a real crime. Which is about to be discovered.

  49. avatar rlv says:

    Both sides are at fault here. Both escalated the situation. Thereby, the shooters fall under “fruit of the poisonous tree”. They should have walked away and called authorities. No gun owner should go to jail for defending themself, but this situation had extenuating circumstances.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Boy, do you need to go back to school, maybe high school! How wrong can you get!? “Fruit of the poisonous tree” is nowhere in sight.

  50. avatar MyName says:

    Why is it always the fat, dumb ones that can’t dress themselves. Fattest guy in my neighborhood insists on mowing his lawn with his huge jugs hanging out. I don’t get it – I’ll buy you a shirt if you can’t afford one.

    1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      LOL. Look, as an OFWG myself I can tell you that we’ve worked hard for this body.

    2. avatar BlakeW5 says:

      It’s Texas, and hot. Fat guys don’t need the extra insulation?

  51. avatar el Possum Guapo Herr Standartenfuher they think we're making pizza's" Oberst von Burn says:

    Poverty: I’m wondering why one of those hot heads didn’t set fire to the mattress and be done with it….. Well that brings a whole new meaning to the word death bed…. Us possums occasionally get into fights at the trash dumpster with those damned cats, but nobody ever pulls any guns or baseball bats…. Do we really need a police force? If Miss Box( that’s funny) would have called the po-po it probably would have been over by the time they arrived anyway….. That vid says something about shotguns as weapons huh

    1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      “I’m wondering why one of those hot heads didn’t set fire to the mattress”

      Because they weren’t in East Lansing?

  52. avatar mister bickles says:

    the father and son have both been released on a $US25k bond;
    that would seem to indicate that, despite being charged with 1ˢᵗ degree homicide, the case against them is weak…..
    OTW: they would’v either been held pending arraignment or the bond would’v been well into the ‘six-figure-range’ ;

    1. avatar DDay says:

      Bond is to ensure the defendant shows for trial, nothing more. My guess is $25k to that white trash is like $500k to non white trash.

  53. avatar mister bickles says:

    gun-grabbing media already calling it “murder” !
    uh….. hunh!
    so far, its only a (fatal) “shooting”;
    those are the facts!
    its up to a jury to say whether or not its “murder” !

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Careful, there are nimnals on this site who think that abortion is murder.

  54. avatar nopenowayever says:

    I will be honest it is a little difficult to support the shooters. But I have to say, if you look at it objectively and without the “Two fat shirtless white dudes shoot an unarmed man over a piece of garbage” narrative hanging over your head, it is hard to not see this as a tragic, but legally justified self defense shooting.

    Hear me out.

    To get it out of the way right now, the decision making by all involved was poor. Criminally poor. It is a piece of garbage. Who honestly cares if it is in the dumpster? It is not worth the headache. No one’s back is against a wall, and all parties involved had the opportunity to retreat and let the police resolve the issue. It never should have gotten to the point where the girlfriend pressed record.

    Now. It did.

    There are two very different attitudes being represented in this video. One is defensive, one is very aggressive. The aggressive stance is not being held by the shooters, specifically John Miller. John is cool as a cucumber the entire video. The handgun is at his side, he never points it at anyone. He has it at the low ready, and is prepared to use it but clearly not willing to unnecessarily. The son, while acting totally ridiculous by bracing the shotgun over his shoulders and taunting the other man, is still pretty passive. The only intimidating part about the pair is the fact they are holding guns. Which, fortunately, is not a crime in and of itself.

    The deceased, however, is extremely aggressive. While John Miller warns “if you come within 3 feet of me, I am going to kill you”, the deceased repeatedly threatens to kill the pair without any condition. He is running around, he is screaming. He is unpredictable. He is asking about getting a gun. He is asking for a bat.

    Meanwhile, John Miller just stands there, watching and casually asking the other party to stand down, calm down. He sets the conditions of his safety. 3 feet.

    If at any point, John Miller or his son wanted to straight up kill the man, they had many chances to do so. They were not out there to kill him, they did not go out there hoping to kill him, based on the video. The accounts relayed so far do not indicate a pattern of disagreement or squabbling to the neighbors, and John Miller went out to the dumpster to remove the mattress when the deceased was not present. When the deceased arrived and become violent and aggressive, his son backed him up. IF this is how it happened, it would be impossible for a sound minded person to see premeditation in that. So first degree murder is off the table. It would be difficult to me to see 2nd Degree Murder either, if the events transpired as above. Carrying a gun is not illegal, and it appears the deceased initiated the confrontation. The Son arriving with the shotgun is not in and of itself a dangerous act. To me, the burden of proof just is not there for a murder charge.

    You will notice a very dramatic shift in John Miller’s demeanor towards the end of the video. He is taking things a little most seriously and watching the deceased much closer. His warnings about personal space get much more specific and closer together. He never raises the gun but you can see he is prepared to. He is totally focused on the threat.

    This is why Stand Your Ground laws exist. In that moment where you are focused on your life and safety, the thought of retreat or evasion is foreign to most people. You should not have to break your concentration to turn around and look for an escape route. If it is life or death, you should have the right to face the threat on your own terms. The 40 seconds towards the end of this video likely happened in a blink of an eye for him.

    Again, while retreat is clearly the safest most logical option, legally, he had no requirement to do so. Once the deceased starts talking about getting a gun, and gets his hand on a weapon, it matters very little what got you to the point. You are there.

    John Miller’s actions once the shooting starts, in my mind, further vindicates him. He doesn’t dump a mag into the other man. He takes two rushed, inaccurate shots and ducks away. A split second later, he ducks again. He is afraid or avoiding something being swing or thrown at him.

    The son’s actions are much more deliberate, purposeful, and effective. Again, though, well within the realms of a reasonable defense of his father. He stops the threat and stops shooting.

    Once this became a threatening situation for the father, this is a pretty clear cut defensive gun use in my book. The real question that has to be answered is, did the father and son create the scenario which led to the death? Did they do it out of recklessness or negligence? Did they have a right to be where they were, when they were there?

    Based on the facts presented so far, I would have to say no, they did not create the scenario, they appear to respond to it. It does not appear the scenario was created out of their negligence or recklessness, and they certainly had a right to be there.

    The only wild card is the son. His mannerisms and comments could easily be seen as inflammatory and recklessly escalated the situation. However the same could absolutely be said of the girlfriend, and the brother who introduced at least one weapon to the equation.

    Bad decisions were made all around, but from where i sit, the shooters did not make any criminally bad decisions. I would expect, due to the inflammatory nature of the narrative and the video, they both are offered, and accept a plea deal for involuntary manslaughter.

    Just my .02

    1. avatar Gralnok says:

      Well, I’ll add mine and make it .04, I agree with you. It’s true, they were arguing over a stupid piece of garbage, but that doesn’t mean the other piece of garbage, (the aggressor) gets to walk all over the armed men. Yeah, they are fat, shirtless, and most likely white trash, but they still have a right to defend themselves using deadly force against a larger, more violent, more credible threat. Guaranteed, if Howard got a hold of either weapon, the father and son would be statistics by now. I would also add that something not mentioned in your comment, was the ability for a human to cover a short distance faster than a gun can be brought up and properly aimed. Three feet is far too close. If he had a knife or bat, the situation could easily have turned against the Millers. As it was, when Howard got that bat, he signed his own death warrant.

      1. avatar Steve says:

        I have more of a question than a comment. Does “Stand Your Ground” apply when you undertake an action on public property that you know will provoke a reaction? If this had gone down on the two shooters property this would have definitely been a clear cut case of a legal action. However, it wasn’t altogether clear the victim had done anything wrong or illegal by throwing the mattress in the dumpster and it seems like the older shooter chose to intentionally take an very provocative activition versus calling the police. If the mattress should not have been in the dumpster, maybe you take it out and put a note on it, but throwing it on the victims property is very aggressive and since the guy who threw the mattress decided carry his gun when he did it he imho knew he was being provocative. Do stand your ground laws release a participant from all responsibility from stirring up a situation like this when they played a role in instigating it? That is my main area of confusion. 99.9% of us would have walked away from this situation but unfortunately the other guy happened to be someone with mental issues. Whatever he did his death is a tragedy for his family.

        1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          since the guy who threw the mattress decided [to] carry his gun

          What? People wear guns because they wear guns as a matter of course, not because they just decided to wear them on the day that something might happen. When I, and most people that I know that wear guns, get up in the morning, we put on our holsters and don’t take them off until we go to bed at night. I don’t just grab a gun because I think I’m going to shoot someone. Are you insane?

          the other guy happened to be someone with mental issues.

          How do you know he is a liberal? That’s a pretty damning accusation. I hope you have proof to fend off certain lawsuits from Ms. Box.

        2. avatar DDay says:

          Fatty didn’t have a holster and Jr fatty wasn’t slinging his shotgun. They carried those guns there, that right there is a criminal offense in TX when you go on the public road. They forfeited their self defense by bringing the guns openly and carrying them. They are screwed.

        3. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          DDay, you are woefully ignorant of Teas law.

        4. avatar nopenotyetnotever says:

          DDay,

          I believe that you believe your opinion on the laws in Texas, and how the events transpired. Unfortunately, at the time of this posting, both are inaccurate.

          There is clearly a holster visible in the video. The eyewitness testimony confirms that John Miller went to move the mattress (a silly passive aggressive action that was unnecessary, but not criminal) with the weapon holstered. The deceased initiated the confrontation. As it escalated, Miller removed the gun from the holster and the son came outside with the shotgun to back up his father. The gf and brother of the deceased joined the confrontation after that point.

          IF this is accurate, your line of reasoning won’t match up to a murder charge. it is just not possible.

          Also, as I stated in another comment. Open carrying a long gun or pistol on a Texas road is not against the law. Refer to that comment for clarification. Bottom line, simply having the guns is not a crime, they are not brandishing them or acting in a threatening manner. They are clearly on the defensive.

          The aggressor is dead. The chain of events leading to the shooting will decide the Millers’ fate, not the shooting itself.

        5. avatar LarryinTX says:

          DDay, note my screen name, here, you are COMPLETELY wrong about Texas law, why don’t you STFU? FYI, Texas has no laws concerning long guns.

    2. avatar DDay says:

      nopenoway

      Carrying a gun is not illegal, and it appears the deceased initiated the confrontation.

      They were brandishing the guns in public, that is a crime in texas, that action is not legal. They purposely brought those guns to the argument as orange shirt brought the baseball bat. They are screwed.

      1. avatar nopenowaynotever says:

        That is absolutely not the law in Texas. Open carry is allowed, and the confrontation was initiated by the deceased.

        You are right though, they are likely screwed, but simply because they will be tried in the court of public opinion, not according to the law

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Please quote referenced TX law, I think you’re full of shit.

        1. “Danger of Harm” Texas Penal Code Ann.22.05 …

  55. avatar BlakeW5 says:

    Such a stupid situation, on all sides.

    Perhaps the guys knew how the deceased tended to act. Yeah, they’d “never met” but assume the Facebook posts the dead guy made are true. How many times do you see posts of local people you don’t know all because someone you know in common replies to it, tags it, or shares it? Also, they almost guaranteed had the same mailman who was threatened, and may have mentioned it to them. Same mailman the dead guy tried to record video of to start a fight with the city, seems to be a running trend for him and the fiancé/whatever. Seems to have a history of making death threats as well, combined with the physical size to make good on those threats.

    How many times you think they’d seen the police at the dead guys house given his record of violent behavior?

    Then your son comes home one day telling you the neighbor pointed a gun at him.

    It’s not surprising the father had a gun on him that day he went to the garbage container. Not necessarily looking for conflict, but prepared should there be one. The son? If you saw the conflict, who here wouldn’t come to their fathers defense against a larger, violent man who had threatened you previously? I certainly would.

    Either way, the father/son duo should have attempted to leave and call the cops. I’m not a fan of getting cops involved in every neighborhood disagreement, but this is the EXACT type of situation where it’s warranted. Had they done that, and the same result played out their chance of winning in court would have went up ten-fold. Being the party that attempts to peacefully resolve pays dividends should the conflict turn deadly, especially when you have a force-equalizer that can keep you safe while doing so.

    At the end of the day, the world is rid of a violent a-hole, who knew he had issues and used them to justify his antisocial behavior.

  56. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    Bullies gotta bully. Well, sometimes they have to assume room temperature. F him. Not guilty. And if that wife of his was oh so threatened, as opposed to being a member of the threatening party, then she could have used that phone to call 911 instead of playing amateur film crew.

    1. avatar Agreed says:

      Vertically filming to, another heinous crime

      1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

        Vertically filming to, another heinous crime

        As is misspelling “too” and not using correct punctuation.

        1. Filming through a cracked door is considered concealment, not cover.

  57. avatar Salty Bear says:

    A perfect case for ending marijuana prohibition.

  58. avatar Red in CO says:

    Look, I’ve met a few of the deceased’s kind. They’re loud, aggressive, violent, and they’re well accustomed to being able to throw their weight around and get people to do what they want. Bullies, in other words, only a whole lot more so. And like bullies, nothin encourages them like submission. Yes, either of the two men could have walked away at any time. But why? Anyone claiming the two defenders are in the wrong for that reason are saying that we should just submit to those who threaten us.

    Sure, it was over a mattress. If they had backed down, thus telling scumbag loser that he can do what he wants if he just makes enough noise and threats, do you REALLY think he never would have taken advantage of that unwillingness to fight back?

    Dead loser made a dick move, and then when he was called on it he decided to brazen it out rather than accept that he was in the wrong. He got himself killed over a literal piece of trash, but the man who killed him did so over a far more important principle. The law may disagree, and hell, most folks here will probably disagree, but they’ve obviously never seen what happens when you make a habit of submitting to somebody like this; things get ugly real quick.

    1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      Red in CO, agree.

      1. avatar Adub says:

        The father was cool as a cucumber. Reminded of the old timers in Westerns. People say he shouldn’t have unholstered, but with the rage of Mister Orange Shirt, I think he unholstered as a deterrent to keep the guy from attacking him.

        And yes, bullies need to be fought. The idea that people should cower and call legal bullies is ridiculous.

        1. avatar DDay says:

          Fatty had gym shorts on and no belt and no holster. The son was carrying a shotgun. They did not unholster, they went there carrying the guns in their hands.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Just to make it simple, “SO WHAT?” Do you have a point?

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          DDay, Do you understand, “Shall not be infringed”? You sound like a moron, arguing bullshit. Are my 1A rights dependent on how I am dressed? THINK!

  59. avatar Jeremy Henry says:

    I don’t see 1st degree murder sticking. I just don’t. If they would go for 2nd degree likely. Manslaughter, absolutely. But premeditated with a man threatening to kill them several times. I just don’t see the charge sticking.

    1. avatar Nopenowayever says:

      This was my original thought, but now I disagree. You would have to prove that the millers intentionally created the situation, and all the facts suggest they simply reacted. I don’t even think manslaughter is guaranteed. Not when the neighbor started the confrontation

      1. avatar Jeremy Henry says:

        You know the more I am reading the comments that actually have some thought put into it I think you may be right. Terrible situation but I defenitely think that the prosecution is aiming too high for the evidence on hand.

        1. avatar DDay says:

          In TX it’s murder if your intent is to kill. Both shot the guy at close range, they intended to kill him. That’s murder under the laws of texas.

        2. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          For the sake of argument let’s say you are correct. Good. 😀

        3. avatar nopenotyetnotever says:

          DDay,

          That is not the legal definition of murder in any state. First Degree Murder always requires premeditation and intent. Second degree murder usually does not require premeditation, but an intent to cause bodily damage or harm, but specifically does not apply to “moment of passion” events.

          If you were correct, every single self defense shooting in the state of Texas would be a murder.

          Raise your hand if you draw your weapon with “intent to maim”

          I don’t. If I pull the trigger, the intent is to take the threat down.

          If the Millers had the intent to kill the deceased from the get go (the requirement for a murder charge) they would have just shot him. That did not happen. There is no pattern of animosity between the two, this is their first altercation, and it was initiated by the deceased.

          As Anonymous said, they made piss poor decisions, and that is what they are going to be on trial for. The shooting of the deceased, from my corner, looks legitimate from the moment the deceased began to threaten to kill them. The decisions before that point are up to a jury to decide. Or the lawyers who negotiate the eventual plea deal

        4. avatar DDay says:

          nopenotyetnotever

          1st degree murder, like all crimes vary by state. It’s not always premeditated, Massachusetts it’s premeditated or extreme atrocity or cruelty. Either is 1st degree. Every state is different.

          https://criminal.attorneywdkickham.com/first-degree-murder.html

        5. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Yeah, but your definitions are not from ANY state. You sound like a kid just making shit up.

        6. DDay
          “Both shot the guy at close range, they intended to kill him. That’s murder under the laws of texas.”
          Actually, you more easily prove murder if the shots were at longer range.

    2. avatar DDay says:

      Different states have different definitions of murder. 1st degree murder in most states does not require premeditation. Most states allow it for a murder committed while committing another felony (brandishing a firearm in public).

      https://medlinfirm.com/blog/the-difference-between-manslaughter-and-murder-in-texas/

      1. avatar nopenotyetnotever says:

        DDay,

        It appears your confusion in this issue revolves around a misidentification of what “brandishing” is.

        Brandishing would be the display of a weapon with the intent to intimidate. As the violent confrontation was initiated by the deceased, when the father had his weapon in a holster (look closely at the video, he is wearing one), the removal of the weapon from the holster and keeping it at the low ready (pointed at the ground, but in hand) would not constitute brandishing. Brandishing is an aggressive display, John Miller is very clearly in a defensive posture.

        The son is a little more tricky, but simply possessing a weapon is not brandishing. He does not aim the weapon at the deceased, he never actually threatens to use it. Until the assault is initiated by the deceased, he is holding it quite casually (and carelessly) I might add.

        You are also misinformed about the legality of open carry of a weapon on a Texas road. This is not a law. The open carry of long guns has been well established in Texas. You may be referring to a common law that prohibits the carry of a loaded rifle IN A VEHICLE, or the firing of a weapon across a road. Both of these are laws designed to limit poaching, and are intended for hunter safety. It is against the law to discharge a firearm inside most municipalities, and I can assume Abilene likely has the same law.

        However, a valid self defense shooting is the legal exception to most of these laws. If someone breaks into your home and you kill them, you do not get charged with firing your weapon inside city limits.

        1. avatar DDay says:

          Box said John Miller walked up to her and put the handgun to her head, yelling at her to get on the ground. She said Michael Miller went over to Aaron’s brother, placed the shotgun to his head, and ordered him to the ground.

          They put guns to the wife and his brothers head and ordered them to the ground? Are you kidding me. They are guilty as heck.

          https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article218728710.html

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          DDay, you are absolutely wrong, you are surrendering any ability to be elected sheriff anywhere in TX!

  60. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

    For you reading pleasure, I just transcribed the video. Not everything is here, but most of it is, at least the most important parts. Some things by the dead dude were unintelligible because he was screaming so much so are not recorded.

    Father: “Back off…back off…back off.”

    Dead dude: “I will kill your dad!”

    Father: “I doubt it.”

    Dead dude: “You piece of sh*t, I’m going to kill you!”

    Father: “I doubt it.”

    Dead dude: “I don’t give a f*ck! I will [unintelligible].”

    Father: “Back off.”

    Dead dude: “I’ll put a bullet through your head!”

    Father: “Back off.”

    Dead dude: “Point it at me!”

    Father: “Back off.”

    Dead dude: “You’re a dead man!”

    Father: “I doubt it.”

    Dead dude: [pointing at son] “You’re a bitch, I’m going to kill you, too! F*ck you too, you little faggot!”

    Son: “Jagoff.”

    Dead dude: “You’re dead!”

    Father: “I doubt it.”

    Son: “You better quit threatening.”

    Dead dude: “F*ck you, faggot!”

    Son: “F*ck you, c*cksucker!”

    Father: “If you come within three foot of me I’m going to kill you.”

    Dead dude: “Okay. Shoot me!”

    Dead dude’s girlfriend: “You’re not going to shoot my husband.” (Eh, you’re not married).

    Dead dude: “You’re dead!”

    Dead dude is now in the process of assuming room temperature.

    Your honor, I vote to acquit.

  61. avatar Tony In Oregon says:

    I expect the verdict to be a case of reverse jury nullification. The jury will find them guilty of something just because they’re stupid enough to deserve it, regardless of the fact that it was technically a legally justified shooting. If they take a bench trial, have a few hundred thousand dollars laying around for a lawyer, and don’t get an anti-gun judge then they have a 50/50 chance of being acquitted.

    If convicted it’s the “take a swing” taunting is what will be used to nullify a claim of self defense.

    We can judge the father and son from various points of view:

    Morally: It’s wrong to seek a confrontation but it’s also wrong to give in to a bully (who happens to be a raving lunatic criminal who lives next door): (tie)
    Intelligence: Can we add an IQ test to the background checks? (fail)
    Legally: With the taunting, it’s a close call but technically it’s likely that they were justified: (win)
    Legal Reality: Very likely they’ll be seeing the inside of a prison for a number of years: (fail)
    Proactive Self Defense: Got (and stayed) way too close to a raving lunatic and nearly got dad’s head caved in with a baseball bat: (fail)
    Reactive Self Defense: Recognized the other party was about to attack with a deadly weapon, issued a warning to stay back, used lead to intercept the attack: (win)

  62. avatar DDay says:

    You people here who think this will not result in a murder conviction better have better sense with a firearm than these two twits. The two twits were making threats too and they never sought to deescalate the situation, in fact they escalated it further.

    The father has a slightly better case than the son. There is ZERO reason for the son to fire that shotgun, there was no threat at all to his father or himself when he fired the shot. He’s absolutely screwed. Every shot needs to be justified, that sons shot cannot be defended in any way.

    Also, listen at the end of the first video. I hear the shirtless loser yelling to get down, face down or something like that. Was he pointing the gun at the wife at that point and ordering her to get face down? If so, she had a phone on her, no weapon so that won’t work in his favor either if that is what he was yelling and doing.

    1. avatar Nowaynotever says:

      They made no threats, they issued warnings. What’s the difference?

      “I’m going to kill you ”
      Vs
      “if you come after me again, I’m going to kill you”

      Subtle, but vastly different.

      Also other than the son briefly participating in the banter, I see no escalation from the millers. Unless you consider just having the guns to be an escalation?

      Finally, the son’s follow on shots APPEAR to be very legitimate. He appears to be defending his father who is ducking and avoiding the ongoing attack. Two handgun rounds will generally not stop a large enraged attacker unless you hit them in the brain.

      This is an extrapolation of the audio and eyewitness testimony, but if the aggressor (the deceased) was launching an attack on the father, the son is justified in the shoot

      I do agree though, if anyone is in trouble it is the son. Not for pulling the trigger, but for assisting in escalating the situation with the banter.

      It’s still a tough case for manslaughter, but murder is absolutely out

      1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

        Yep, I can post many videos of cops saying things like, “If you move, I’m going to shoot you” (every cop) or “I’m going to put a round in you” (Dearborn PD). Never mind if you attack me and come within three feet. Cops would never even allow that. Three feet is way too close. They would have done a mag dump long before then.

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      They brought guns to a trash can, specifically to have an altercation with the neighbor, Howard.

      Bad move.

      Then before Howard released his psycho “I’m going to kill you” speech, Howard told them to take their guns and go home. Instead, the Millers said “take your swing.”

      Bad move.

      It’s debatable younger miller’s shotgun blast which appeared to be fired after the threat was over, was needed.

      Bad move.

      I foresee some prison time fellas.

      1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

        They brought guns to a trash can

        Is that how you roll, Anonymous? Not only are you too afraid to use your real name, you are too afraid to carry your gun unless you think you are going to need it? What type of weird prognosticator are you? What type of wizardry is that? Most normal people carry their guns all the time because they never know when they’re going to need them.

        I see that you are on a personal crusade here to trash the father and son. What you, like the other guy (forget his name, sich I think) fail to realize is that it does not matter. It does not matter one whit. So what if the father and son get found guilty? The dead dude is still dead. That’s one less a-hole in the world, and if I’m on the jury, the father and son walk. If not, the dead dude is still dead.

        The lesson here is not to be an a-hole or you might get shot.

        1. avatar Anonymous says:

          Is that how you roll, Anonymous? Not only are you too afraid to use your real name, you are too afraid to carry your gun unless you think you are going to need it?

          Guns are for defense. Key word “defense.” Not for assistance with instigation.

        2. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Guns are for defense. Key word “defense.” Not for assistance with instigation.

          Which is why you purposefully took a gun to ask someone for rent. You could have simply called the guy and reminded him that the rent was due. Why show up to his door with a pistol? Physician, heal thyself.

        3. avatar Anonymous says:

          The lesson here is not to be an a-hole or you might get shot

          There is another lesson here. It’s called don’t be an a-hole or you might go to prison for killing people needlessly.

        4. avatar Anonymous says:

          So what if the father and son get found guilty? The dead dude is still dead. That’s one less a-hole in the world, and if I’m on the jury, the father and son walk. If not, the dead dude is still dead.

          Disagree. The father and son are also a-holes. Why have one less a-hole when you can have 3 less a-holes?

        5. avatar Anonymous says:

          Danny,

          You know I once took a gun to my rent house. I had a tenant that I suspected was selling drugs on the side, and doing drugs. I didn’t trust him, and he was late on his rent. Brought a small pistol with me, when I went to ask for the money.

          That said, I didn’t take it out and exchange threats with him. I didn’t egg him on, while feeling confident with my gun in my pocket. I wanted to get my money and go, not exchange gun fire, or bat swings. I didn’t bring the gun there knowing I would have an argument or yelling, or threats. If I did, I wouldn’t go, I’d just call the cops for assistance, or slap a eviction notice on his door and let the authorities handle it from there. And if I did go and yelling occurred, I certainly wouldn’t brandish a gun for the sake of leverage, taking it out and holding it while we talk. If he demanded I leave, then I would have left.

          I hope you see where I am going with this. I attempted to be analogous with the miller’s decisions with my own.

          Their mistake wasn’t shooting him. Technically they were justified in doing so. Their mistake was everything that led up to them shooting him. All mistakes. That is what they will be punished for.

        6. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Gotcha. You’re a small pocket pistol guy for when you think you might need it.

          See, most normal people who carry a full sized gun every day refuse to go somewhere if they think they’ll have to use a gun. See the difference?

        7. avatar Anonymous says:

          See, most normal people who carry a full sized gun every day refuse to go somewhere if they think they’ll have to use a gun. See the difference?

          No. If they don’t think they’ll go to a place where they might think they’ll have to use a gun, why do they even bother carrying one? They carry their full sized pistol for exactly the same reason the pocket pistol guy carries.

          Regardless, I don’t see the relevance of this with the topic at hand.

          What does this have to do with the many many mistakes the Millers partook in to reach an event that resulted in them shooting a guy dead?

        8. avatar Anonymous says:

          See, most normal people who carry a full sized gun every day refuse to go somewhere if they think they’ll have to use a gun. See the difference?

          Does that include shirtless, with a shotgun?

        9. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          If they don’t think they’ll go to a place where they might think they’ll have to use a gun, why do they even bother carrying one?

          This the absolute stupidest thing I’ve ever read here. I’m done with you. I will never reply to you again (unless you change your name to disguise yourself).

        10. avatar DDay says:

          Danny, how many times have you stood there with a pistol in your hand and hand a heated argument with someone in public? Or had a shotgun on your shoulder?

          It’s one thing to have a pistol in a holster for protection, it’s FAR FAR different to engage in a heated argument on a public street and brandish a shotgun or pistol.

          The guy above who thinks the son was justified in the shotgun blasts is scary. He’s completely screwed and so is fatty. They’ll get at least 25 years in prison and fatty looks like a heart attack waiting to happen, so he’s likely to die in prison.

          I do not want morons like this to have guns, they do a great disservice to gun owners everywhere, just like that jackass in Clearwater who got in an argument over a parking space and shot a guy. Idiots.

        11. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Know what? The dead dude is still dead. Nothing you or anyone else says will change this. You do realize this, right? Maybe the father and son walk, maybe they don’t, but that’s immaterial. The dead dude is dead.

          So many people don’t seem to get this. This is THE one single salient take-away point.

          TTAG should really implement an IQ test to post here.

        12. avatar DDay says:

          So they win. He’s dead, they’re at minimum going to be financially ruined due to the trial most likely convicted and in prison but hey, they got the upper hand, right? They were men, they didn’t walk away, they were the tough ones and they showed their neighbor.

          Are you 12 or did you just stop maturing at 12? You are a negative for gunowners. Your macho attitude when you’ve probably never been in a fight in your life. Those two fat jackasses are going to learn very quickly how real this shit is as they spend decades in prison. Was it worth it? Grow up.

        13. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          You might be surprised who I am. And I never said it was worth it. You create strawman arguments in nearly every post. Maybe one day you will learn how to discuss things rationally, but I doubt it.

          But ultimately, yes, the dead dude is dead because he was an idiot. Are you too stupid to understand that?

          You say the father and son might go to jail. And?

        14. avatar Anonymous says:

          This the absolute stupidest thing I’ve ever read here. I’m done with you. I will never reply to you again (unless you change your name to disguise yourself).

          It’s not stupid at all. The everyday carry man carries for self defense. The random pocket pistol man carries for self defense. They both carry for the same reason. Therefore, If they don’t think they’ll go to a place where they might think they’ll have to use a gun, why do they even bother carrying one? Obviously, they carry because they “might” need it. In both situations. The everyday carry man with full size gun, and the pocket pistol man. For the same reason, they carry that gun. It was a rhetorical question.

        15. avatar Anonymous says:

          Know what? The dead dude is still dead. Nothing you or anyone else says will change this. You do realize this, right? Maybe the father and son walk, maybe they don’t, but that’s immaterial. The dead dude is dead.

          What does that have to do with anything? What does that mean?? Of course the dead dude is dead. It doesn’t mean we don’t punish the people who killed him. Anyone who ever killing another person, resulted in a dead dude that was dead. It doesn’t mean they don’t get prosecuted and imprisoned for it.

          Maybe the father and son walk, maybe they don’t, but that’s immaterial.

          This is what we are arguing about Danny. I don’t care about the dead man being dead. At all. I argue about this because of the morality and principles the shooters exhibited in their actions. Concepts like keep your guns holstered. Don’t escalate. Don’t intimidate. Don’t threaten. And I guarantee you, if you came over my house or I came over your house with a gun in hand, unholstered, or a shotgun behind my neck, shirtless, it would be threatening. This is what I have been talking about. Everyone knows the dead guy is dead. However, are the Millers to blame for it- that is the question.

        16. avatar Anonymous says:

          But ultimately, yes, the dead dude is dead because he was an idiot. Are you too stupid to understand that?

          And the millers will be in prison because they were idiots. Do you understand that? Do you not see what they did wrong? This is the topic of discussion Danny.

          You say the father and son might go to jail. And?

          And they’ll deserve it – that’s what we are talking about. The morality revolving around the decisions they and the psycho neighbor made.

        17. avatar Anonymous says:

          I’m done with you. I will never reply to you again

          Danny, don’t get excited. We agree on pretty much everything else. Your opinions and thoughts are still valuable to me. We are just pounding out ideas here.

        18. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Anonymous, sorry for my previous tone. You are correct, we’re just discussing the event.

          I’m not saying the father and son don’t have an uphill battle, I’m not saying they will get off. They might end up in prison. My larger point is that no matter what happens now nothing will bring the dead dude back to life. His actions lead to his death. I’ve seen it over and over numerous times. Don’t get in confrontations like this, you never know what the other person will do. They might shoot you. Sure, they might end up in prison like Martin Zale, but if you’re Derek Flemming you’re still dead.

        19. avatar Anonymous says:

          I’m not saying the father and son don’t have an uphill battle, I’m not saying they will get off. They might end up in prison. My larger point is that no matter what happens now nothing will bring the dead dude back to life. His actions lead to his death. I’ve seen it over and over numerous times. Don’t get in confrontations like this, you never know what the other person will do. They might shoot you. Sure, they might end up in prison like Martin Zale, but if you’re Derek Flemming you’re still dead.

          I agree. Howard was begging to get shot, or mentally insane. He swung a bat at people with guns in their hands.

        20. avatar Anonymous says:

          Which is why you purposefully took a gun to ask someone for rent. You could have simply called the guy and reminded him that the rent was due. Why show up to his door with a pistol? Physician, heal thyself.

          He didn’t have a phone because he didn’t pay those bills either.

        21. avatar Anonymous says:

          Danny, I’m not necessarily arguing in support of them getting a murder charge. I’m arguing that they made moral mistakes, big mistakes, and they shouldn’t get off scott free for them.

          All life has value. Our entire legal system is built around this. Innocent until proven guilty. Natural rights. For the sake of fairness and that each of us, our lives, have value, regardless of intelligence or abilities, or flaws.

          This is what I am arguing for. The principles. I am aware, just by watching the video, that Howard was a psycho aggressive nutbag. That he was dangerous and aggressive. And if these guys didn’t shoot him, he would probably have been shot by someone else.

          So I haven’t focused on Howards actions, because he is dead. He can’t be punished for them. I focused on the Miller’s actions. They are not purely victims here. They are both victim and perpetrator, because of the actions they took.

        22. avatar Anonymous says:

          Which is why you purposefully took a gun to ask someone for rent. You could have simply called the guy and reminded him that the rent was due. Why show up to his door with a pistol? Physician, heal thyself.

          Also, he didn’t know that I had it. Therefore, I was not presenting myself as a threat. I didn’t go shirtless to his abode with a shotgun over my shoulders. When I asked for the money, I didn’t take it out during our discussion. Which is why conceal carriers follow the concept of always keeping your gun holstered unless you plan on using it.

          I have no problem with the Millers taking guns over to have a friendly discussion with the neighbor. It’s that they were shirtless with guns in hand, and that is threatening. If I took off my shirt and walked to your house with a gun in hand, you would perceive it as a threat. And that is exactly what the guy with the shotgun did.

      2. If you don’t bring your guns to a trash can, some day, someone will bring a trash can for your guns.

    3. avatar Eli2016 says:

      It’s painfully obvious you’re no lawyer DDay. There are dozens of options that the defense could use in a case like this. To me it’s manslaughter. To you it’s Hang em High.

      1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

        Eli2016, don’t get too worked up about it. I suspect DDay is a cover for someone else here. DDay seems to be very prolific for a newbie.

        1. avatar DDay says:

          I’ve been posting on TTAG’s for over 5 years.

          You’re a clown Danny L Griffin

        2. avatar Andy Buckmichael says:

          Total know it all clown. Probably a useless scum cop.

      2. avatar Anonymous says:

        Manslaughter is fine. They’ll still get to go prison for it. And they deserve it. They deserve them some prison. That’s the bottom line.

  63. avatar Sian says:

    You can throw out the GF’s testimony since she’s too dumb to hold the phone properly to take video.

  64. avatar MSq'dI says:

    I severely doubt that the Wife of the Orange Shirted guy was the only video made that day of the that scene. Two Shirtless Rednecks wielding Firearms in the Day Time in a residential neighborhood, isn’t going to go unnoticed. Especially by anyone with these people as neighbors.

    1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      I will bet you an inedible Crispy Creme donut and and undrinkable Starbucks burnt coffee (French Roast is a scam on the consumer, it’s re-roasted stale beans) that it is the only video. Miss Box sucks at recording video. I hope she does a better job when her next live-in boyfriend (he’s going to marry me eventually, really, he promised!) gets shot. She obviously picks winners.

  65. avatar TX223 says:

    1. No duty to retreat in TX if you are the one who is attacked.
    2. Shooters will go to prison if they were the instigators.

    Moral of the story is walk away to live another day. Also, bright clothing is bad for the self defense minded. Makes too good of a target – not a joke.
    Completely needless and a great way to have a real bad day. Tragic.

    1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      Completely needless? Yes. Tragic? Not so sure.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I fail to see a great loss to society regardless of future events.

  66. avatar B.D. says:

    Nothing to see here, just another day in the trailer park of white trash trump lamp. Wanna bet they got a trump bumper sticker? Seriously tho… wanna bet?

    And this is what libtards will see and use against us. Sad, idiots like this give us all a bad name. Make sure you vote in 2020 guys… it’s gonna change everything. They promise.

    1. avatar mister bickles says:

      the gun-grabbing ‘media’ can use any-thing to make gun owners look bad…
      or….
      they can just make stuff up if they feel like it!
      @ least ½ of the US doesn’t b’lv the media any more …. so…..
      (except, maybe, for the sport and the weather);
      of such scenarios are civil wars made…..

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        sad but true. I got a little political but that was pretty much my point, and it doesn’t matter what idiot is in the white house or what party they are from. At least they knew better than to allow Hillary in… pretty obvious that would have started a civil war.

  67. avatar DrDKW says:

    Wonder if Huntsville has a ‘father-son’ wing?

  68. avatar VF 1777 says:

    A lot of wrong on both sides there. Very disturbing. 9 out of 10 on the ‘No Bueno’ scale. Not the kind of ‘defensive’ shoot I would ever find myself in, that’s for sure. Was too easy to back away for either party and you can’t just be brandishing shit like that in these parts.

    1. avatar DDay says:

      exactly. If you have your gun out for 2 minutes and you stand there arguing, you are not in a defense situation, you are at minimum an equal aggressor.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Really. How about 1 minute and 50 seconds? Where was that written in the law, again? Are you listening to yourself? Where did you get the authority to declare that?

        1. avatar Aaron says:

          the “2 minutes” thing is a red herring.

          what bothers me is that the older shirtless armed man kept escalating the conflict with the angry orange shirted man by saying things such as, “go ahead, take a swing” and “if you get within three feet of me I’m going to kill you”.

          the man in the orange shirt was saying threatening things but did not have a ranged weapon.

          the shirtless older armed man did not sound like a reasonable man in fear for his life. all three of them sounded like they were having a dick-measuring contest between hot-headed douchebags.

          i don’t see self defense in this situation, and if i was on the jury for the shirtless duo, they’d be in jeopardy.

    2. avatar B.D. says:

      Brandishing is a kind way to put it in this type of scenario. My mind is still blown. Two idiot instigators with a combined IQ of a mentally challenged sloth. Good ol heartland stuff…

  69. avatar Sid says:

    While it is very possible for all of these idiots to walk away and cool off, I can’t see clogging up prison with these two. The dead man was the agent of his own demise. He broiled up his threats. Once he uttered “I am going to kill you” the first time combined with his physical motions, they could have dropped him.

    I am not condoning their actions. As ugly as this video is, self defense is a valid legal protection for everyone. It is not just for those who look good on video or those who are hiding upstairs in the closet. If someone has a valid reason for self defense, how it appears to the rest of us is only a question for the jury.

    1. avatar DDay says:

      No self defense is not an option for everyone. If you are an aggressor or equal aggressor in a situation, if at some point you start to lose or are in fear for your life, you cannot legally use deadly force. Because you were the aggressor, you forfeit that right.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        When a jury says that, I’ll believe it. From you, it’s just talking out your ass.

    2. avatar Aaron says:

      pretty hard sell, in my opinion. especially since the older shirtless armed man kept escalating by saying things such as “good ahead, take a swing.l

  70. avatar Joatmon says:

    I don’t know any involved so I really don’t care but I’ll throw some things in.
    Father and son knew this guy wasn’t right. I’m sure the whole neighborhood knew. Why would you even confront someone like that?
    This is over a mattress? Jesus, get a life. You don’t have anything else to do there?
    Father and son did the garbage man’s job. Just leave the mattress in the dumpster and they’ll take it or not take it.
    If you go looking for trouble, you’ll find it. It’s not that hard.
    1 dead and 2 still alive when it should be 3. 4 or more if you want to count fiancée and brother.
    Public property and not private property. Ask someone to leave and they don’t, maybe you should.
    It’s Texas and I know it’s hot but put on at least a wife beater.
    Stupid is contagious so I’ll just stay away.

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      I second that notion to brand them with an idiot burn on their forehead so everyone around them is warned before coming in contact with them. That said, fuck it, lock em up. We lock everyone else up instead of killing them or chopping off body parts so what’s two more idiots gonna hurt? Inflation and taxation isn’t going down… ever. The least of my worries is the prison system.

  71. avatar FedUp says:

    You get 1+1/2 pages, 14 photos per page, when you search for Taylor County booking photos of a 37 year old Aaron Howard.

    https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/42257226_237571183770597_6348269896110964736_o.jpg?_nc_cat=110&oh=70ec45e9ea9cb48c588f20199f3eac1c&oe=5C180468

    1. avatar DDay says:

      None of that will be admissible.

    2. avatar walter says:

      Taylor county property records shows the Millers were homeowners in that neighborhood for 30 years.
      Taylor county arrest records : clearly show Aaron Howard is a total psycho (and a renter ).
      Takes one bad renter to ruin a neighborhood.

      1. avatar MSq'dI says:

        And yet the City of Abilene allow “Berserker” too live there…

    3. avatar Aaron says:

      yeah, you can tell by the orange shirted man’s behavior that he was a hot-headed, angry troublemaker and a terrible neighbor….but that doesn’t necessarily constitute grounds for the shirtless morons to claim reasonable fear for their lives.

  72. avatar John G says:

    The father/son duo kept antagonizing the other gentlemen. They should have walked away. They, the father/son, showed very poor judgment and should and will see the inside of a penitentiary for quite a while.

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      especially because it was public land and they were trying to enforce their will for someone to leave by brandishing a firearm. Lock em the fuck up. Good riddance.

      1. avatar DDay says:

        This is amazing too. Fatty and his son, after shooting the guy, put a gun to the woman record head and ordered her to the ground. There were likely a number of witnesses to this because it went on for at least 2 minutes (the recording).

        Fatty and fat son brought the guns to confront the guy. They instigated it.

        Box starts screaming, “No, no, Aaron!” after her husband is shot in the chest and head.

        “I ran to Aaron and for a second I thought he was going to be OK, but he didn’t make it,” Box said.

        Box said John Miller walked up to her and put the handgun to her head, yelling at her to get on the ground. She said Michael Miller went over to Aaron’s brother, placed the shotgun to his head, and ordered him to the ground.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          You’re using some selective memory, there. Try to remember that dead dude had mentioned a gun, like dumb broad and idiot brother may have one to hand him. I would have done the same, many would probably have shot them. Someone just tried to kill them, it isn’t hard to imagine they are a bit tense.

          And hey! If your maniac brother is screaming bloody murder while gesturing at two armed men, what would be your purpose in handing him a baseball bat? Only purpose I can see is actively trying to get him killed.

  73. avatar walter says:

    The old man with the gun – was a homeowner in that neighborhood for thirty years. The orange idiot – raging man – was a renter and lived there for five months. He had explosive intermittent disorder and actually said shoot me , prior to being shot. That was his last words. The woman exacerbated the entire situation by not trying once to calm her husband who was claiming to kill the two men, shoot one in the head , telling them they were dead.

    Aaron Howard= Criminal history , multiple arrests , renter (raging)
    John Miller=30 year homeowner, of said neighborhood (calm)

    Stand your ground would apply to the homeowner, not the renter who drove up in a truck to the alley.

    1. avatar MSq'dI says:

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but “Alley” implies Common Area (Public Access) owned by the City of Abilene. Not by either Home Owner and/or House Renter.

      1. avatar walter says:

        possibly – but we dont know the exact plot of the mans property – if he was one foot within his own land – he could use that as stand your ground. The alley was directly behind HIS house.

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          Right. Behind his house. Where his fence ended and the public lot began that held the trash can for the whole trailer park to throw their old Allen Jackson cassettes away.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Wake up, guys. “Stand your ground” has nothing to do with your home, that is “castle doctrine” you’re thinking of. Stand your ground can be applicable if your home is in another state. IOW, all the discussion of the last half-dozen posts is nonsense.

      2. avatar Gralnok says:

        That is correct, however Stand Your Ground also applies. Father and Son have no duty to retreat. They only have a duty to stand there and take it until either the hothead leaves, or does something to make him an imminent threat. Once he became an imminent threat, they were fully justified in putting him down. The wife is now also a possible threat, now that her caveman was just iced. Both father and son responded properly.

        1. avatar DDay says:

          The son walked out there in the middle of the argument with a shotgun, he has ZERO stand your ground defense under any circumstances.

          And stand your ground doesn’t mean you get in a heated argument with someone and allow it to escalate. You are ignorant

        2. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          SYG means any place you have a legal right to be. Don’t confuse that with Castle Doctrine.

        3. Doesn’t SYG also apply to “Baseball Bat Guy” too…

        4. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          I believe dead dude went out there to confront the father, not the other way around.

        5. Ahhh, correct me if I’m wrong. But virtually everyone has assumed that the “Orange” guy put the Mattress into the Dumpster and that “Fat Bare Chested w/Gun” took the Mattress Out Off the Dumpster. That means that “Orange” guy was there FIRST. Who “Confronted” who. If Bare Chested Guy got there First, why was it necessary to be Armed and with his Idiot Son in Tow with a Shotgun. Is Confrontation of Trash Removal in Abilene so common, that Residents are required to carry firearms to do so. That say’s something about the City of Abilene, Texas and their Chamber of Commerce. I’ll live in Chicago instead…

        6. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

          Dead dude puts mattress out one day, father removes the next. The father didn’t come out while the dead dude was loading up the mattress. As to why the father was carrying, most people who carry guns carry them all the time. Or at least they should.

        7. So Bare Chested Guy was anticipating a Violent Confrontation with his Neighbor. That’s not SYG, that’s a TRAP…

        8. avatar MSq'dI says:

          How exactly was “Orange” T-Shirt Guy a threat? Both the Shirtless Guy’s were Armed with in plan sight wielding firearms. While Orange being rather bigger then the other two, possessed no visible weapons of any kind! I don’t see the logic of two armed guy’s with firearms taking trash to the a “shared” dumpster, and confronting a neighbor doing the same. But not being armed! A bit vociferous and bellicose maybe, of which neither is a crime. At least not in Virginia! I can’t say for Texas though …

        9. avatar Anonymous says:

          That is correct, however Stand Your Ground also applies. Father and Son have no duty to retreat. They only have a duty to stand there and take it until either the hothead leaves, or does something to make him an imminent threat. Once he became an imminent threat, they were fully justified in putting him down. The wife is now also a possible threat, now that her caveman was just iced. Both father and son responded properly.

          I don’t see that as what happened.

          They are not purely the victims. They are both the perpetrator and the victim. The neighbor is both the perpetrator and the victim. And that is what you want to avoid. If they were purely the victim and the neighbor the perpetrator, I would have agreed and been on their side of this. However, they, shirtless, with guns in hand, in a threatening manner (and me walking to your house shirtless with a gun in my hand or taking one out while talking is threatening), confronted the neighbor at the trash can. They knew he was a psycho hothead nutbag and did this anyways. When he told him to “put the guns away and go home” they replied with “take your swing.” Bad move. Irresponsible. Why would they do that? Did they want to provoke the neighbor and then shoot him when he got out of line?

          Had they visited the neighbor, in a polite manner, perhaps with shirts on, and guns holstered or concealed, to discuss the mattress and he attacked them, then I would purely be in their side. No question.

          They could have avoided it entirely, by following some basic principles that concealed carriers/everyday carriers follow:
          ►Don’t take your pistol out unless you are going to use it.
          ►Don’t provoke psychos and then use “stand your ground” as a defense.
          ►If you have the opportunity to leave unscathed, why not take it? Yes, they had a right to be there. No they didn’t have a duty to retreat. But they weren’t putting anything in the trash can. They were there for an argument.

        10. avatar Gralnok says:

          To DDay:
          Well, if someone is outside threatening my father, I’d go out armed too. If you say you’d do otherwise, you’re a horrible liar as well as an idiot.

          To MSq:
          Are you blind, deaf, and retarded? Orange shirt is threatening multiple times to kill both the father and son, he has the strength and height to do it, he’s psychotic, has a history of confrontation with others, that alone is worth a bullet to the head.

          To Anonymous:
          The father and son are shirtless and fat, so that makes them the aggressors? Right. Well, if I hear a commotion behind my house, and I know I have a hot head psycho neighbor, you can bet your ass I’m going to investigate with my gun. Also, news flash, not everyone is dressed while at home and not everyone looks good without a shirt. How about you go to the gym and screw yourself with a barbell since you care so much for fitness.

        11. avatar MSq'dI says:

          If two people armed with Exposed Firearm, pointed in my general direction. I would consider that an Immediate Threat too…

        12. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Really? So, then you would react by screaming death threats at them?

    2. avatar RedRed says:

      Homeowner should have called the cops instead of deciding to handle it himself. There was no rush. He simply could have backed off and called the cops, but then he couldn’t have thumped his chest.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        This!

        If they wanted to use stand your ground appropriately, then they should have politely confronted the neighbor and explained, maybe with a shirt on, and concealed or holstered guns, in a non-threatening manner. “Non-threatening” is key here. If he started swinging a bat or throwing fists, then you could shoot him and I would have no scruples with it! I would have been on their side. I would have said “good shoot.”

        Instead. They instigated an altercation at the trash can in the threatening manner (and walking shirtless to confront your neighbor with a gun in hand, or taking it out while you are talking – is threatening). During his psycho spiel, he said “put your guns away and go home.” That would have been my cue to leave. Instead, they said “take your swing.” Then, predictably, when the psycho nutbag takes a swing, they shoot him dead.

        Sorry. Not a valid “stand your ground” in my opinion.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Pretty certain your recitation of the sequence of events is *entirely* wrong, I find it difficult to believe that is not deliberate.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I do have a question. Many report someone said “take your swing”, or some such even before we ever saw the bat. Are we certain (I haven’t found it yet) that it wasn’t “take your springs”, since we were discussing box springs?

  74. avatar RedRed says:

    Rest of their lives in prison? NO! They should be lined up against a wall and shot! Why should the taxpayers fund feeding, housing, and giving free medical care to scum like this? There is simply no justice in America anymore.

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      I get it, but considering inflation and taxation will never drop in price to help the economy, I could care less about the prison system. Consider having your arm chopped off for something so stupid it shouldn’t even be a crime. That is why we live in America. Limited freedoms. I’m totally fine with not getting my foot chopped off for wanting to drive in the fast lane 5mph over the speed limit. Let em rot in prison. Your tax dollars take an entire lifetime to circulate.

    2. avatar Gralnok says:

      Well, for one, they aren’t guilty of anything more than standing up to a big loudmouth bully, then putting him down when he and his bitch decided to do more than just exchange pleasantries.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        Well, for one, they aren’t guilty of anything more than standing up to a big loudmouth bully, then putting him down when he and his bitch decided to do more than just exchange pleasantries.

        Stand in the street, shirtless, with a gun in your hand, and see if you are arrested and not found guilty of something.

        1. avatar Gralnok says:

          If I’m being threatened with great bodily harm or death should I even turn my back, I’ll stand in the street butt naked. Doesn’t matter, I’ll still have my gun, I’ll still open fire if someone comes at me.

          For someone commenting on a firearms website, you seem to know very little about how to actually carry yourself when you have a firearm.
          Be courteous.
          Be respectful.
          Be alert.
          but when all else fails…
          Be prepared to use your gun!

  75. avatar Wally1 says:

    So, I have to ask, what happened to the mattress? This would have eventually happened to the bully, he just had never met the type of person that won’t be bullied, until the day in the alley. It was just a matter of time until someone ended this scumbags existence. This is good lesson, be polite and courteous, but always have a plan.

  76. avatar Tony in Oregon says:

    Man: Hello 911 my neighbor threw a mattress in our shared dumpster. I took it out several times but he keeps putting it back in. If it’s still in there the garbage man will skip us and we’ll have garbage piling up everywhere and that will make the garbage man continue skipping us and I’ll have to haul all this stinking filth to the dump and pay to get rid of it. But my neighbor doesn’t care, he won’t listen to reason and now he’s ordering me to put the mattress back in the dumpster. He’s really rude and crazy and I think he has a long criminal history. How soon can you be here?

    911 operator: __________________________________________________________________________

    So what responce do you all think they’d have gotten if they had stayed inside and let the police handle things?

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      No. No. When they were threatening the psycho neighbor – Right there on the video! – the neighbor said “put away your guns and go home.”

      They could have went home, called 911, said the neighbor was threatening their lives, and that they need the police. Those two short sentences would get the cops there. Hell, they could have just called and demanded the cops and they would have sent them. Said their neighbor was violent and they need help. Cops would have arrived.

      INSTEAD…

      They confronted the neighbor, with guns in hand, shirtless, in a threatening manner (and guns in hand is threatening) and provoked him, knowing he was a hothead psycho, and then shot him when he predictably got out of hand.

      Nope! Prison time is happening. Watch and see.

  77. avatar MDH says:

    Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

  78. avatar Gralnok says:

    I’m noticing several people are saying that the Millers shouldn’t have left their house with their guns over a garbage dispute. Perhaps this would be true, if it was a first time offense. Muscle brains and his wife seem to have been repeat offenders, and not just with the trash. Given their history, and his propensity for shouting “I’M GONNA KILL YOU!” I think anybody would take some form of protection when going into a confrontation. Hell, if someone started vandalizing my car, I’d grab my gun and order them on the ground. Also, three feet? That’s way too close.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      Pyscho neighbor said – take your guns and go home. Fat boy skippy said – take your swing.

      They brought the fight to him, they egged him on, while standing there with guns in hand, and then they shot him when he assaulted them. Stand your ground is for defense, not offense. And they will pay for it in court. I’d make bets on it. Big bets.

      1. avatar Gralnok says:

        I would take those bets, except I honestly have no idea what sort of crap the justice system is full of, especially when justified self defense shootings, (not this one) will land an old man in jail simply for defending his life against an unarmed aggressor.

        As for this one, it’s justified. Orange shirt was shouting, threatening, he has a record, and was getting a weapon. Father and son were standing there, calmly responding to orange shirt’s threats. They weren’t taunting, they were just calmly telling him to back off.
        Pro Tip: If you’re harassing someone who has a gun drawn, but is responding calmly, it might be a sign they genuinely feel threatened, and are waiting for you to do something stupid.
        Most people would back off when a gun is drawn on them. This guy continued threatening, shouting, screaming at the father and son, who stood their ground and didn’t give an inch. They should be commended for not responding to the threats and screaming with threats and taunts of their own. Instead, they gave a clear warning to orange shirt, and his wife. Most likely the police were called. However, as we all know, the police response times for non-emergencies are greatly dependent on the drive thru times at the nearest Dunkin Doughnuts. Some police departments don’t even roll on such disputes, leaving the father and son to deal with it on their own.

        Oh, and for the record, not all people look decent when shit goes down.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I am still not getting this. Everybody seems to be working from a secret source of info, and all are different. Tell me where I’m wrong. Dead guy puts mattress in dumpster. No conflict. Later, fat guy removes mattress, puts it back on dead guy’s property. No conflict. Dead guy replaces it in dumpster. No conflict, so far there has been only one person at a time at the dumpster. Fat guy, again, removes mattress from dumpster, this time dead guy races to challenge him in a vehicle, emerges shouting commands and threats loud and violent enough that Fat Skippy responds with shotgun to back up Fat Dad. Soon after the video begins, all of this is prior. IOW, Fat Family does *not* march down to dumpster with drawn guns to confront dead guy, exactly the opposite. Dead guy races to intimidate and threaten the life of Fat Daddy, causing Fat but Rational Skippy to respond with a gun. Dead guy started the confrontation and was doubtlessly frustrated to discover he and his bat were not going to be able to just demand anything he liked, apparently causing a psychotic breakdown.

      1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        You would seem to be correct, Larry.

      2. avatar Aaron says:

        IMO, what you are missing is that the shirtless duo did not de-escalate, they made the situation worse.

        it might be hard to justify that you feared for your life when your side has two guns drawn and is taunting the other party with “go ahead, take a swing.”

  79. avatar Walter says:

    Shirtless Man 1 with gun : Calmly– Back off;;;; I doubt it::: back off …. I doubt it -if you come within 3 feet Im going to kill you… I doubt it.

    Orange man who is 6’7′ tall yells like a crazy person : Im going to kill you , your dead. Im going to get my bee bee gun and shoot nine bullets through your head..Im going to take your gun and shoot you in the head.. Im going kill you too you little faggot… Your dead… point the gun – shoot me..

    Outcome: I doubt its son – blew the mans head off.

    I was scared of orange just watching the video – I cant imagine being there. Not to mention – this guy could have easily targeted his neighbors in the future – had this confrontation ended. Death threats are always to taken seriously.

    THIS WAS SELF DEFENSE PERIOD.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      LOL!

      I would be in deep trouble, if I took my shirt off, slung my fat out, and then walked to your house (or the space between) with a gun in hand to argue about a trash can.

      The out of context, instantaneous moment they shot him – that was self defense. All the mistakes and laws broken that led up to it? That was not.

      If I stand at your driveway, next to your trash can, shirtless, gun in hand, waiting to have an altercation with your son (a known hothead), then beg him to take a swing at me, then shoot him when he does – That’s self defense! LOL

      Does it matter that I instigated a fight at our shared trash can? That you didn’t bring a fight to me, but I brought one to you?

      Does it matter that I walked around gun in hand in a threatening manner?

      Does it matter that when your son asked me to put the gun away and leave, I didn’t leave, but told him to take a swing?

      Context matters.

      Here is what it looks like to me. Two idiots, were planning on shooting the neighbor, and using “stand your ground” protections to do it.

      Stand your ground is for defense – not for riling up your psycho neighbor and then shooting him.

      If you are going to take a mans life, then you need to be the victim, and it doesn’t look like these guys are the victim, when they walk around shirtless with guns in hand threatening the neighbor (and carrying guns in hand is threatening!)

      1. avatar Jmr says:

        Anonymous your first paragraph…. that’s not what happened, you are an idiot.

        I hope to god no one ever has the misfortune of having you as a juror.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        You are not only making up the events, you’re also inventing new laws. None of it is The Truth.

  80. avatar Brad says:

    Its funny how people are trying to defend the orange shirt guy. First off he was breaking the law by throwing a bed in the trash. Second the old shirtless guy had already had his gun on him when the orange shirt came out and confronted him while he was removing the bed. If i was that old guy I would have drawn my gun too. Its pure idiocy to turn your back on a threat. Lets put it like this, if an officer had come over and taken the bed out and the orange shit guy acted like that the officer wouldn’t leave he wouldn’t back down. And then when orange shirt came at said officer with a bat he would get shot. The only problem about this is the son coming out with his shotgun and shooting after the father.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      I wonder if there had been prior history between
      the parties involved. Of course this could have been avoided.The victim was out of line and may be the bullying type as well as a bad neighbor. We just don’t know all the details. If someone comes at me with a bat having threatened my life multiple times I might have to shoot.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I can’t agree or disagree because I don’t know what Skippy was seeing when he fired, the video was no help. Have to listen to testimony. I’d also like to hear testimony of why Box was hanging with such a determined loser.

  81. avatar Edward Rogers says:

    I would really like to know the final outcome of this incident. Context is everything. My observations are a bit different than most:

    I find it disturbing that so many here are blatantly the predjudiced against the obese shooters. Isn’t one of the premises of gun ownership – to level the playing field? The weak have a fighting chance against the strong?

    The “fiance” directly contributed to her betrothed’s demise by not immediately calling 911.

    It may be that the mattress wasn’t the only trash out there, when it all went down. Maybe a jury can discern how many.

  82. avatar Maximus says:

    The problem I see with this situation is that the father and son made a big deal out of the mattress….I could have cared less about the mattress…..as long as it wasn’t a weekly thing which I highly doubt he was dumping a mattress every week. They came armed because they knew they would infuriate the guy in the orange shirt with their actions and knew how he would react. They should have called the county or police and let them handle the situation but instead they confront the guy and start a huge argument. Yes, the guy is loud and threating but father and son should have walked away but instead you hear the father say “take a swing at me” almost like he was bating the guy so he could shoot him……..all are in the wrong and father and son should spend some time in jail for provoking the entire situation.

  83. avatar Gralnok says:

    I just noticed something. For all the people taking either the side of the father and son, or the side if the crazy orange shirt guy and his wife, nobody is taking the time to talk about the mattress! How dare you all just give up on a mattress like that! You don’t know what it’s been through, what it’s opinions on the matter are. Think of how it feels, being the catalyst for all this chaos! Not every mattress can bounce back from something like this!
    #mattresslivesmatter.

  84. avatar Rememberlexingtonandconcord says:

    Don’t want to seem callous in any way, but this shooting just gave the Liberal Left more ammunition to argue for more gun control. It was a stupid and worthless argument which I believe all parties involved now strongly regret.

    The price was heavily paid by the man shot, but all of us that love our 2A rights will pay the price, more or less.

    1. avatar BDM-Brat says:

      ^ This sums it up perfectly.

    2. avatar Aaron says:

      3 despicable people clashed over a triviality, and all 3 have already or soon will pay greatly.

      And you are correct – the armed men just put our rights in jeopardy.

  85. avatar Aaron says:

    ALL 3 of them escalated the conflict.

    The shirtless old man kept egging on the orange shirt man by statments such as “go ahead, take a swing” and “get within 3 feet of me and i’m going to kill you”. The younger shirtless man traded insults with the orange shirted man.

    The orange shirted man clearly had anger control issues screaming threats and insults, and stupidly throwing a bat, at two armed persons.

    Everyone involved acted despicably, and all are either dead or will be ruined for life.

  86. avatar Pan Pan says:

    I could not see anyone with a bat. However, bat or no bat, the man with the pistol stopped any threat. The man with the shotgun shot after the fact, committing cold-blooded murder and he should be executed. In addition, anyone that would protect a mattress in a trashcan, with a gun, is a danger to society and should be removed. They would both be f*ck*d if I was on the jury.

    1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      You can see the bat hit the elder Miller right in the video! What’s wrong with your eyes???

      “The man with the shotgun shot after the fact, committing cold-blooded murder and he should be executed.”

      Or he fired to prevent the deceased from attacking again.

      “In addition, anyone that would protect a mattress in a trashcan, with a gun, is a danger to society and should be removed.”

      You are right. Why was Howard insisting the mattress go into the trashcan when that is against city law?

  87. avatar Hans says:

    How bias was the reporting: Anchor said “senseless crime” and
    the reporteree kept referring to it as a murder.

    More fake news.

  88. avatar John says:

    Maybe it be best to be wearing a shirt.

  89. avatar Wheel Gun Guy says:

    The digusting Miller fat bodies will most certainly will have their day in court…..they will be on their own to pay for any attorney fees which can run well over $250,000 …..no one had the mantle of innocence once all weapons were brandished…..not one of these idiots made any attempt to diffuse or de-escalate the situation and it appeared no one made a call to 911 while all this was going on …the younger Miller fat body went to the house to retrieve a shot gun instead of a cell phone just made matters worse for their (Miller’s) cause…..I just don’t see any jurisdiction anywhere in the US that would not prosecute the Millers for their actions….they will be convicted by a jury for at least manslaughter and may serve a minimum of 6 years in prison each….that is the absolute best they can hope for assuming they can afford the best legal defense possible and they will certainly lose their guns rights forever.

  90. avatar JOHNNY DALE CRAWLEY says:

    Idiot #1 Walk away from 2 men with guns. Don’t dare them to shoot you.
    Idiots #2 It’s trash in the alley, not on your property. Walk away from crazy people.

  91. avatar RS says:

    One of the common themes I’ve seen throughout many of the questionable shooting stories TTAG posts, people (not you or me, of course) tend to put themselves at more- and unnecessary -risk than what they would have had they not been armed in the first place. In effect, they place themselves in situations that increase the possibility for stupidity to occur for no good reason.

    Disarmed, would these guys have approached a person wielding a baseball bat over a mattress? No, because this is dumb. You know it, I know it, but carrying a firearm increases your confidence and sometimes even lowers your IQ. The same goes for motorcycle chick a few stories back. Guy gets out of his truck to confront said chick on a sport bike. Without a firearm, chances are you’re not going to dismount and confront the alleged crazy guy, but wait! You have a gun! …And immediately decide to place yourself in a position where you might have to use it, just because you have it when the sane option would have been to walk/drive away.

    Don’t be these people. Pretend you don’t have the gun until you absolutely need it. Don’t make your encounter the self-fulfilling prophesy of using the gun because you have the gun. If you would have walked away from a situation for being without a sidearm, chances are you should still walk away even if you are carrying.

  92. avatar Mister Fleas says:

    Here is the deceased’s arrest record:

    https://arrestfacts.com/Aaron-Howard-5U2k54

    Scumbag, he was. A lot of victimless crimes, but also a lot of criminal mischief, trespassing, theft, and some assault as well.

    1. avatar MSq'dI says:

      In other words, it was a Justified Murder (i.e. Purging) of someone that Shirtless Guy deemed to be a Threat to Society. I hope Shirtless Father and Son fare equally as well in the Texas Prison System…

  93. avatar Darrell Hart says:

    It is pretty clear from hundreds of comments, that there is a wide range of opinions as to the legality/illegality of the confrontation. I seriously doubt that any prosecutor could get a jury to return a guilty verdict since it requires unanimity of the jurors to convict.

  94. avatar Steve Czulewicz says:

    Poor handling of the situation.
    Threats were made but this could have been easily deescalated. I do not see justification for deadly use of force.
    Certainly a case study in how, when and where to to deploy deadly force.

  95. avatar BRUCE CLARK says:

    The two whites had the advantage as they were both armed and there were two to one. How was it their business confronting the black man throwing trash out into a public alley behind their house. The two white men were totally at fault and the only ones that could have walked away. It was their duty to retreat. I think a 1st degree murder charge is a streach but, at the very least they’re both looking at 20 years in jail. They are an embarrassment to all legal gun owners, they are the reason the left wants everyone disarmed. A totally senseless act of disregard of life.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email