Jump to content
Sam

Joe McKnight

Recommended Posts

Last night at dinner my wife and I were talking about us living in New Orleans as opposed to Richmond. I told her I was happy in Richmond and did not miss all of the NOLA turmoil that occurs daily and have no plans of living out my last years in NOLA.

 

Now, Joe McKnight was shot and killed in Terrytown (across from NOLA in Algiers) from a road rage incident.

 

All I can remember about Joe, the number one high school running back from John Curtis High School, is that he spurned LSU and went to Southern Cal where he had injuries and other problems. He never lived up to his billing in the NFL and last I heard he was playing in the Canadian Football League.

 

It is always sad when a life is lost in a violent manner over something as dumb as a traffic altercation.

 

RIP, Joe.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, the shooter was already released with no charges filed.

Louisiana has a stand your ground law that apparently makes it easier for people to get away with blatant murder, though im not sure it applies to this case or not.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/12/02/louisiana-law-make-it-easy-for-citizens-to-shoot-to-kill/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! I knew Louisiana had a "stand your ground" law but this is the first time I have read about it being used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry for the loss of this young man. 

Stating  '"stand your ground' makes it easier to get away with blatant murder", shows a lack of understanding. The article (and NBC sports) quoted has a serious anti-gun agenda. Attacking someone who cuts you off in traffic is a dangerous thing in any state.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people should wait to draw conclusions until the details are known. The very fact that the shooter was released speaks volumes to me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, roadwarrior said:

I think people should wait to draw conclusions until the details are known. The very fact that the shooter was released speaks volumes to me.

  A point to ponder?  The shooter attacked another man at the same intersection for reporting his erratic driving a few years back?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nickles said:

  A point to ponder?  The shooter attacked another man at the same intersection for reporting his erratic driving a few years back?

If this guy is guilty of bad judgement and an aggressive attitude then he is probably in for a well deserved bad time. He was in his car when the shooting took place. He was legally carrying a firearm. I will let the professionals decide if he acted properly. Shooting an aggressive attacker if you are in fear of your life is not a crime, and should not be.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2016 at 5:20 PM, K_Mac said:

I am sorry for the loss of this young man. 

Stating  '"stand your ground' makes it easier to get away with blatant murder", shows a lack of understanding. The article (and NBC sports) quoted has a serious anti-gun agenda. Attacking someone who cuts you off in traffic is a dangerous thing in any state.

additional information:

profootballtalk or PFT is basically just hosted on NBC Sports, sure they make money on it but thats not the point here. PFT couldnt handle the volume of traffic it gets on its own server, NBC offered to partner up with PFT owner, Mike Florio, to help fix said problems and make money of course. PFT, otherwise is still completely independent in what its able to post and write in its content, that was part of the deal when they partnered up. Also, owner Mike Florio is a lawyer himself, so i think he knows a little bit about the law and understands things better than most non-lawyers would. That being said, im also sure he has his own beliefs about guns.

But moving on to this McKnight case and the stand your ground law, more info is now available. That law can be a problem in cases like this, also complicating matters and the law wanting to be fair and impartial, a former deputy in the department handling the investigation had a part in bringing up/raising McKnight, creating a supposed conflict of interest. The shooter has since been arrested on manslaughter charges. Also, you have one of the actual witnesses who told three different stories in one hour about what supposedly happened. Apparently, McKnight cut the shooter off, the shooter followed him, McKnight stopped and exited his vehicle, approached the shooters car and had some words, then got shot. Thats according to the department handling the investigation. How accurate that is, I cant say for sure, its just whats being reported, and some speculation from Florio of PFT, who suggests that the sheriff and his department may not be fit to properly handle the investigation.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/12/06/sheriff-explains-joe-mcknight-shooting-with-another-bizarre-press-conference/

im not sure what to make of all this myself, seems like there is more going on than has been reported so far...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Red Bear there is enough evidence for charges against the shooter to have been made. I said from the beginning that this was possible. With that said, a stand your ground law simply means you have no responsibility to run for your life when lethal force, or the threat of lethal force is used against you. You have the right to "stand your ground" to defend yourself.

I don't know anything about PFT or care to, though I know plenty about NBC's position on guns. What I do know is any "news" organization that makes that statement about "stand your ground" obviously has an anti-gun agenda, and regardless of credentials, is more concerned with that than the law, the Second Amendment, or the Constitution.

A young man is dead here and the law will decide who is responsible. In any case it is a tragedy. This is not the forum to make inflammatory comments about guns and gun control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shooter has been charged, looks like they were just buying time to make sure they had a case since he was cooperating. If the person isn't a flight risk it's safer to go that route than toss them in jail and be under a time limit to file charges. No conspiracy here.

Sad story though, we just had one up in this area where a guy kidnapped, robbed, and murdered another guy over a road rage incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This story is a sad reminder of where we've fallen to as a society where common sense and courtesy are no longer the norm. Why is it so difficult for grown men to act like grown men? Not everything should be taken as a personal attack.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2016 at 11:18 PM, K_Mac said:

Red Bear there is enough evidence for charges against the shooter to have been made. I said from the beginning that this was possible. With that said, a stand your ground law simply means you have no responsibility to run for your life when lethal force, or the threat of lethal force is used against you. You have the right to "stand your ground" to defend yourself.

I don't know anything about PFT or care to, though I know plenty about NBC's position on guns. What I do know is any "news" organization that makes that statement about "stand your ground" obviously has an anti-gun agenda, and regardless of credentials, is more concerned with that than the law, the Second Amendment, or the Constitution.

A young man is dead here and the law will decide who is responsible. In any case it is a tragedy. This is not the forum to make inflammatory comments about guns and gun control.

I havent really stated any personal opinion i may have in this thread. I'm just adding to the details as they come out. As far as what certain news outlets may believe in, thats not what this is about or what im making it about, its what you seem to be making it about though. PFT is a football source i read everyday, McKnight being a former football player, theyre covering the story. Mike Florio, the owner of PFT, and also a lawyer, is the one writing the information that i am passing on. He is not your typical NBC news anchor or reporter or writer or whatever. PFT is still his site and he still maintains full control over it despite it being hosted on NBC. PFT cares about stuff related to football, he wouldnt be writing about it if some random joe shmoe was shot. He is also looking at it from all legal perspectives and possibilities. PFT is basically a blog, aside from breaking an occasional football story, almost all of their articles are based on stuff they gather from other media covering the story and they credit them with a link. PFT sources are not strictly from NBC. I explained most of this above, i dont know what youre not getting.

If you want to make this into a debate about a news networks political stance on gun control, then the mods might as well shut this thread down right now.

If you want to talk about Joe McKnights shooting death, then please stick to that and the facts being reported. There are other news outlets you can go to for information if you choose not to believe the facts that PFT are reporting(that theyre getting from other news outlets as well).

So anyways, the stand your ground thing is a relevant part of the investigation. If not investigated, then how do you know if that law is applicable in this case or not? It was simply stated that it could possibly come into play by PFT, never that it was the actual case one way or the other.

Also, now there is going to be a third autopsy conducted on McKnights body to gain further information. Stuff like the angle the shots were fired from, McKnights position and distance in relation to the vehicle the shots were fired from when they were fired, and other forensic type stuff like that. Louisiana's laws probably makes this case more complicated than it has to be, yet at the same time may create a situation where a more complete investigation is needed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2016 at 11:49 AM, Red Bear said:

 

Louisiana has a stand your ground law that apparently makes it easier for people to get away with blatant murder, though im not sure it applies to this case or not.

Red Bear, I do not intend to argue with you. My response was to your above inflammatory statement. To quote Forrest Gump, "That's all I have to say about that."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, K_Mac said:

Red Bear, I do not intend to argue with you. My response was to your above inflammatory statement. To quote Forrest Gump, "That's all I have to say about that."

Its not my intentions to argue either, im just debating, no malicious intent here, if i came off that way i apologize, i just didnt want this to turn into a political debate about a news networks beliefs on gun control, PFT is a site i frequent and therefore im using them as a source.

As for the statement above, im not sure if you read the article, or even the headline in the link to the article, but thats why i posted the PFT thought that the stand your ground law could be a factor, and makes it easier to get away with blatant murder. The only personal thought of mine in what you quoted there was that i myself am not sure if the law is applicable or not. I do tend to agree with PFTs take though. And i will explain why. In the McKnight case there are witnesses that can help corroborate what may have happened(if they tell the truth, and not multiple different stories as reported). In this case it can help law enforcement conducting the investigation help determine if the law is applicable or not, as the shooter has claimed he felt threatened and it was self defense. Now heres why i tend to agree with PFT(who was just speculating to begin with) and the idea that it actually is possible to use that law to get away with blatant murder. If there are no witnesses around, you can murder someone outright, plant a knife in their hand or by their body, claim they came at you, you were in fear of getting stabbed/cut up, so you stood your ground and justifiably defended yourself and shot and killed them. In Louisiana's case, courts and jurys cant hold it against you that you just didnt run to safety. How is anyone going to know if youre lying or not? An investigation may not be able to prove a person is lying in my scenario. To me, it seems the law has a few loopholes, and any scrutinization of it is justified...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2016 at 7:40 AM, Red Bear said:

 Now heres why i tend to agree with PFT(who was just speculating to begin with) and the idea that it actually is possible to use that law to get away with blatant murder. If there are no witnesses around, you can murder someone outright, plant a knife in their hand or by their body, claim they came at you, you were in fear of getting stabbed/cut up, so you stood your ground and justifiably defended yourself and shot and killed them. In Louisiana's case, courts and jurys cant hold it against you that you just didnt run to safety. How is anyone going to know if youre lying or not? An investigation may not be able to prove a person is lying in my scenario. To me, it seems the law has a few loopholes, and any scrutinization of it is justified...

If there's no witness you can do that in any state. "He chased me or blocked me from running so I shot him." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Crappiebasser said:

If there's no witness you can do that in any state. "He chased me or blocked me from running so I shot him." 

its a lot easier when you have a law that enables one to shoot another person knowing the law will protect them

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Red Bear said:

its a lot easier when you have a law that enables one to shoot another person knowing the law will protect them

You just won't leave it alone. The above statement is complete nonsense. Murder is illegal in all 50 states. Any self-defense shooting is subject to legal review to determine if the use of lethal force was justified and necessary. "Stand your ground" does nothing to change that. 

As is shown by this case, a person cannot escalate an encounter to violence and then claim lethal force was justified to end it. It appears he was not justified in his use of lethal force because of his actions leading up to it. What happened here has nothing to do with "stand your ground". 

Our system of government is founded on our right to defend our freedom, and the 2A guarantees our ability to do that. Your continued insistence that "stand your ground" makes "blatant murder" possible is offensive to every one of us who take our Constitutional right and responsibility to self-defense seriously. Using this case to show why we should not be allowed exercise this right is like using a poaching case to condemn fishing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, K_Mac said:

You just won't leave it alone. The above statement is complete nonsense. Murder is illegal in all 50 states. Any self-defense shooting is subject to legal review to determine if the use of lethal force was justified and necessary. "Stand your ground" does nothing to change that. 

As is shown by this case, a person cannot escalate an encounter to violence and then claim lethal force was justified to end it. It appears he was not justified in his use of lethal force because of his actions leading up to it. What happened here has nothing to do with "stand your ground". 

Our system of government is founded on our right to defend our freedom, and the 2A guarantees our ability to do that. Your continued insistence that "stand your ground" makes "blatant murder" possible is offensive to every one of us who take our Constitutional right and responsibility to self-defense seriously. Using this case to show why we should not be allowed exercise this right is like using a poaching case to condemn fishing.

you mustve missed the part where i said i didnt know if stand you ground was applicable in this case. but if you dont think law enforcement is looking at all possibilities in this case, including stand your ground, then i think thats a bit naive on your part. it was even mentioned by law enforcement themselves. also, i stand by my other comments as well.  im not going to sit here and argue with you about this anymore. as you dont seem to understand that im mostly just sharing information ive read in the media, and ive said that all along, yet you keep wanting to attribute it all to me. i dont see you sharing anything relevant to the case yourself...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're done here.  This is a fishing site.  Carry on....peaceably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • fishing

    fishing forum

    fishing rods

    fishing reels

    fishing

    bass fish

    fish for bass
    fish

×