ONLY Han shot plus Greedo was really stupid

I think about this subject from time to time and chuckle at the various "discussions" especially the "Han Shot First" memes.  In reality, the accurate phrase should be "Only Han Shot" or "Greedo Was Stupid".  Here are the points to prove my assertion:

1. Greedo prevents Han from leaving the cantina at gun point

2. Greedo does not disarm Han

3. Greedo directs Han to sit in a booth and keeps the gun trained on Han

4. Han slouches in his seat and assumes a relaxed posture, concealing his gun below the table

5. Conversation between Greedo and Han continues.  Greedo keeps the gun trained on Han.  Han looks up and to the left while speaking as well as moves left hand idly to distract from right hand motion.

6. Han releases gun from holster and draws the gun below the table

7. Greedo makes statement indicating he is about to kill Han ("That's the idea. I've been looking forward to this for a long time." in response to Han saying "Over my dead body")

8. Han fires and kills Greedo

Mistake #1: Point 2

Mistake #2: Point 4

Mistake #3: Point 6

Only Han shot AND Greedo was stupid 

(QED)

"Change the law" argument

Changing the law should not be the go to answer to society's problems.  This ignores the personal responsibility everyone should have.  Reduce prison populations and adjust sentencing simply because demographic group A, B or C is disproportionately represented (as many people argue) is a horrible idea and does not address the underlying problem. The only question that should be asked is if the law is in line with the Constitution. Any considerations beyond that should come after the behavior of demographic group A, B or C is evaluated.

In other words, to quote Jim Carrey from Liar, Liar, "Stop breaking the law, @$$hole!"

So much uproar recently

So many high-profile cases have dropped all at once, some overlapping each other.  In one that has so many very intelligent people on different sides of the issue, it is very interesting to evaluate the perspectives as a way to see how someone views other issues.

This shooting in Lubbock, TX, between Kyle Carruth and Chad Reid is as clear as mud depending on who is doing the explanation.  I was watching VivaFrei's sidebar with Andrew Branca and Robert Barnes and it was interesting seeing the differing points of view.  There were good points made on both sides of the discussion.

To address what Andrew was saying, which was not an unreasonable assessment; I don't believe that it's reasonable to think that the encounter was over when Kyle was tossed off the porch, and Chad was feet away (6, 8, 10, it doesn't ultimately matter) when viewing all the various parts of the encounter as a whole. This is where much of the disagreement occurs for this case. 

If Kyle had not fired when he did there was a very good possibility (I would argue it was a certainty based on what happened up to this point) that Chad would have charged Kyle again to take the gun away and use it on Kyle or simply beat Kyle, possibly to death. What Kyle believed at the time is what matters rather than our assessment after the fact. Here are the relevant things I see when watching the videos.

• Kyle was entitled to produce his gun and demand Chad leave since he did not comply the first time he was told to leave. Bringing out a gun on your own property is legal in Texas. Kyle does not brandish it or use it in a threatening way. He holds it at high ready when he emerges and demands that Chad leave.
• Chad escalated the situation by not leaving and threatened to take the gun and kill Kyle while Chad charged up to Kyle.
• Kyle fired a warning shot which appeared to be an attempt to de-escalate and make Chad back off which we see did not work. This could be an indication of an initial unwillingness to kill, but that feeling changes later.
• Chad escalated the situation by grabbing the gun and tossed Kyle off the porch while failing to obtain the gun in the process.  It is entirely possible Kyle had an "Oh sh**!" moment while flying through the air and became afraid for his life.
• When Kyle fired, he was landing from the toss and regaining his footing. It appeared to be the first opportunity for a clean shot and prevent Chad from continuing the encounter, i.e., neutralize the threat.
• Chad, at every chance, indicated he was going to continue the encounter if he had the chance in which case, it is reasonable to believe Kyle was in fear of his life.

TL; DR 

Chad threatened to drag everyone into court before Kyle appeared with the gun. Why didn't he storm off and follow through with that? Of course, this tragedy didn't have to happen, but it did because someone didn't control himself.