what do you guys think of this story?
 

I have mixed feeling, sure do understand it though... be hard not to react the same way :2 cents:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-dad-a...ry?id=18477907

A Texas father, who watched a drunk driver strike and kill his two young sons, has been charged with murder after allegedly shooting the driver in the head moments after the accident.

David Barajas, 31, was charged with murder on Monday, more than two months after his sons David Jr., 12, and Caleb, 11, were killed steps from their home on a rural road outside Houston on Dec. 7.

Bond was set at $450,000, police said.

Barajas and his sons were pushing the family's disabled pickup truck toward their home late that night, as the boys' mother and two younger siblings sat inside, according to a police report released by the Brazoria County Sheriff's Department.

They were struck by Jose Banda, 20, the driver of a Chevy Malibu, instantly killing David Jr. and critically injuring Caleb, who later died at a hospital.

"Banda was determined to be intoxicated at the time of the crash," police said in their report.

When cops arrived on the scene, they noticed something else about Banda. He had been shot in the head. But they could not immediately find the murder weapon.

"Investigators recovered a projectile from inside of the vehicle that Jose Banda's was shot in. Investigators were unable to match that projectile to a weapon because no weapons were recovered at the scene," according the sheriff's department.

Witnesses at the scene watched Barajas walk to his home and allegedly retrieve the gun with which he shot Banda, according to a police report. When police searched the home, they found a pistol holster and ammunition, but no firearm.

"Investigators are currently awaiting results of gunshot residue tests which were collected at the scene," police said. On Friday, a grand jury found there was enough evidence that Barajas could be charged.

According to authorities, he does not yet have an attorney.

"It really hurt a lot of us," Jose Roman, a family friend of Barajas, told ABC affiliate KTRK-TV about the death of the boys and the indictment of their father.

The boys, both fans of the Houston Texans, were buried last month. Many of the mourners at their funeral wore Texans jerseys.

But the family of the slain driver believes justice must be done.

"It was an accident. He didn't purposely do that,' Janie Tellez told KTRK. "Whoever did it is getting away with murdering my nephew. He deserves justice."

I say fuck drunk drivers and alcoholics in general. I used to do it too, really glad I only hit trees and decided it was time to grow the fuck up. I still don't even own a car, 7 years later.

It can't be called an "accident", because the guy chose to drink and drive. Also, the father should claim some of the blame for the event because he was pushing a disabled truck down the road with his family inside. If that isn't a recipe for an accident, then what is?

Even if the weapon was registered, people can't go around dispensing their own capital punishment. He should go to jail for the rest of his life, because we definitely don't need a guy like that among us.

What if you cut him off in traffic? Is he going to pop one if your head for that too?

two wrongs don't make a right. he should be charged with murder.

he should be given a fucking medal and a few boxes of ammo!

I would probably do the same thing. Can't imagine the emotions that could pour through you at a time like that. Wouldn't be surprised if they claim temporary insanity or something.

If the father shot and killed the drunk driver, he's committed murder. Two rights do not make a wrong.

Temporary insanity or irresistible impulse would be slam dunks for the poor father.

Texas Insanity Law:

http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/8.01.00.html

"§ 8.01. INSANITY. (a) It is an affirmative defense to
prosecution that, at the time of the conduct charged, the actor, as a result of severe mental disease or defect, did not know that his conduct was wrong.
(b) The term "mental disease or defect" does not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct."

Irresistible Impulse:

http://insanityplea.umwblogs.org/sta...-impulse-test/

"The Irresistible Impulse test made its debut in America in 1844 when a man named Abner Rodger stabbed and murdered a prison warden in the prison where he was being held. His only defense was that he was insane during the actual stabbing. However, the chief justice judging the trial was stated to the jury:

?If then it is proved, to the satisfaction of the jury, that the mind of the accused was in a diseased and unsound state, the question will be, whether the disease existed to so high a degree, that for the time being it overwhelmed the reason, conscience, and judgement, and whether the prisoner?acted from an irresistible and incontrollable impulse. If so, then the act was not the act of a voluntary agent, but the involuntary act of the body, without the concurrence of a mind directing it.? (Commonwealth v. Rodgers, 1844, p. 502)

The Chief Justice Shaw elaborated by concluding his statement being letting the jury know that if this is the case that Rodger would not be held responsible for his criminal acts. The jury found Rodgers not guilty by reason of insanity. This test that acquitted Rodgers of his crime involved knowing right from wrong but being unable to stop from committing the ?wrong? act. In 1897, The Supreme Court adopted the Irresistible Impulse test and thus rejectingthe M?Naghten Rule out completely(Garrison, 1998).

However, there there was a problem with the Irresistible Impulse Test: it failed to differentiate between the impulse that cannot be resisted and the impulse that was not resisted. There was a still a remnant of vagueness due to being unable to truly know what a person committing the act is really thinking in the moment. Despite this, the test has still remained in the United States court system and has been used (Garrison, 1998).

A well-known case in which this irresistible Impulse test was used was the case of Lorena Bobbitt in 1994 where she was found not guilty when her defense used the Irresistible Impulse.

Bobbitt was tried because she cut off her husband?s penis one night after he returned home drunk from a party and had then raped her (Bell, 2010). This trial highly publicized the Irresistible Impulse Test due to the enormous amount of publicity this case had received during its time."

:2 cents:

the father was really a moron in this situation, the kids could of been hit if the driver was drunk or sober

"authorities say plowed into his sons as they helped push their family’s broken-down pickup truck along a dark, narrow, rural road."

what was this idiot thinking putting his kids in danager like that? most likely the vehicle had no working lights as they were pushing it.

Very true.

fuck you guys. kill the guy that caused it, then kill yourself instead of dealing with the pain of loosing two children because you couldn't afford a decent vehicle.

I figured you pop in with that homeboy.... somebody kills your kids right in front of you, you call 911? the gov wasted a lot of money making you a marine :2 cents:

jesus christ what to say...

sure but did the accident occur because the driver was intoxicated or the fathers lack of judgement of having his kids push a car down a dark rural road? just because a driver was "intoxicated" which could mean anything over the legal limit, it doesn't mean he was drunk doesn't mean that the accident wouldn't of happened anyways. the father could of probably beat the shit out of the guy and got away with it but he had to go all the way and commit murder.

good point... my initial reaction would of been to do the same or at least do something irrational, but eventually I would agree with what you say