DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Texas mom shoots man trying to take car with her kids inside at gas station: 'I hope that woke him up'

Texas mom shoots man trying to take car with her kids inside at gas station: 'I hope that woke him up'

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/05/tex...oke-him-up.html

A Texas mother said she didn’t think twice about shooting a would-be carjacker when the man jumped into her vehicle at a Dallas gas station while her two sons were in the backseat.

Michelle Booker-Hicks was at the Shell station along Interstate 35 around 10 p.m. Wednesday when Ricky Wright, 36, attempted to steal her vehicle while she was paying her gas bill, police said. Booker-Hicks told FOX4 Dallas her two sons, ages 2 and 4, were sitting in the backseat at the time.

“I proceeded to jump in my backseat and told the gentleman to stop, to get out the car. He would not get out of the car. He turned around and looked at me. I reached over the armrest to get my glove compartment and that’s when I fired at him once I got the gun from my glove compartment,” Booker-Hicks recalled to the news station.

Booker-Hicks shot Wright in the face while he was allegedly trying to drive away. He crashed the vehicle into the fence.

“I’m not a killer but I do believe in defending what’s mine,” the mother of two said. “I hope that woke him up.”

Wright was arrested and taken to the hospital for treatment. He is expected to face charges including kidnapping and the unauthorized use of a motor vehicle or carjacking.

Booker-Hicks and her children were not injured in the incident.

Good for her. I saw this on Twitter..

Thankfully that happened in Texas.
If it had happened on the East Coast,instead of a hero that woman would be in jail.

Why do you say that? She was in fear of her children's lives she had just cause.

She also had a loaded weapon in her glovebox.
CCP's are extremely,extremely difficult to secure in most,if not all,East Coast states.
Let me amend that to read from Virginia north.
As I have no experience in the southern states.

Pretty certain that you don't need a CCW to have a gun in your car, in Georgia.

Again I have zero knowledge of the southern states.
But,a loaded hand gun in the glovebox would be the very definition of a concealed weapon.

Well had she lived in those States requiring a CCW maybe should would have gotten one who knows.

No, she wouldn't. He'd be in jail all the same. She was well within her rights and did a great job.

I don't understand leaving 2 young kids alone in a car though.

Here is a story that proves your claim:



Some of our laws are simply stupid!

Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

When you want the police to take care of every minor inconvenience and to serve all your needs, you begin to make laws to punish people for acting independent of them.

When you are more concerned about the health and welfare of the attacker than the rights of the victim.. you begin to make laws to punish people for acting independent of them.

Completely. We've became entirely way too litigious as a society. The victim might flip the script and injure their attacker? Sounds risky. The police should take care of it instead. That's why we have them after all. They are the 'official channel' and are trained to handle these situations so they will do so in the best way and reduce our collective liability.

Thanks Vers.
I figured most people on here had no idea what I was talking about and I didn't feel the need to waste time and energy on something so trivial as our Constitutional Rights.

Good thoughts, guys. I really want to get on my soapbox about litigation and laws, but I doubt anyone wants to hear it. Thanks to you guys for pointing out some of the things that bother me.

Go for it. It beats reading whatever article Vambo will post over the next 2 days.

Thanks bro.

I won't go full beast mood, but just stick my toes in the water and see what y'all think. I'll add more later if need be, but would love to hear more from you folks who are more educated about such things than I am.

I'll start by saying that I think the majority of Americans are not looking to use litigation as a means to make money. We get hurt, we swear, we suck it up, and we move on while perhaps b******** a bit.

I want the above point to be understood. I am NOT saying that most Americans are litigious.

However, we all know people who go out and slam on their brakes when a car is close behind them during the first snow of the year. We all know of people who fall on a wet spot and sue. We have heard of people who sue over a fence perhaps crossing a property line. On and on and on.

I think that's a problem because I've read that litigation costs our economy 2 percent of the GNP. That's significant. Translated, that leads to the loss of roughly 2.5 million jobs.

I want to go on, but I'll stop there so it won't be overwhelming and so I can see what others have to say. I have more information if needed.

I would love to hear some of our more intelligent posters give their thoughts. I want to educate others on this thread, but I also want to be educated. I'm sure several of you know more about it than I do.

You're up, CHS.

I don't think Americans are naturally litigious, and I think that you are right that most people are not looking to sue people.

I've really never considered the economic impact of this extra legal society. I always wondered about the societal impacts and changes to our group psychology when it comes to the law. What happens down the line when people are taught to call the cops to handle every situation? Which at best, can lead to middle aged women calling the cops on kids selling water on a street. If we view the government, and industries in general, as the be all end all of all of our societal issues, how far can we lean on that? I jokingly like to think that the American future is just feudalism where the King is whoever the CEO is of that day. Most people already rely on their employment for health insurance. Companies in the silicon valley are counteracting the housing crisis up there by buying and operating apartments for their employees. What else can we rely on capitalism for? Perhaps food? I notice that whenever I walk into an office now, I cannot only smell stale coffee, but usually the office has some sort of catered sandwiches or healthy snacks for employees so they do not go out of the office for lunch. Again, I truly think that we'll get corporations providing us a soviet style life in the future.

But to quickly consider the economics side, there was a pretty good book that came out a few years ago called, Bullcrap Jobs. The book isn't actually titled 'bullcrap' but I don't want to be banned. Anyway, the book was all about how middle management positions, especially those in the legal field, were completely useless. Not only did they not add anything of note to society, but that their daily work could be done in 2 hours, but they were working 8-10 hour days. There's actually a story in the book where a young employee brings this up to her boss and her boss says never to talk about it again. Like it is a secret that they don't contribute to society. To bring it back specifically to legal work, I always thought that lawyers were the most unneeded part of any society. Their only role in the world is to keep up the facade that is our legal system and they're paid beautifully for it. However, I have a question about our need for them. If all the lawyers and trash collectors were beamed up by aliens and were no longer on this earth, which disappearance would we notice first? How long could we go without one or the other?

I don't think folks are going out looking for reasons to sue either.. well, most folks...

I honestly think that lawyers are largely to blame, not for the lawsuits but for the amounts.. So you have a tool, the tool malfunctions and it cuts you badly.. you end up in the ER, you get stitches, you have to miss a week of work.. so all in this incident costs you $15,000 out of pocket... so you talk to a lawyer about suing for damages and suddenly the lawyer has worked up the number and you are suing them for $3.5 million. Y'know, pain and suffering and all..

As for you analogy about the old woman calling the cops on the kids selling water on the street.. sadly folks are afraid to approach other people and act like adults.. My daughter had a field trip a couple years ago and when they returned in 5 coach busses, it was mass confusion of parents picking up their kids.. one lady ended up parked in the middle of it.. one kid standing in front of her car asked another kid to grab his backpack as it was unloaded.. the kid picked it up and basically slid it across the hood of this womans car. You could hear the zipper dragging across her hood. She put her window down and, relatively calmly, asked the kid why he did that.. it was careless. Just then the kids mom shows up and asks the woman in the car what happened and she told her.. the kids mom starts SCREAMING at the mom in the car for even addressing her kid... my dad would have let them whoop my arse if I did that to somebody else's car... People don't always call cops and lawyers because they expect them or even want them to handle things... they do it because it's scary to address other people about what should be simple easily resolved issues.

Next point.. SAS is a local company here, always ranks high nationally in best places to work.. it's a software company with a campus in Cary, NC.. they have restaurants/cafeterias on site, fitness centers, day care, even primary healthcare.. there is literally no reason to leave, they have all of your daily needs taken care of on campus.. It is kind of scary how bigger companies are slowly taking over the lives of their employees under the guise of making things more convenient for us..

Good post that I have been wanting to respond to for a few days now. I too have seen many of the conveniences you mentioned (and more) in my company and have read of them in others. I think there is a gain to be had by both company and employee and I have successfully used these benefits to my advantage thus far, but I am absolutely aware of how this can evolve into the "Soviet" lifestyle you mentioned.

Companies are looking to compete and attract talent at this stage. Speaking from experience, many larger companies have adapted their recruiting strategy to appeal to millennials that otherwise seek or desire the lifestyle offered by many tech firms in Silicon Valley. In my opinion the key thing to ensure that this does not get out of hand is to remember that balance is the key. This counterweight needs to come largely from employees. So long as millennials (and successive generations) push for flexibility and work/life balance they can enjoy the perks being offered without becoming too dependent upon them. For example, despite bringing in doctors for on-site wellness exams, I always go to my doctor's office every year. There is no push back from management to save time (or the sick day I often take) by doing it on-site.

I consider my work ethic to be strong, but I learned a long time ago that the hard work mantra is largely corporate rhetoric. I could do 200% of the quota/goal for the year, but at my performance review inevitably my goal for the following year will be to increase my productivity to 220%. I absolutely understand why this happens, and management shouldn't necessarily settle for current production output, but my point is that its up to me to balance my work/life schedule (as best I can given constraints) since with few exceptions, companies will let you do as much extra work as you want. Not to toot my own horn again, but I have been offered promotions twice now and have passed on both. I recognized that the freedom/time I was giving up is not worth the extra compensation at this point, for me.

This is a great topic that I have thought much about over the years and would love to continue to discuss and get your viewpoints on. I don't think capitalism is the problem here (yet), but again I recognize how this could get out of hand at some point. For now, I enjoyably reap the benefits. I feel debt and societal expectations also lend to the corporate takeover you discussed. Debt is probably the single biggest control you can have over the general population as far as I am concerned. Also, loved the remark about the trash collectors and lawyers and will definitely be using that one.

**Disclaimers: I love a good conspiracy theory but I swear I don't have a tin foil hat. I am not totally debt averse. I do not promote sandbagging at work, but I do encourage taking care of yourself first.**

Vers, I can't speak to the effects of lawsuits on our economy but I didn't want to ignore this post either. I agree that Americans are not naturally inclined to be litigious in my experience. You have a few bad apples, sure - and that includes lawyers who push the more frivolous lawsuits.

The bigger damages are generally awarded as the punitive variety with the intent to discourage the behavior of the offender/others. Part of the problem is that the punitive damages typically go to the plaintiff/victim, which encourages the bad apples. But to change that is a problem in itself - if you remove incentive for victims to file suit, then a lot of "necessary" lawsuits probably don't happen and more victims are made and/or existing victims are not compensated. Society hasn't necessarily improved; catch-22.

I am at a loss for what part of the system should be changed here. Is this potentially a case of already utilizing the most efficient system possible despite the waste you described? Could changes make us worse off overall?

Two nice posts, mike. Thanks.

While your point above is far easier to quantify, I'd put money on the cost of the fear of this same litigiousness is far more than what we spend of litigation. There are countless examples of spending money/effort (or not being able to do things) simply due to not wanting to risk getting sued/ fear of litigation.

Yes, it really does depend on the workers to shape how they want to work. They have more power than they like to admit.

However, I'm worried that many of these people will want to work in conditions, where you're salaried and working 16 hours a day. I'm being a bit egregious, but if you live in company housing, eat catered meals from the company, and work out at the company's gym, they'll probably want you to be working nonstop. I worry about smaller cities like SF, Austin, and Seattle who are all having surging real estate prices. In today's age of super convenience, I think more people are going to fall prey to companies establishing fiefships.

I thought the word was fiefdom?

The thing is these companies are also targeting younger folks, millennials who aren't as interested in owning a home or starting a family yet..

A little tired and a lotta high. Good catch lol.

Exactly, they know their demographics and their targeted ads. I just wonder what will happen when millennial who do eventually live there and if Google will want their kids (I'm sure they would love it).

Actually I just googled to see if there were any News story about people living at google and I found this.

http://www.businessinsider.com/employees-who-live-at-google-2014-9

From 4 years ago, this article talks about people living out of their cars in the Google parking space to save money on rent. What a life.

Since Raleigh is very much in the running for Amazon HQ2, it's in the news a lot....

Read an article recently that said if they come here, Amazon wants HQ2 to be downtown.. this means as many as 4 new skyscrapers... and a ton of multi-family housing that they would want to build immediately adjacent to the buildings so the workers can live a block or two away from the office.

Yeah, I'm partially glad that Columbus doesn't have a rail system and is essentially a distant out for the HQ2 sweepstakes. I've heard that the Amazon Campus is pretty much a Minority Report police state where cameras and facial ID software is used on the people walking through the campus. It'll be great growth for a city, but I doubt that it'll be worth the tax breaks et al in the long run.

I agree. And our culture, especially at the corporate level, promotes being a workaholic. This generally seems to happen while simultaneously promoting a culture of work-life balance. I am fortunate enough to not be 100% dependent (at least in the short term) on wages, but there are enough that are not as independent, whether by circumstance or by choice. And you're right - this group especially will unfortunately fall prey to this feudal system.