I guess the story was labeled correctly after all. BTW, Kudos for the follow-up.
This is why "We Need Stricter Gun-Control Laws NOW".
- Thread starter constitutionman
- Start date
I guess the story was labeled correctly after all. BTW, Kudos for the follow-up.
Just to be clear on the facts. It does appear that the shooter could have just let the criminal walk out, therefore stand your ground would not appear to apply. We also know that the deceased was not an innocent man, he was in fact committing a criminal act and would still be alive today had he not broken the law.
Moral of the story, don't break the law. Next.
Moral of the story, don't break the law. Next.
What is a store owner supposed to do? Just make paying optional? On one hand, the guy was fleeing and you are taught in CCW class that it is not legal to shoot a fleeing criminal who has committed a property crime. On the other, they were grappling in close quarters and the victim had an axe.
Tough case and I'd hate to be on the jury.
In any event "Stricter Gun-Control Laws NOW" is not the answer.
You consistently prove how fucking dumb and ignorant you are. being a criminal doesn't justify getting shot at, what happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?
Moral of the story is that dumb fucks like you with no sense of responsibility give the actual gun owners a bad name. I have said it before and repeat it again, Just shut the fuck up. Next.
There are many options: fire a warning shot, shoot him in the arm or legs, call the police and ....
Also, if you are dumb enough to lose your cool and pull the trigger, have some humanity, don't stand there and watch the guy bleed to death, help him or call an ambulance.
enlighten us with your solution or suggestions, please.
The leftist would watch the crime occur, wait for back up, take it to court and hope for the best. I prefer Callahn's thought process.
Harry Callahan has to explain why he shot a man]
Harry Callahan: Well, when an adult male is chasing a female with intent to commit rape, I shoot the bastard. That's my policy.
The Mayor: Intent? How did you establish that?
Harry Callahan: When a naked man is chasing a woman through an alley with a butcher's knife and a hard-on, I figure he isn't out collecting for the Red Cross!
[walks out of the room]
The Mayor: He's got a point.
Moral of story, the obviously guilty get no presumption of innocence. Next.
Harry Callahan has to explain why he shot a man]
Harry Callahan: Well, when an adult male is chasing a female with intent to commit rape, I shoot the bastard. That's my policy.
The Mayor: Intent? How did you establish that?
Harry Callahan: When a naked man is chasing a woman through an alley with a butcher's knife and a hard-on, I figure he isn't out collecting for the Red Cross!
[walks out of the room]
The Mayor: He's got a point.
Moral of story, the obviously guilty get no presumption of innocence. Next.
This is getting absurd. Some of you would go to whatever extreme to excuse some vigilante guy to kill someone for a petty crime or in some past cases just looking menacing. He was stealing an axe, not swinging it. People don't deserve to die for stealing merchandise, that's an idea more at home in medieval times not a modern democratic country. People react in horror to the idea that some thiefs get their hands chopped off in some societies; you are advocating that the US does much worse.
The shooter needs some serious time in jail; maybe next time he'll think twice before killing someone.
Last edited: