Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the victim had used a gun to shoot down the criminal we'd be calling him a hero and no charges would be filed, assuming he had all the necessary permits and had the gun legally. Instead he used a car as a weapon and took the criminal down that way. If the victim was a trained police officer and panic fired his entire magazine into the criminal they'd never ask any questions. Instead a guy who is untrained responds to adrenaline and stress and makes a snap decision to go after a violent, armed and dangerous criminal. Shouldn't he get the same support a police officer would get with legal counseling and a sympathetic justice system? If he put others in harms way, that's one thing. That's reckless endangerment. I think some charges should be filed, but they should really be limited and nothing like what they're considering. Its up to the jury to make the final decision. I'd find him not guilty if they charged him with a crime that was not warranted. And the injured criminal knowingly put his life in jeopardy when he committed the crime and should be totally responsible for all hospital bills and should have no right to sue civilly. Throw the book at him.
If the victim had used a gun to shoot down the criminal we'd be calling him a hero and no charges would be filed, assuming he had all the necessary permits and had the gun legally.
If the victim was a trained police officer and panic fired his entire magazine into the criminal they'd never ask any questions.
.
As far as this writer in concerned you are wrong on all counts.
Even in under stand your ground, if you go to your car, your home whatever and retrieve a gun drive down the street and shoot down a robber you in all likelihood would be arrested and charged with with attempted murder.
It was an armed robbery, brandishing. His life was in immediate danger beginning with that. After the theft the perp was also still within firing range--after he'd already displayed contempt for his victim's health.
Exactly......"officer the gunman got out of the car, started walking away but turned and pointed the gun at me, now I want to talk to a lawyer".
In all honesty, according to the report, the suspect did exit the vehicle and was fleeing the scene so basically the victim was no longer in danger and did not have to pursue or run the suspect down with his vehicle.
In principle, if it were me, the guy would've lost more than his arm.
The criminal deserved to be totally run down and killed.
If the victim had used a gun to shoot down the criminal we'd be calling him a hero and no charges would be filed, assuming he had all the necessary permits and had the gun legally. Instead he used a car as a weapon and took the criminal down that way. If the victim was a trained police officer and panic fired his entire magazine into the criminal they'd never ask any questions. Instead a guy who is untrained responds to adrenaline and stress and makes a snap decision to go after a violent, armed and dangerous criminal. Shouldn't he get the same support a police officer would get with legal counseling and a sympathetic justice system? If he put others in harms way, that's one thing. That's reckless endangerment. I think some charges should be filed, but they should really be limited and nothing like what they're considering. Its up to the jury to make the final decision. I'd find him not guilty if they charged him with a crime that was not warranted. And the injured criminal knowingly put his life in jeopardy when he committed the crime and should be totally responsible for all hospital bills and should have no right to sue civilly. Throw the book at him.
IF the victim used a gun. He didn't.
Maybe the strews and adrenaline caused him to make a u-turn and run down the perp. Who knows? I certainly don't feel bad for the crook here.
If a police officer did this, he'd be guilty in the court of public opinion before the booking was completed. What the driver did was intentional and malicious. The CCTV clip shows this much.
Maybe the strews and adrenaline caused him to make a u-turn and run down the perp. Who knows? I certainly don't feel bad for the crook here.
If a police officer did this, he'd be guilty in the court of public opinion before the booking was completed. What the driver did was intentional and malicious. The CCTV clip shows this much.
I guess I'm not sure what you're getting at.
His state of mind must be proven in a court of law. This could very well go down the same way as a abused wife can get off or get a light sentence for killing her abuser.
"I have no idea what happened.....I had a gun pointed at me and my life threatened. I just snapped and I really don't recall much of what happened after that"
This isn't about feeling for the thuglum one way or the other, we just can't have folks going off playing judge jury and executioner, whenever they feel that they've been wronged.
Quote:
If a police officer did this, he'd be guilty in the court of public opinion before the booking was completed. What the driver did was intentional and malicious. The CCTV clip shows this much.
The driving over the kid with the car was pretty vicious, but so was sticking up a guy with a gun a violent action.
Was the driver in the wrong or right? Take in mind, the guy was just robbed by GUNPOINT. When 10 seconds ago, you were almost shot and killed, your mind isn't exactly thinking calm rational thoughts on what to do next. Having a retaliation item like a large vehicle, and knowing the kid could shoot at you, as you drive towards him, it's not a huge leap that you'd suddenly irrationally feel threatened again, and gun that accelerator with the thought you are back at a 'do or die' scenario. It's not RIGHT, but my guess is the victim turned his car around, and suddenly realized he'd put himself in harm's way, and had to follow through on something. You can't turn your car around on him, and just look at him, or ask to talk to him about it.
Should he have turned the car around? Rationally, 'no'. But emotionally, maybe he said 'yes', which creates the next scenario, 'okay now what?'
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
