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.
The guy ran back into the restaurant and came back with a gun. At that point, there's really nothing more that needs to be said.
But we must not infringe on this man's right to draw his gun to stop the perpetrator of a stolen $4.99 Chinese meal. We're all so much safer because he has this right.
There is more to be said. The shooter wasn't involved in the fight; two other employees were. Deadly force is justified if you reasonably believe it's necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to you, or to another. So, the specifics of the fight make a difference.
Some people will kill over less. Some people look at it as "If you disrespect me you die". It doesn't seem like it's worth much, but some people will kill over less.
My friend's son was murdered earlier this week in what appears to be a road race incident. He and the driver were shot at while driving in a neighborhood.
In my view, it's a perfect illustration of why laws need to be enforced: what the customer did was fraud and theft, but probably nothing would happen to the thief if the restaurant called the police, even though anyone who steals a meal probably has done a lot more bad things than just that. We need a lot more police and a lot more judges who enforce the law and crack down on such thieves. Theft needs punishment, period, but our current criminal law system does not necessarily punish theft. The poor restaurant employee should not have been forced to take the law into his own hands in order to crack down on theft.
So what you are basically saying is that it's okay for someone to lose their life for a $4.99 meal. Because the courts are too lax on those master criminals.
We don't need more police and judges, we need less guns, so morons like this guy don't have easy access to mow down petty thieves. A lot less guns.
This. A thousand times, this. Guns are too easy to grab in the heat of the moment when people are not thinking rationally. And this is the inevitable result. More guns just means more people reaching for them in moments of irrationality, and more dead people over something worth less than a fin.
There is more to be said. The shooter wasn't involved in the fight; two other employees were. Deadly force is justified if you reasonably believe it's necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to you, or to another. So, the specifics of the fight make a difference.
Once this guy went back and got a gun, the rest was moot. He could have called the police instead of playing Dirty Harry.
This is what happens when morons have easy access to guns.
Once this guy went back and got a gun, the rest was moot. He could have called the police instead of playing Dirty Harry.
This is what happens when morons have easy access to guns.
Politicians are among the morons who should give up there right to armed protection. They need to lead by example not by denial or from behind. They should be in the herd not outside of it. That's where the safety is. In the herd.
Politicians are among the morons who should give up there right to armed protection. They need to lead by example not by denial or from behind.
Deflect, deflect, deflect.
Meanwhile, morons with guns continue to slaughter Americans at an obscene rate. But you keep deflecting, because you know you have no argument against that reality.
So what you are basically saying is that it's okay for someone to lose their life for a $4.99 meal. Because the courts are too lax on those master criminals.
We don't need more police and judges, we need less guns, so morons like this guy don't have easy access to mow down petty thieves. A lot less guns.
Yes, I can. To refresh your memory, you said "the poor restaurant employee should not have been forced to take the law into his own hands in order to crack down on theft."
Who forced him? No one. He chose to go get a gun and shoot a petty thief for $4.99.
He is not a cop, a judge or a jury, but he acted as if he was all three.
I hope he rots in prison. Morons should not be allowed to have guns. Period. And given how much slaughter there is in the U.S., there are lots of morons who do.
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.
