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.
It looks to be a legal case of the castle doctrine! However, it being morally justified is hard if you look at it from the POV of the parents of those 3 teens!
The parents can look in the mirror if they are trying to find answers. When your child is part of an armed masked posse roving the Earth at 4AM looking to rob victims, you can safely assume you were a bad parent and literally asked for this ending.
We are not talking about a point of view, we are talking about a point of default.
If he shot them in the back while they were running away, they he might be in trouble.
not if they were armed, and could stop, turn around, return to the property and shoot back. running to hide behind an obstacle and return fire at the homeowner?????
not if they were armed, and could stop, turn around, return to the property and shoot back. running to hide behind an obstacle and return fire at the homeowner?????
There are always exceptions, but shooting a fleeing robber in the back is likely to put you in prison.
There are always exceptions, but shooting a fleeing robber in the back is likely to put you in prison.
Not if they took the first shot, in which case shooting them in the back, the front, the side, the head, wherever, should be considered a public service. Saving taxpayers from the expense of keeping them alive in prison until they get out and resume their violent ways. These thugs were just doing their internships. Who knows what they would have accomplished as full adult gangbangers? But we don’t have to worry about that now, because gun ownership is legal and protected and private citizens can retain the ability to fire the interns before they get permanent employment.
Not if they took the first shot, in which case shooting them in the back, the front, the side, the head, wherever, should be considered a public service. Saving taxpayers from the expense of keeping them alive in prison until they get out and resume their violent ways. These thugs were just doing their internships. Who knows what they would have accomplished as full adult gangbangers? But we don’t have to worry about that now, because gun ownership is legal and protected and private citizens can retain the ability to fire the interns before they get permanent employment.
Tell the judge and the jury you shot a 15 yr kid in the back to perform a public service. Good luck.
Tell the judge and the jury you shot a 15 yr kid in the back to perform a public service. Good luck.
If they were masked how could the person who shot them know they were 15 ?
If they were running away but still aiming the gun at the homeowner why didn't he have a right to shoot them ?
Any half-decent lawyer could run rings around any prosecution.
But as far as I can see the cops are not intending to press charges and the case is over.
Simple fact is three thugs went ahunting and their prey was bigger,faster and stronger.
Rinse and repeat until it's whitey doing the shooting then watch Sharpton et al turn it into a political event.
Then there would be charges.
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.
