7/18/2012 10:51:03 AM
I see no problem with what this man did, I'd think the legal system can look the other way.It's not right to terrorize people with a gun, unloaded or not, with the intent of stealing things most of them worked hard to get.
7/18/2012 10:57:54 AM
once you try to commit armed robbery, you can't complain about what you get when somebody fights back
7/18/2012 11:08:14 AM
Yea no shit. And sorry but after watching the video, he secured the premises and ended pursuit there. I have no problem with his actions. He gets them out the door, makes sure they aren't coming back in, and locks that bitch down. They are lucky they didn't get fucking killed.BTW that video with them tripping all over each other is funny as balls.
7/18/2012 11:14:13 AM
When are these CCW holders going to start shooting the finance company execs that rob entire nations[Edited on July 18, 2012 at 11:18 AM. Reason : .]
7/18/2012 11:18:21 AM
^LMAO, you are absolutely pathetic.
7/18/2012 11:20:18 AM
^^ Right after they finish shooting all those in favor of entire nations being robbed by finance companies, namely you. Or do you no longer think the bailouts were necessary? As per the subject of the thread, I'm not so sure. They clearly started running away, yet he kept firing at them. In the end they didn't die, so no harm done. But if that last shot out the front door had killed one of them, I'd be hard pressed not to find that last shot excessive force. Of course, there is the very real chance that other than the first few shots he was missing on purpose, merely firing to keep them running in a panic. [Edited on July 18, 2012 at 11:53 AM. Reason : .,.]
7/18/2012 11:48:02 AM
wow.If you really wanted to stick to the letter of the law, then it's possible this guy could be charged, I think. I don't know the laws there, but there is probably something in the law about fleeing criminals no longer posing a threat, thus deadly force isn't justified. However, even if fleeing, an armed criminal could still pose a threat by shooting, thus the fleeing clause doesn't come into play (because the person is not completely removing himself from the situation).That, and police/DAs still have the right for discretion. It would be asinine to charge the guy.
7/18/2012 1:38:46 PM
high five to the old man.
7/18/2012 1:42:20 PM
No, he shouldn't be charged. Even if he was no jury in the world convicts.
7/18/2012 3:18:00 PM
7/18/2012 3:19:22 PM
Good for him I guess, but again, the guy risked a gun fight in order to save a bunch of old people from having their phones and viagra 'scrips stolen. What if an errant bullet hit some kid who was walking around just outside? To me, you can never square the benefits of this sort of action with the potential risks.
7/18/2012 3:25:56 PM
Then this would be one of those isolated times when the felony murder rule would be appropriate to appy against the would be robbers. If some guys come in, one brandishing a gun, the other a bat and proceeds to bust up the place you know they are capable of violence. Assume the worst, protect the innocent.
7/18/2012 3:39:28 PM
7/18/2012 6:37:32 PM
7/18/2012 7:32:48 PM
7/18/2012 9:41:39 PM