Originally posted by Evil Dead
the important thing from this story is that two criminals will no longer be committing criminal acts agaisnt upstanding, law abiding citizens. You want to live in society, you follow the rules set forth to protect all citizens. You don't want to follow those rules, you don't get to live in the society. These two guys are no longer living in our society.
Which is something a lot of people are conveniently ignoring.
Originally posted by Evil DeadSo.....commit a crime, get blown away by Joe Redneck? This is acceptable to you?
the important thing from this story is that two criminals will no longer be committing criminal acts agaisnt upstanding, law abiding citizens. You want to live in society, you follow the rules set forth to protect all citizens. You don't want to follow those rules, you don't get to live in the society. These two guys are no longer living in our society.
Law (Pretty Complicated?)
Their deaths are more unfortunate in the law's eyes than a petty charge on the man. You can't happen to kill someone in defense who wasn't going to kill you or someone else.
He might get a long year in jail and a relatively large fine for using arms to impersonate cruel and unusual punishment.
You only ask once if a life was in danger. If the man could plead that they were going to hurt someone, he'd be let off, though. I don't think you are allowed to shoot someone to keep them from running, but that's the issue. Supposedly, if you see them, the police will catch them. It's certainly not your fault if you don't shoot that they get away. Shooting implies lots of dangers as a civilian and amateur in arms. I think the police shoot them in the leg if they run.
If he wasn't sure, I think he'd be charged a fine and maybe less than half a year in jail, maybe even just a week or a day. If he just regrets ignorance, he might get a moderate charge.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
No witnesses, no one to see him being "charged", how convenient.
So guilty until proven innocent, then?
Like I said, in the article I believe it said that he left his cell phone on and had it in his pocket. So the operator would have heard the whole thing and could have pretty easily been able to tell if he was lying about it or not.
And yes, no one in their right mind would rush a guy with a shotgun. Is it really that outlandish that a couple of druggy criminals may not have made the reasonable decision?
Originally posted by BackFireSo now they were drugged up AND stupid?
So guilty until proven innocent, then?Like I said, in the article I believe it said that he left his cell phone on and had it in his pocket. So the operator would have heard the whole thing and could have pretty easily been able to tell if he was lying about it or not.
And yes, no one in their right mind would rush a guy with a shotgun. Is it really that outlandish that a couple of druggy criminals may not have made the reasonable decision?