Shooting of burglary suspect unjustified, family says

  • Thread starter Thread starter AlextheDroog
  • Start date Start date
if the guy pulled his gun, his only option SHOULD HAVE BEEN to shoot until the threat is gone. if that means he touched off 2 before the burglar fell, sucks for the burglar.
 
This isn't news. What news would be if you saw a headline that read something like ...

Relatives of teenager killed say shooting was justified.



2 or 3 shots to the head? Naaa, you're supposed to go for "center mass", THEN put one in the head when you see some punk breaking into your house in the middle of the night.
 
This is more semantics than anything else. Removing the threat is almost only certain if the threat is dead. And I suggest if he shot the guy in the head multiple times he is either one of the world's greatest shots, or it's coincidence. Chances are he fired rapidly aiming for the torso and shot high.
 
lol. I'm glad it unnerves you as much as it does me.

For the record, the Rand thread I made and all the comments inside were pure troll. (For various reasons...)
 
Just an FYI, it was the GODMOTHER who said he was shot in the head "2 or 3 times". That doesn't make it so. Unless she performed the autopsy, I seriously doubt she knows what the hell she is talking about. I mean apparently the woman can't even count.
 
since the deceased was inside the home when it happened he got what was coming to him. you dont break into other peoples homes.
 
I'm sorry, I wasn't saying it scared me. I was just agreeing with you that I bet it is scary for you to agree with me.

As for the Rand threads, I really don't pay much attention to them. I agree with most of the 'Pauls' general views, but I also know they come off as totally bat shit crazy to ever get elected as President. Congressmen yeah. MAYBE (big maybe) a Senator. But bottom line, neither are going to amount to a hill of beans because even the President doesn't really call the shots. He is just a bought and sold "face" for the real hidden power in Washington.
 
I think there is a large distinction between shooting someone until they are dead, even if you have to reload and continue shooting... and shooting someone until they are no longer a threat. Even if the two often overlap.
 
after one bullet blasted the kids brains all over the fucking place i doubt there would have been much room for more bullets. but i digress..
 
Sorry, but I generally don't remember "general asshattery" from boards. There is so much of it around, unless it is REALLY memorable, I don't bother storing the information. Typically, the only thing I "store" (at least until it builds up to the point that I add someone to the IL, then I purge) is personal attacks that are done for no reason.
 
if you are going to shoot someone, shoot him until he is dead. You will hear that advice from just about anyone. A dead person cannot testify
 
I met a guy who did that. From this guy's story "Al" came at him with a knife... So he shot Al in the stomach. Al keeled over and dropped the knife. The guy shot him again in the head killing him.

Guy went to jail for it for 2 years. Why? Because the second shot wasn't in self-defense.

Stupid. Fucking. Advice.
 
If he has shot him again before he hit the ground and was laying prone, he most likely could have gotten away with it.
 
Absolutely. I have no problem with him shooting him over and over... until he realizes that the guy is no longer a threat.

Shooting him just to make sure he is dead is a different story, however.
 
Back
Top