Business & Finance0 min ago
Another Mad American With A Gun !
http://
He shot her, despite her telling him she was pregnant. He shot her in the back, she was unarmed but he still hasn't been charged by the Police !
He shot her, despite her telling him she was pregnant. He shot her in the back, she was unarmed but he still hasn't been charged by the Police !
Answers
I can understand the fear and anguish of an 80 year old coming home to find a robbery in progress and then being assaulted- absolutely terrible. I can understand him firing in self defence if there was a skirmish, what I can;t understand is him shooting someone in the back as they ran from his property after they had said they were pregnant and were very obviously...
18:43 Sat 26th Jul 2014
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
//My purpose in making this thread was to discuss the rights and wrongs of not charging the man who killed the woman but instead charging her accomplice, who cannot possibly be guilty of murder. Guilty of assault and burglary but not murder.//
Extra-judicial killing goes over big, in the States. This was just another example of it, imho. It looks like he has a huge front garden so the woman was, technically, still on his property and liable to be shot for however long it took her to cover that distance.
Shooting her in the back is a bone of contention - I've seen enough movies to see -other people- think it is cowardly, with which I can't help concur.
The part about the same couple burgling him twice before modulates my opinion on that somewhat. It is materially important so where did that factoid come from? I read the article in full. Is it mentioned in the video clip? (usually the vid is just a repeat of the text, so I don't bother).
How did the old guy know that -they- were his previous burglars or was he just taking it all out on the ones he happened to catch in the act?
My current stance is that, despite my sympathies for his plight and despite a wish-fulfilment type desire to do something similar, I feel that the gun did its job of making them flee, they apparently had nothing with which to fire back so shooting her in the back was manslaughter.
Contrarily to that, I like the way it puts the fear of lead into the scrotes. I can't see any jury pushing to convict on manslaughter as that practically paints them as wannabe-housebreakers.
Extra-judicial killing goes over big, in the States. This was just another example of it, imho. It looks like he has a huge front garden so the woman was, technically, still on his property and liable to be shot for however long it took her to cover that distance.
Shooting her in the back is a bone of contention - I've seen enough movies to see -other people- think it is cowardly, with which I can't help concur.
The part about the same couple burgling him twice before modulates my opinion on that somewhat. It is materially important so where did that factoid come from? I read the article in full. Is it mentioned in the video clip? (usually the vid is just a repeat of the text, so I don't bother).
How did the old guy know that -they- were his previous burglars or was he just taking it all out on the ones he happened to catch in the act?
My current stance is that, despite my sympathies for his plight and despite a wish-fulfilment type desire to do something similar, I feel that the gun did its job of making them flee, they apparently had nothing with which to fire back so shooting her in the back was manslaughter.
Contrarily to that, I like the way it puts the fear of lead into the scrotes. I can't see any jury pushing to convict on manslaughter as that practically paints them as wannabe-housebreakers.
