Current Affairs The " another shooting in America " thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 28206
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TN Toffee said:
He had already loaded eight shots into the guy at point blank range, and knew he was no longer armed because he picked up the attacker’s gun which had slid into the corner by the door. How much threat could he realistically pose at that point that warranted executing him?
Click to expand...

TBF the fact he'd already hit him multiple times is what probably makes the ninth shot irrelevant, legally.

The first lot of shots are clearly legal self-defence (of himself and others) and would be in any jurisdiction I am aware of - a bloke pointing a gun at multiple people in a store, robbing them and in the US context of mass shootings being a daily event could absolutely be shot in the back when the opportunity presents itself.

The ninth one (the "execution" shot) would be really difficult if not impossible to get a murder charge out of because the defence would almost certainly argue that the eight which preceeded it killed him. Then there is all the emotional disturbance, the "I thought he was going to get up and had another gun", "I am just a civilian and I was terrified for my and my friends life" and so on. I am also not sure it was that intentional either TBF, he lets it go just as he is standing back up with the bad guy's gun as if he still had his finger on the trigger.
 
Rita_Poon said:
How many other states have such lapse attitudes to guncrime? Also, thats the lone star state ruled out for a visit, not sure who's happier...
Click to expand...
No idea on different rules in different states. I looked into Texas because of this situation. Maybe, just maybe, if no one had guns we’d be able to avoid this. Good guy with a gun has been proven over and over again to not work.

A six year old purposefully shot someone a few days ago. It absolutely blows my mind that so many Americans care more about having a gun than the safety of children. Or anyone. Thankfully the vast majority of our Americans on this forum don’t hold those views and I wouldn’t want to tarnish them with the same brush.
 
tsubaki said:
TBF the fact he'd already hit him multiple times is what probably makes the ninth shot irrelevant, legally.

The first lot of shots are clearly legal self-defence (of himself and others) and would be in any jurisdiction I am aware of - a bloke pointing a gun at multiple people in a store, robbing them and in the US context of mass shootings being a daily event could absolutely be shot in the back when the opportunity presents itself.

The ninth one (the "execution" shot) would be really difficult if not impossible to get a murder charge out of because the defence would almost certainly argue that the eight which preceeded it killed him. Then there is all the emotional disturbance, the "I thought he was going to get up and had another gun", "I am just a civilian and I was terrified for my and my friends life" and so on. I am also not sure it was that intentional either TBF, he lets it go just as he is standing back up with the bad guy's gun as if he still had his finger on the trigger.
Click to expand...
The final shot is 100% intentional. If he was still in fear for his life he wouldn’t approach like that and then he just puts another one in his head. I agree he’ll get away with it but it was clear what he was doing.
 
Wizard said:
The final shot is 100% intentional. If he was still in fear for his life he wouldn’t approach like that and then he just puts another one in his head. I agree he’ll get away with it but it was clear what he was doing.
Click to expand...

I disagree - if he was going to execute him he wouldn't have approached him like he did, he'd just have aimed at his head and fired. It seems a very odd time to let a round off, when he has less balance than he would do normally.
 
tsubaki said:
I disagree - if he was going to execute him he wouldn't have approached him like he did, he'd just have aimed at his head and fired. It seems a very odd time to let a round off, when he has less balance than he would do normally.
Click to expand...
I don't want to think like him, I'll surmise that it was a make sure shot, the speed at the emptying of the clip in a frenzy until the last. I wonder, "no way is this pr*ck being saved and he's suing me..."
 
Mr. White said:
Well, it wasn't a premeditated killing. It's easy to sit at home and pass judgement after the event. Multiple gunshots to the body doesn't necessarily end a threat to life. |A headshot is more effective. This isn't a TV show where one shot kills...

Morale of the story... don't rob and threaten peoples lives with a gun. As an added bonus, chance of reoffending = zero.
Click to expand...

You disgust me
 
Shooting an “armed” robber is one thing, killing a kid for breaking into cars is a different level.
WASHINGTON (7NEWS) — MPD detectives are investigating after they say a Northeast D.C. resident shot and killed a 13-year-old boy, whom the resident told police was allegedly breaking into vehicles on the block.

According to MPD, 13-year-old Karon Blake was killed just before 4 a.m. near the 1000 block of Quincy Street, NE.

On Saturday, an official confirmed a resident told detectives about shooting Blake after seeing him breaking into cars on the street.
 
Wizard said:
Thing is armed robbers don’t tend to shoot unless confronted. They use the weapon as a threat to stop people from tackling them and then run. Usually people are sensible enough to realise that a bit of cash or a phone isn’t worth risking your life for so just hand it over. This guy has clearly decided he would be the hero and has ended up executing someone. No idea what the laws are but he should do time
Click to expand...
By that logic, just let them always get away with it? No. Proportionate response is the only deterrent, and in all honesty, I’m a little tired of people justifying or being ok with criminal activity and in particular something like armed robbery…The videos where people just go in and take what they want without fear of any repercussions because they know no one can intervene are ridiculous.

That said, in this instance the response was clearly overly excessive and the last part was way too far. If he thought there was still an active threat prior to the final shots he could’ve sat there, ensured there wasn’t, and waited for the police to arrive.

It’s sad any part of this type of thing is normal life.
 
ArtetaMoney said:
Turns out it was a fake gun, and the vigilante has a decent chance of getting off with it.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Moment customer shoots dead masked robber in Texas

The robber, believed to be in his 20s, entered Ranchito #4 Taqueria in southwest Houston wearing a black ski mask and gloves before ambushing 10 customers.
www.dailymail.co.uk

View attachment 200185
Click to expand...
And this matters now why? How would anyone have known that in the moment? Prosecute the guy for taking his vigilante act well past the line, but not because the robbers gun happened to be fake after the fact…In the moment when it was pointed at the customers I’m sure they thought it was real and felt their lives were in danger.
 
carolinablue232 said:
And this matters now why? How would anyone have known that in the moment? Prosecute the guy for taking his vigilante act well past the line, but not because the robbers gun happened to be fake after the fact…In the moment when it was pointed at the customers I’m sure they thought it was real and felt their lives were in danger.
Click to expand...

I was just stating the fact, I agree that if you point a fake gun at someone and get shot then that’s your fault.
 
ArtetaMoney said:
I was just stating the fact, I agree that if you point a fake gun at someone and get shot then that’s your fault.
Click to expand...
The way you phrased your sentence seemed to imply the fakeness of the gun should somehow matter as to the seriousness of what the guy did in response. “The gun was fake and the guy is going to get away with it.” It’s immaterial. Seems you agree which just makes your statement a little odd to begin with.
 
carolinablue232 said:
The way you phrased your sentence seemed to imply the fakeness of the gun should somehow matter as to the seriousness of what the guy did in response. “The gun was fake and the guy is going to get away with it.” It’s immaterial. Seems you agree which just makes your statement a little odd to begin with.
Click to expand...

Just adding context to the original video as I’d read it in the article I shared.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top