My contention is that for every one of these you're going to have a dozen cases of misuse of the gun. One indicator, unscientific as it is, is the fact that stories of true DGUs are very rare in the main stream media. We've heard many justifications for that, usually the pro-gun crowd claims the main stream is biased against them, but the truth is these are sexy stories that are widely disseminated when they do happen. Unfortunately they are rare.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
There was a video on one of those "extreme video" shows (one about "extreme senior moments") last week wherein a store clerk fired at his assailant as the man was fleeing the store. Luckily for him and the local PD he hit the robber and not someone else. In that case he fired through the doorway as the perp was fleeing.
ReplyDeleteMy first question when I saw it was, "Did he know if there was anyone else in the line of fire?". My second question was, "Is 'Castle doctrine' portable?".
I believe it is illegal and not even part of Castle Doctrine to shoot someone who is trying to leave.
ReplyDeleteThe cops can yell stop or I'll shoot, in some situations.
Civilians - never.
Typical reaction, Democommie and Dog Gone. Stand up for the thug, worry about what might have happened, and ignore the good that resulted from a good citizen having a handgun.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing wrong in the story is that the goblin still lives.
Greg Camp:
ReplyDeleteYou pride yourself on being a teacher and yet you seem to have a serious failure of reading comprehension. Please let me know where I wrote something that you conflated with standing up for the thug.
It has become fairly obvious that you want to be a vigilante. You keep letting your mask slip. It really is all about you wanting to be able to shoot people who have the temerity to 'front you, isn't it?
Greg Camp wrote:
ReplyDelete"Typical reaction, Democommie and Dog Gone. Stand up for the thug, worry about what might have happened, and ignore the good that resulted from a good citizen having a handgun."
Greg wants us to trust that he is law abiding and would only use his weapon to kill someone lawfully.
And then he turns around and argues that it was a good thing for it to be used unlawfully. It is illegal to shoot someone trying to leave, at that point they are no longer a threat. At that point,shooting them in no longer about self-defense.
Greg DOESN'T want to be able to shoot people in self defense. Apparently what he wants to do is to be allowed to execute them.
THAT would be the definition of vigilante justice, and is the point of why people like Laci and I distrust people like Greg, and what they tell us about how safe they are with firearms.
As if his ridiculous and immoral and unethical comments about the value of human life versus property weren't reason enough.
Greg, Now you've come completely out of the closet.
ReplyDelete"The only thing wrong in the story is that the goblin still lives."
Given the report of the event, that could have been an attempted rape. At the very least, it was a violent attempt at theft. Any of you would be sorry if he'd been killed?
ReplyDeleteGC wrote:
ReplyDelete"Any of you would be sorry if he'd been killed? "
Yes. We should be sorry when anyone is killed. We should be sorry we have too many state-sanctioned killings as it is, including way too many executions of people who are innocent.
What you are advocating for, GC, is nothing less than vigilante executions instead of a prosecution, and punishment only after a judicial conviction -- and on top of that you are clearly advocating for a disproportionate level of punishment to the crime.
But then apparently you DIDN'T get the point of Les Miserables...maybe you should give it a re-read.
I'm guessing from your description of your teaching assignments that you are what - a substitute teacher/ instructor, not a full time teacher or professor?
That should give you the time.
Although it IS better in the original French than in translation.
Dog Gone,
ReplyDeleteMy area of interest is ancient through Renaissance literature, not nineteenth century French novels. I also don't take Victor Hugo as gospel.
You claim that I support vigilante justice, but that's simply not the case. I don't support hunting down the alleged attacker and killing him on the spot. But when someone is in the process of an attack, the situation is different. The woman in the story defended her life with a handgun. She didn't sneak about to find the guy later and pop him one. She acted in the moment. Good for her.
Yeah, Greg, I guess that's what you're all about. If it "might have been" this or "might ahve been" that, you've gotta shoot 'em down. It would be irresponsible to not do so.
ReplyDeleteSelf-defense means exactly that. Killing someone who may be trying to harm you or take your property is, under law, homicide.
ReplyDeletedemocommie, are you reading your e-mail? The realdemocommie one.
ReplyDelete