Of course this whole issue just reminds me of why ranchers often will include a few Brahmans or Longhorns in every herd even if their main cattle choice is a better tasting breed like Angus or whatever. Angus cows will just allow wolves to eat their young or helpless rather than putting themselves at risk to protect them, Brahmans or Longhorns will fight the wolves off, protecting the herd. In life we have need for both because the rancher can't always be around, even if the Angus doesn't appreciate the Brahmans.
That's easy for us to say when we're not affected by the robberies. I bet the Gamestop store patrons and employees were happy that the robber got shot dead.
I think there will be a bit of 'fixing the story' to fit the narrative Like JV said . .. . I doubt he will be convicted of anything no one of any importance was harmed Rocket River
Yep. The one time I have been around a crime I did. Woman in a parking lot was tackled and had her purse stolen. I saw the guy WALKING away. I went to help the woman who was terrified. Called the police and helped her however I could. God...I regret so much not beating that guy down with some patriotic justice! Whenever I smell crime, I'll start reloading from now on.
You didn't read the story, posted incorrect information and now don't believe the law enforcement. We don't have all the information yet your mind is made up that when more information comes it will be lies.
1. Dude was eating 2. dude saw a crime 3. dude stopped eating 4. dude went got his gun 5. dude shot IN THE OPEN PUBLIC AT CRIMINALS 6. dude is not a cop/law ennforcement/etc Where am I missing something Rocket River
1. BTW -I read the initial story . . . . just went back to the link . . .and it is not MORE story to it. 2. "I feared for my life" - if ever you shoot any one .. . immediately say that . . .no matter what . .. you have to say that . . . . it is not almost a cliche Rocket River
That's sort of the problem, you aren't missing anything, you are just coming to the wrong conclusion. You know it's 2+2, it's that somehow you are coming up with the answer being 5. 1. Dude was eating 2. Dude saw people's lives in danger 3. Dude stopped eating 4. Dude went and got his gun 5. Dude drew on the robbers, stopping the robbery. 6. Dumbass pointed his gun at dude. 7. Dumbass died. You blame the guy who stopped the armed robbery for putting people's lives in danger, somehow failing to see that their lives were already in danger to begin with.
The sheriff said that after hearing many facts we don't know. Your quote marks are from law enforcement. Are you happy with the outcome? And I don't wanna hear about no mother****in' ifs. Happy with outcome or not?
Bandwagoner pointed out we don't know exactly what happen so I leave it at that.... we don't know exactly what happen.
Guns where not drawn of fired until he escalated So to be CLEAR . . . your hero DREW FIRST If your hero had not drawn first . . .simply got the information the cops would have picked these guys up in a matter of hours and no one would have been put in harms way BTW - What is the source of the info that dude pointed the gun at him? The cop wasn't there and he did not say witnesses said. When you kill a person . . you always win the he said i said battle. Rocket River
Great so don't act like your problem is elsewhere in the details. Don't pretend the sheriff is full of crap. You are unhappy that an armed robber was shot and killed after he pointed a gun at someone.
The robbers already had guns drawn when they were committing the robbery at gunpoint. Also, big myth that cops get these guys whenever things like this happen.
We do know that 2 guys were robbing a store at gunpoint and it ended up getting one of them killed. That we know. Honestly though, what else do we need to know? No, he didn't "draw first", do you think those guys were robbing the store with mean words? How you can think that no one was "in harm's way" during an armed robbery is beyond me. I'm sorry that your hero got shot while robbing a store, but it was his fault that he died. It shouldn't sit right with you, no one should be stupid enough to end up dead because they were stupid enough to rob a store "over an XBox". The problem is that you put the blame on the wrong person. You blame the person that stopped the armed robbery rather than the armed robbers. The implication in an armed robbery is that the armed robbers will kill you unless you do what they want, they were planning on killing people "over an XBox", how does that sit with you?
Did I absolve the robbers of their crimes? Responsibility? Compounding a crime with another irresponsible act does not absolve the criminal An irresponsible act that ends up with 'favorable' results. . . does not make it any less irresponsible Rocket River
You're not in harm's way when you're not in the building being robbed. He put himself in harm's way intentionally. The problem with the story is that he says he went to his truck to get his gun and was threatened in the process whereby he drew his gun and fired. If he already had his gun why was he going yo his truck to get a gun? Sounds like he went out to intervene and lied about going to his truck to get his gun. As for the whole he feared for his life thing, they teach you to say that in CHL classes. It's the standard tag line to claim self defense in a shooting.
It wasn't irresponsible, it was in fact him being responsible. If you have the ability to help those in harms way and you do nothing, you are being irresponsible. He put himself in harms way because there was a store full of people already in harms way. He was threatened when the moron raised his gun at him, he wasn't threatened until that point. If he'd run up shooting, then that's one thing, but I haven't heard anything suggesting that was the case. I honestly can't believe this is even a discussion.
