yes they do. When they put themselves into a situation where it is a choice between their lives and innocent lives, they deserve to die.
This is why the Concealed Handgun Licensee did the right thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby's_massacre Would this guy have turned around and shot up the restaurant? No one knows, but there was significant potential there.
Everybody NOT firing a gun got out without injury. I'm not risking my life to save Burger King a few bucks ...but that's just me.
you've got to be kidding read what that guy actually did, he drove his pickup into luby's and started shooting. he didn't pretended to be some two bit robber and then started shooting.
That's pretty much what I think. Normally in an armed robbery, does the robber want to shoot anybody? Most likely not. They want money. Period. You can prevent those crimes by improving your society. You can't, however, prevent crimes of insanity or crimes of passion... where someone is out to kill people, period. Those crimes, however, have to be a tiny portion when compared to armed robberies.
IT doesn't sound like anyone's life was in imminent danger until the vigilante started arguing with the robber. Had the vigilante kept silent, a few things would have happened. The robber would have stolen a small amount of cash. The robber would still be alive. The man who shot the robber would still be in good health. I really don't have a problem with someone foiling a robbery attempt. This seems like some one may have taken the attempt to foil the robbery to too much of an extreme. I'm glad no innocent bystanders were hurt. I would not fault anyone who didn't risk their life and others life for a handful of Burger King's cash.
but instead of working for it or doing without they decide that their need for money is greater than the other people's need to live. Otherwise they would not commit a felony with a deadly weapon.
I would disagree but it is more of a disagreement over the definition of "imminent danger" than your general argument.
The robber wasn't trying to kill people for money. He was trying to steal. He didn't decide that other people shouldn't live because he needed money. He decided to rob, because he needed money.
ah but when he was loading his gun how did he feel about the importance of the people he was robbing living? I agree he did not intend to get paid for killing people, but killing people was not a problem for him because he decided he wanted to use a loaded gun to commit the crime.
Um, so if they want money, and don't want to shoot anyone, how are they deciding that their money is greater than other people's need to live? We're talking intent here. Naturally I'm assuming the robbers do not want to hurt anyone (it doesn't help them get money, and it puts a bigger bounty on their head, a lose-lose situation). But for your statement to be true, they would have to intend or want to hurt someone. I don't think that is the case. The "deadly weapon" isn't a means to hurt people for them, it makes it easier to get money. Sure they could rob someone without a deadly weapon, but that isn't quite as conducive to getting money... the real factor here.
Stealing an empty car vs car jacking with a loaded gun. Neither probably want to kill someone, but the car jacker decides that killing someone, or the threat of doing so (with the means) is worth the car. The empty car thief does not risk lives. It is a what am i willing to put at risk in order to get something senario. This guy put those people at risk. He loaded the gun for a reason.
that's a logical leap I can't make. just because you have a weapon, or a loaded weapon, does not mean you are going to hurt someone. i'd venture to guess that most armed robberies don't even involve any violence, even.
You had it right with "the threat of doing so". Or more aptly, "the ability to do so". You can't infer anything else from that, though. Maybe I'm wrong. Can I get a criminal defense attorney to holler?
Of course that is correct. I have plenty of loaded weapons, I am not going to hurt anyone. But by having them I risk the possibility I WILL hurt someone in order to protect my family. Just like this guy risks hurting someone to get his $$$$.
Well under texas law if someone threats your life with a deadly weapon, you have the right to use deadly force. Saying give me your money and having or saying you have a gun qualifies. But I wasn't really looking for a legal argument.
