These savages took a 9 year old to an armed robbery?
L
The ONLY WAY for for an armed populace to be able to effectively control crime is to ALWAYS give them the benefit of the doubt in tough situations, and that means, at least in Texas, Grand Juries looking at the what instigated the situation, rather than holding armed civilians to the same standards as, say, SWAT officers.
In this case, it was a robbery, so assuming that the victim of this robbery was otherwise not a criminal himself (as was the case here), the ONLY person that should be held liable, either criminally or civilly, is the person committing the robbery.
So glad to see the Grand Jury agrees with me (and most here) and told the Soros prosecutor to STUFF IT.
I always back up slowly into the middle of an ongoing gunfight. You've got to if you want a good view...maybe get video to upload to YouTube.
I guess then that anger and stupidity are valid mitigation.
The life of a little girl was snuffed out by this individual's anger and stupidity and The Law decides, "He didn't *mean* to do it."
I live in a Constituional Carry state, WV. I am very happy my rights are validated by state law. But people acting as Mr. Earls did will aid the tyrants in rescinding those rights.
From the information provided, the victim made a decision to fire indiscriminately at a vehicle without a visible, identifiable target...to state nothing of a target with a weapon.
I’d have voted to charge him. It’s this sort of recklessness that gives ammunition to the antigunners (pun intended).
At a bare minimum he should barred from carrying until certain conditions are met (training among them).
Carrying a firearm bestows the owner with benefits, risks AND responsibilities. It is NOT a license to be reckless, as so many before him have demonstrated for us all.