Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dayman

“Whether or not a situation like this is self defense should take into consideration the outcome. “

Wow very liberal. So if the owner shot a baby by accident would it still be self defense? Or if he ran over a little girl on her bike? Or perhaps Grandma?

Self defense doesn’t depend on the outcome. It depends on the fact of a threat to someones life. Once the threat is removed it is no longer self defense.

IMO thats why we have cops, judges, DAs, and jails. If they don’t work then perhaps the energy should be put into fixing them. Either we are a nation which adheres to the rule of law or we are not.

If he had shot them while on his property I would fully support him. As it is I hope he goes in front of a jury.


50 posted on 03/06/2010 7:52:03 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: driftdiver

For a person who is so big on the end of self defense for the store owner, you sure do set a different standard for youself. How so you justify this?


51 posted on 03/06/2010 7:58:17 AM PST by Ratman83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: driftdiver

Your argument is moot.
You are only warning people on FR if they hurt one of yours, you will kill them.
Some business owner who gets robbed and wants to chase and shoot is not going to pause and think “if I hurt one of driftdiver’s, he will kill me, so I better not go after them.


86 posted on 03/06/2010 1:40:42 PM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson