I believe we all have, and can exercise, freedom of choice.
You can equate theft of another person's goods with murder of that owner, in that the person with the goods spent part of his life acquiring the goods and that time was taken away from him by the thief. If you take all of the owner's time, it is called murder. So what is part of his life worth?
You can go to law school so you can determine this, and the equivalent fair and just punishments. Or you can just say murder is murder. Is oral sex not sex, therefor you don't break your marriage vows is you engage in this behavior, by your choice? Or is it adultery, pure and simple.
I believe the law is way too complicated, by design. But the common man can figure it out without calling the police or an attorney. Someone took part of another American's life; part or all, he must pay. He took the choice.
Who lost in the retribution? Not me. Not you. Not society. The parents lost a child, so they lost. It is not my concern, I have my own family to worry about and raise properly.
So I ask you, honestly, who cares that a person was punished for his misdeed outside out judicial system? Are you hurt? No.Did anyone benefit? Yes, as a matter of fact, the next guy considering theft might think twice about it, and we will have a more civil society. Equivocate if you like about shades of gray, or accept that there is black and white. I'm with the shooter on this.
You are not alone. Athough stealing beer is not a felony, has anybody done any research into the area? is it a high crime area? was the kid a gang member? did this happen a number of times at this store? did the kids parents ever bring the kid back to the store to apologise? The store owner didnt just land here from another planet, the kid didnt just show up either. Every action comes from some other action. the kid chose poorly and the store owner did too. but Im sure the cops would have taken the stolen beer report next tuesday between 1 and 5 p.m.
Technically, it is the State who is responsible for the life of its citizenry. Partly why LEO’s are authorized to carry arms, to defend human life. It is why the State prosecutes the criminal case against the defendant.
Second degree murder, not manslaughter. Intent to inflict serious bodily harm at the time of the incident.
The major debate possibly was if the store clerk was being found guilty of homicide or manslaughter, intentional or unintentional. It might also be the accusation of the clerk for performing the role of LEO and court without proper authority. (Contempt of Court, though proceedings were not yet underway???)
The gun had been purchased for self-defense or murder upon provocation?
He shot him several times in the back of the thigh? With a handgun. Reads like he had been running away when he was shot.
Citizen’s arrest gone bad?
Yes, as a matter of fact, the next guy considering theft might think twice about it, and we will have a more civil society.