Poll: Teen Shot dead after attempting to mug man

Carlston

New member
Apr 8, 2008
1,554
0
0
No matter how people say you have the right to live and commit crime and this and that...in the heat of the moment, you get killed to damn bad.You should have made all the choices to try and harm another, rob another....
Once another person sees you as a threat to their life because your commiting a crime...you get whatever comes to you...in what ever caliber it comes to you.

No protection, No second chance, no excuses, no lame people crying for your dumbass. Just a funeral and a goodbye.
 

tikalal

New member
Dec 17, 2009
56
0
0
Girl With One Eye said:
Sorry but I have to disagree with a lot of people here. It was just a couple of kids and the guy shot him eight times. He could have fired a warning shot, I mean hes clearly capable of handling himself if hes applying for the military and keeps fit.
You don't fire warning shots if you think your life is in danger or you are being attacked. This isn't a character in a film, this is someone who fears for their safety. Besides, warning shots can ricochet and hit you or others, and if fired in the air can kill people miles away.

In that situation I would definitely shoot until both my attackers were dead and my gun was empty. You only have one life, and you only have two arms/legs etc. You don't risk that kind of thing in a situation like that. I am convinced that anyone who is saying "shooting 8 times is clearly overkill" simply can't imagine themselves in that situation and don't understand what happens to a person when they are under threat of assault.

If you truly believe he consciously made every decision in that situation as calmly as you are thinking about it now, you are uneducated and deluded.
 

Impluse_101

New member
Jun 25, 2009
1,415
0
0
Mugger diserved Punishment, not really death persay.

Sure he was probably doing it in self defence, but theres really no true way to know unless your God. In which then you know everything that happend at that event and why.
 

Foolishman1776

New member
Jul 4, 2009
198
0
0
It's hard to know if it was a justified shooting without knowing all the facts. The fact, however, that the State was satisfied that it was defensive, is pretty strong evidence that it was justified.
 

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
Fagotto said:
Whatever man, you keep trying to use the point, "you weren't there you don't know".

Neither were you.

I'm going off of what the article presented, and at the end of the day you ask anyone if 8 hollow point bullets sparatically shot at someone is overkill for getting punched in the face. This wouldn't be such a contraversy if

A) The Tuscon Tradgedy didn't, just happen.

B) The kid did more than punch the guy once.

C) He didn't shoot the kid 8 times with hollow points.

Honestly 2-3 hollow point bullets are more then enough to kill someone.
 

Berethond

New member
Nov 8, 2008
6,474
0
0
FollowUp said:
I say Yes*.
The asterisk because eight shots with HOLLOW POINTS is overkill. he unloaded that weapon into his mugger, but that might even be blamed on the circumstance. It would have been best if the mugger was not killed, but in situations like that, shooting at all is shooting to kill, especially with a gun with that much stopping power.
Overkill is the point.
If you're ready to shoot someone, you can be sure that you're going to shoot him as many times as possible until he falls down and stops moving.

Also, hollow points are not overkill. The whole idea of hollow point bullets is so that you don't overpenetrate. They're less dangerous than normal bullets.
 

Impluse_101

New member
Jun 25, 2009
1,415
0
0
Spot1990 said:
More proof that people will jump on an angry band wagon believing they're morally right without reading the thread and seeing that most of the arguments they raise have been countered already. Guess I'll add to it.

8 shots is excessive, of course it is, but if you're lying on the ground dazed and terrified you don't take aim, you point and fire til you can fire no more.

Hollow point rounds do cause more damage, they also don't go through the target. Bullets don't evaporate in flight, they have to go somewhere.

Grab a gun and a manequin. Now try and shoot that dummy in the leg the same second you draw the gun. Try doing it without having to take careful aim. Now imagine that duumy was running at you. Try to hit a fast moving target that's about 5 or 6 inches wide. Now image that within that target there's something, that if hit WILL kill the target. Try to avoid that if you can. You shoot in the chest because there's a better chance you hit the target. You fire and miss the mugger will panic too. He probably won't turn his back on the guy that just fired at him so he'll keep coming.

Warning shots don't work, bullets hit things.

Of course he shot first. Why would he wait until the mugger pulled a gun before pulling his. You don't want to be the one to draw second.

Why are people saying he shouldn't have been out so late because it would be dangerous? Should we just resign ourselves to being inside past dark? Or should people take measures todefend themselves so they can actually feel safe. Should we just resign ourselves to the fact that the streets belong to the criminals at night?
Makes we wish I could shoot at a guys feet like in the old cowboy movies. Make them dance and all that.

Other then that I have no reason to say anything else about your post.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
This is why if you're going to mug someone you should shoot them dead first and then just go through their pockets. So much safer for all concerned.

Seriously though. In these cases I'm usually against the shoot-first-think-later approach. But this one seems justified. The mugger physically attacked him without warning. And he called the police and stayed at the scene. I can't really fault his actions.
 

Arsen

New member
Nov 26, 2008
2,705
0
0
In today's world there is no telling what another person had.

Did the kid deserve to die? No.
Did the kid choose the wrong action to instigate this confrontation? Yes.
Did the guy have the right to defend himself? Yes.
Is the kid dying the jogger's fault? No. The young man chose to die with his decisions.

The young man took the risk of mugging another. This man deserves to walk.
 

FlyAwayAutumn

Rating: Negative Awesome
May 19, 2009
747
0
0
So now I see where that recent gun info thread came from.

Here's how I feel:

If the kid wasn't prepared for the consequences he shouldn't have tried to mug someone

The man being mugged is by himself up against two guys, I completely agree with his actions

Of course the kid didn't deserve to die, but he was kind of asking for it ya know?

And for people who say that shooting so many times was unnecessary, I think it was perfectly reasonable to shoot 8 times or however many it was.