https://twitter.com/4Mischief/status/1658221264459251712
A gun is no better or worse than the man wielding it.
Good Guy With a Gun
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
Brandishing a gun, much like “fashioning a whip,” seems to be a question of occasional necessity.
Questionable. As the thief was running away.. Did he need to fire? (And fire that many rounds?)
Yes he should have fired. Then reloaded and shot the effing scumbag some more.
An armed bandit deserves no benefit of the doubt. The law incorporates this in the doctrine of the fleeing felon rule.
Questionable. As the thief was running away.. Did he need to fire? (And fire that many rounds?)
Guns are not a melee weapon.
Pulling back, and then firing, is how you deal with a threat that got closer than you expected.
So no, he wasn’t “running away.” He was putting space between himself and the unexpectedly fighting back victim.
Don, Is the Fleeing Felon Rule applied equally to law enforcement officers and the public, allowing either to use deadly force to stop a person known to be a felon from escaping custody?
It would apply to both unless altered by state statute. Deadly force may be used only if the felon is a physical threat to others. An armed felon is.
The robber was shot a lot of times after he was already down … Did he survive?
David WS, It takes 1/10ths of a second to turn and fire. The man behind the counter we completely in the right to address a very clear threat. That he unloaded his pistol is typical of people in adrenalin charged situations, including well trained police and soldiers. I’m no armchair lawyer and I’ve never shot someone, but I’ve been in enough scraps to know that when it’s time to dance you dance with everything you have. Death is an occupational hazard for armed robbers.
A man on the ground, unable to walk, can still lift a weapon and fire it. Removing the threat means REMOVING the threat.
Obviously carrying a firearm is a very serious responsibility. One needs to know when to fire, when not to, and also when to stop. When the armed robber was running away, I would not have fired. The threat was removing itself. No certain threat. The robber had a clear shot at the moment he realized the man behind the counter was reaching for his gun. The robber did not shoot, he ran.
Now IF the felon could have been conceived as a threat to others while running away from an armed robbery, then shoot. I don’t think he was from the video.
Where I live in New England we have a Castle Doctrine, a Duty to Retreat and 1/10 adults have a license to carry. We have very low gun crime. It’s not the “laws”, it’s the culture. There was very low gun crime before “the laws”. We don’t believe in shoot and ask questions later. Maybe “that’s” why we have low gun crime. Culture is a broad thing. Just ask Chicago.
When the armed robber was running away, I would not have fired.
The shop keeper fired because the robber was carrying a gun. I hardly doubt that he would have fired if the thief wasn’t carrying a gun. Nobody likes to take a life intentionally if they are defending themselves. The shopkeeper has to live with the fact he shot a person. There are no winners.
Maybe “that’s” why we have low gun crime.
Demographics. New England is the whitest and the oldest part of the nation. Demographic makeup and age of a population tend to be two of the most important factors that go into a murder rate for a state. The more peaceful parts of the country have demographics like western and northern Europe. The most violent parts of the country, especially cities, have demographics resembling third world nations.
Felons tend to have little interest in local gun culture. The number spawned by a state is a much more important question. Cbicago’s murders are overwhelming committed by blacks and hispanics against other blacks and hispanics, and usually related to gangs and their participation in the drug trade.
“The shopkeeper has to live with the fact he shot a person. There are no winners.”
The shop keeper has to live with the fact that he used the felon’s power of attorney and shot the same person. Justice and safeguarding our civil rights are winners.
The A-bomb is being criminalized. The A-bomb was built for Hitler but not soon enough. The A-bomb was built for Tokyo but Tokyo was too far away. The ship that delivered the A-bomb , the Indianapolis was torpedoed twice and sank. some 900 men got off but were eated by sharks. Only some 3 60 men were saved. Hirohito’s war. The movie Jaws was based on the Indianapolis. If it weren’t for the A-bomb every American might be speaking Japanese. It is called self-defense, a natural human right.
(If this is to be believed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_African-American_population) Connecticut ranks #23, Massachusetts ranks #28, RI ranks #34 in black population. And each has a large Hispanic population. Respectfully disagree, there’s something to be said for education opportunity and culture. Chicago has always had a violent one.
Connecticut ranks #23, Massachusetts ranks #28, RI ranks #34 in black population.
You forgot about New Hampshire and Vermont, both of which have black populations of two percent. Maine, which you also forgot, about has a black population of 1.8 percent. These three states have negligible hispanic populations. Massachusetts has 11 percent hispanic and Connecticut and Rhode Island have 17 percent each. As to black populations, Connecticut and Rhode Island have 7 percent, slightly over half of the thirteen percent of the national population. Massachusetts, the murder capitol of New England, has ten percent. Illinois in contrast is 14 percent black and 18 percent Hispanic. In Chicago the percentages are 29.2 percent black and 28.8 percent Hispanic. I stand by my contention that New England is among the whitest parts of the country, along with being oldest per capita.
I did not forget about NH, VT and ME, I left them out because they’re less populous. Nor do I contend that Black and Hispanic (culture?) inner city areas are not subject to higher crime. What I am saying, and this applies in all areas low crime and high crime -is that Culture has a lot to do with it.. It’s not skin color. And I do believe that Culture bleeds across criminality and ordinary citizens.
My culture believes emptying a gun into an armed thief that is no longer a threat and running away isn’t good. To think that doesn’t bleed over to a criminal’s thinking is a mistake.
that Culture has a lot to do with it..
Culture has something to do with it. However the question that arises is why some groups produce cultures that are mostly positive for the group, Jews are the classic example of this, while other groups produce cultures that are negative for them and those unfortunate enough to live close to them. The hideous crime statistics for many young black males speak for themselves. Irish immigrants had a similar crime problem in the 19th century. Group cultures can change, but it is usually not a fast process and the desire to change has to come from within the group.
“It is called self-defense, a natural human right.”
Yes and I agree. It doesn’t change the fact that killing another person is against our God-given nature. The shopkeeper will have to live with the fact he killed another human being (if in fact the thief died). I agree he had every right to do it in self-defense. But that doesn’t change consequential guilt any normal person would feel after such an incident. Or maybe some people don’t feel it. I don’t know?