Murder or Self Defense
06-04-2009, 04:19 PM
#11
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: houston, tx
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and you would be in jail just like mister rambo! its that simple. i hope your just typing that and not really meaning it.. lol
06-04-2009, 04:30 PM
#14
they should let him get away with it...send a message out to criminals that when you bust into a building wearing a ski mask, you will get shot and there are no consequences.
anyone else find it ironic that the cameras protecting him ended up ******* him in the end haha. if there were no cameras he would be in the clear.
anyone else find it ironic that the cameras protecting him ended up ******* him in the end haha. if there were no cameras he would be in the clear.
06-04-2009, 04:54 PM
#15
TECH Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (45)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Hennessey, Oklahoma
Posts: 9,439
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
5 Posts
Its one thing hearing about it or seein it, but actually experiencing it is completely different. This guy is a military vet and im sure he learned in the military was to shoot to kill not shoot to harm. things like this happen so quick when its actually happening to your self you really dont have time to think you just go off instinct, his instict was to kill that peace of ****. He just had back surgery and had no good way to protect himself other than his gun. the same pharmacy was robbed before and all the women were pistol whipped in the back room. You dont walk in with a gun and expect not to get killed. they kid knew the risks.
06-04-2009, 05:06 PM
#16
I absolutely agree...however...
...Ersland said he shot one of the robbers in the head then grabbed a second gun to pursue the other robber.
"...pursue the robber..."---this is where he is wrong. The use of deadly force is only authorized to "stop ending your life" or to stop a violent felony. When the pharmacist went and switched guns (indicating that his life was no longer in danger as the retards had left the store) and then gave chase, he effectively instigated a second situation. That is going to be very difficult to spin as self defense. He should not have went after the guy.
The injured teen was trying to get up, Ersland said, so he emptied his gun into the would-be robber’s chest.
There are three things that, when combined, constitute the use of deadly force as self defence...the means, the ability, and intent. This robber had demonstrated all three in the first situation. But, when the pharmacist instigated the second, ...the injured teen was trying to get up. This indicates that he no longer had the ability to commit his crime.
I hate to say it, but I think this guy is a ******* cowboy. From the facts being made public, it wouldn't surprise me if he was found guilty of murder...which sucks because he did society a service by smoking that kid.
06-04-2009, 05:13 PM
#17
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Currently In suspense.
Posts: 1,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
**** with the bull you get the horn its that simple.
He will probably get tried for murder though.
IMO self defense who knows if the kids would have come back for revenge.
He will probably get tried for murder though.
IMO self defense who knows if the kids would have come back for revenge.
06-04-2009, 05:50 PM
#19
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Odessa, Texas
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep in mind we don't know the whole story. We only know what the media chose to tell us.
I think he was justified in the first shot, but the rest of the shots all depend on whether or not the guy was still a threat. Wounded or not, if he still had a gun he was still a threat. He absolutely should not have had to put himself in more danger by approaching the wounded kid to disarm him. Keep in mind the kid went into that store with a gun with the intent to commit a felony. He chose to pick up a gun and he chose to use it to put another person in fear for his life. He put himself in that situation.
I think he was justified in the first shot, but the rest of the shots all depend on whether or not the guy was still a threat. Wounded or not, if he still had a gun he was still a threat. He absolutely should not have had to put himself in more danger by approaching the wounded kid to disarm him. Keep in mind the kid went into that store with a gun with the intent to commit a felony. He chose to pick up a gun and he chose to use it to put another person in fear for his life. He put himself in that situation.
06-04-2009, 05:51 PM
#20
Tribe Shaman
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as long as it is inside the shop/home, self defence.
out side the shop/home you go to jail just like the rest of the dumb bastards.
going for the second gun is just like stoping to reload.
you have had time to think about what your gona do before you do it.
thats why you need a clip that holds 25 rounds.
out side the shop/home you go to jail just like the rest of the dumb bastards.
going for the second gun is just like stoping to reload.
you have had time to think about what your gona do before you do it.
thats why you need a clip that holds 25 rounds.