Posted on 05/30/2011 9:20:04 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
What if his 1st weapon was empty and he went to a 2nd for further protection and seeing the perp squirming, with his own adrenaline pumping, assumed the worst and took aim?
I’d do that.
“Well, shoot! I dun runn’d oud uh bullets. Backup!”
You say he was uncosious.
Where is the proof?
There is no medical proof only an opinion.
How would the the opinionated expert determine he was unconscious?
There isn’t a way to.
There is no camera evidence one way or the other.
Except for the fact that the guy walked calmly to get the second gun, rather than running as fast as possible, which is how someone who was truly in immediate danger would respond if they were under threat and had to find a weapon in a hurry to defend themselves a second time.
|
How do you or anyone know the robbery suspect on the floor did not start moving until the store owner got close to him?
Ersland claims he went to get the second gun because he didn’t know what to expect next. I don’t think anyone but Ersland can say whether or not he needed the second gun to feel safe.
Well, except the jury ...
Ersland claims he went to get the second gun because he didn’t know what to expect next. I don’t think anyone but Ersland can say whether or not he needed the second gun to feel safe.
Well, except the jury ...
If the store owner was Black and the kid white, this would have never made the news. And the store owner would have been found not guilty.
Yeah, he can appeal and he should. His defense should have done a better job refuting the expert testimony.
i remember a similar incident where two person tried to rob an internet cafe and the security guard chased the robbers and shot one behind the back. Will the guard get charged for murder because it was no longer self defence, but a chase to stop robber from getting away?
I cannot make that call. It was only seconds after the pharmacist came in the door from chasing the other criminal thug. The video does not show the perpetrator on the floor. I cannot say that I would not run back in the pharmacy to see someone that tried to murder me to steal drugs and put some slugs into him until he stopped moving. That is not murder.
I think thats a reasonable explanation. I would switch gun because I don’t know what will happen next as well. Will the robber come back with a gun. I want to make sure my gun have full bullets or maybe switch to gun I’m more comfortable holding. The first gun I would grab might not necessary be the one I prefer, but the closest and quickest to get to
I have a problem with the outcome of the trial.
And I have a problem with some FReepers perception of the events.
First, I don’t thing it’s and “either-or” situation where it was either self defense or murder.
Here’s why.
As soon as the guys bust in the door and start shooting, this is no longer a normal, rational type situation. As soon as the pharmacist had fired back, normal rules IMHO go out the window.
Was he justified in shooting back after the pukes bust in? Certainly.
Was he justified in putting more lead into a guy who is down? That’s questionable.
But as soon as any shooting at all happened, the guy CANNOT be held to be a normal guy-on-the-street dude. His heart is now pumping probably faster than it ever did in his whole life. He is loaded to the gills with adrenalin. He is totally uncertain and in fear about what might happen next.
He’s not a “normal human being” now in any sense of the word.
He should have been acquitted of murder on the grounds of temporary insanity or diminished capacity.
Good points.
I think fear would be part of what he be feeling. How many ppl here ever experience armed robber in their life ever? Hardly anyone. I would bet I would be so confused when it happen to me, I couldn’t think straight
Me.
Three times.
All three times I emerged with my wallet and skin intact.
Once because I was just plain lucky, the other two times I used my brains.
I agree with you. You can not prove the guy was not unconscious....and there were two criminals...the other could be coming back any second....just because the man looks calm in his demeanor doesn’t mean a darn thing....you can not tell how frightened he was at all.
His store (proved)....he is the victim (proved)...He shot the one (proved)...he shot an unconscious, immobile person.....NOT proved.....doubt should ALWAYS go to the victim. and then these stupid crimes would not be encouraged to happen.
Well, my opinion on what constitutes “first degree murder” is that it means the planning and carrying out of the taking an innocent persons life.
Was the kid innocent? Not by a long shot.
And I don’t see how anybody can call this premeditated, because even one second before the kids came in the door, this scenario would have been the very last thing on the pharmacists mind. If you asked him about his job, he’d probably complain that it was boring. But he NEVER would have said he wished some kids would bust in the door so he could gun them down.
It’s simply not first degree murder.
The Victim Perp laws are more recent laws. Once in most places in this nation you pulled a weapon on someone they had a legal right to kill you. You stole from them the same. Horse theft for example was a reason to kill. Now a decent person can find themselves in the jail house for simply firing a warning shot toward the roof of a shed if Bubba is in there stealing. IT's not right. But these are Perp protection laws.
Operating a pharmacy has become a hazardous occupation in this nation in case you've not read the news. Pharmacist are getting edgy, paranoid, and tired of having punks come in sticking knife, gun, whatever in their faces only too have a Boo Hoo judge & D.A. give alternative sentencing diversion, plea bargains, etc because Billy Bob or Jamal is an addict.
The robber could have just as easily killed them all and he likely would not have gotten life. Why? Because of the new policy of giving victim status to perps.
I believe in a persons full right to protect life and property even with the use of deadly force from those wishing to take either from you. If a person walks in my home with a weapon and I get a draw on them first and they turn around walking off and say I'll be back to kill you later what do you do? By law they can walk off. Can the police protect you and yours 24/7? Oh yea that's right you can go to court and try and get a restraining order. Criminals fear those kinda things. /sarcasm
No one forced the perp to rob the drug store. He robbed and he died. Only in the last 30-40 or so years with the takeover of the entire justice system by liberal lawyers has ones being robbed all too often also have become the jailed themselves. Why? Because defense lawyers want money to defend scum and drag cases out for years on end in frivlous appeals. A right they have funded by taxpayers also. They can't defend a dead perp now can they? But by makining the ones being robbed criminals if possible who respond with lethal force to the threat it is a win/win situation for the defense lawyers. The robber gets a defense lawyer at taxpayer expense and the one robbed and defending their own life and property soon must sign over all he has to pay their lawyers.
I likely would not have done what the man did but I would not have convicted him either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.