Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Shimmer1
It is not uncommon for people who are justifiably shot, to be shot in the back. I am not saying that this shooting was justifiable, simply that the mechanics of a justifiable shooting often result in the assailant often being shot in the back.

Self defense shootings are often dynamic and fluid. It takes an appreciable amount of time, perhaps .25 seconds to .75 seconds for the decision to pull a trigger to translate into the gun firing. During that time it is not unusual to have the assailant turn, or react to a first shot in such a way that the assailant is shot in the back.

My guess, in this case, is that the victim, Erik Scott, was shot in the chest, then in the back as the other officers opened up, after hearing the first officer shoot. That does not make this shooting justified.

7 posted on 08/04/2010 6:17:12 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: marktwain

Several witnesses said that as Scott laid on the ground writhing, the officers shot him again. It’s in earlier threads.


11 posted on 08/04/2010 6:27:43 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson