[TXnMA]

Have you watched all three videos? (Four, actually -- including the woman who had to shelter her kids when the "raw deal" popped off shots down a residential street.)

The pharmacist got exactly what he deserved. And a irresponsible gun-user is removed as a threat to the public.

And before you fire up to call me anti-gun -- know that I carry, but do so responsibly.

That pharmacist (and -- to judge by their comments re that incident -- a disgusting number of FReepers) is nothing less than a bloodthirsty menace to society.

The Second Amendment does not protect a right to be judge, jury and executioner.

Grow up.

[Tex-Con-Man]

If the Pharmacist had killed the perp immediately, he would have likely been no-billed.

The fact that he didn't kill him immediately, doesn't suddenly make the perp an innocent victim. Nor does it magically transform the pharmacist from someone protecting his life and property to a cold-blooded killer.

An argument can be made the Pharmacist overreacted, and maybe should have received a lengthy probation to make sure he doesn't get into any more trouble, but suggesting that he deserves life for what he did is ridiculous.

And I am all grown-up.