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

To: marktwain

“Christ, I didn’t want to kill him. I didn’t want to shoot him in the chest, so I shot him in the shoulder.”

Idiot.


2 posted on 11/22/2012 12:55:04 AM PST by BigCinBigD (...Was that okay?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: BigCinBigD

Shooting the man in the shoulder could easily have killed him.

Shooting him in the shoulder could hit the axillary artery or the brachial artery. The bullet severing this artery the man could have bled out in a few minutes.


4 posted on 11/22/2012 1:29:12 AM PST by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: BigCinBigD
“Christ, I didn’t want to kill him. I didn’t want to shoot him in the chest, so I shot him in the shoulder.”

Idiot.

Idiot is right, in CA if you don't shoot to kill they will charge you. You have to tell them you were trying to kill the guy but are simply a poor shot, admitting to merely wounding him such as this guy did will result in being charged because they feel if the situation didn't warrant killing the intruder than you shouldn't have fired at all. I feel pretty much the same way, either fire center mass or find another way to subdue the guy.

5 posted on 11/22/2012 2:09:12 AM PST by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: BigCinBigD
“Christ, I didn’t want to kill him. I didn’t want to shoot him in the chest, so I shot him in the shoulder.”

Sadly, he is now going to need a lawyer for the lawsuit when he gets sued.

6 posted on 11/22/2012 4:47:53 AM PST by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: BigCinBigD
Idiot.

Evidently the 76 year old guy had something you might lack (situational awareness) and lacks something you might have (the urge to kill just because you might get away with it).

I wouldn't hesitate to go for a kill if the situation indicated it was the best way to survive, but I would hope I wouldn't execute some drunken idiot just because I could.

8 posted on 11/22/2012 4:57:40 AM PST by trebb (Allies no longer trust us. Enemies no longer fear us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: BigCinBigD

Wanna bet some lawyer is working up an “excessive force” suit against Mr. Boggess?


16 posted on 11/22/2012 5:44:10 AM PST by Little Ray (I have VOTED AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: BigCinBigD

Dead men tell no tales.

In other words, if you manage to kill the guy than your side is the only one that gets told.


17 posted on 11/22/2012 5:44:21 AM PST by BobL (You can live each day only once. You can waste a few, but don't waste too many.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: BigCinBigD

Stupid idiot.

You let them go once, they’ll be back. After the law suit, Underpants will be the new homeowner.


24 posted on 11/22/2012 6:26:56 AM PST by bgill (We've passed the point of no return. Welcome to Al Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | 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