I tend to agree. On the other hand, I've killed venomous serpents just for being around my house. If I see them in the woods, I let them be.
Posted on 05/28/2011 11:54:51 PM PDT by TigerClaws
OKLAHOMA CITY - An emotional jury decided Thursday that pharmacist Jerome Jay Ersland is guilty of first-degree murder for fatally shooting a masked robber two years ago in an Oklahoma City drugstore.
Jurors recommended life in prison as punishment.
Two co-workers at Reliable Discount Pharmacy told jurors that Ersland was a hero who saved their lives on May 19, 2009.
Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20110527_222_A15_CUTLIN912500
(Excerpt) Read more at tulsaworld.com ...
So the pharmacist is suddenly a doctor or M.E., I could care less. The guy initiated his demise and chose this pharmacist. He lost. Do not blame the pharmacist. Your argument holds no water and excuses the events that led to this.
I tend to agree. On the other hand, I've killed venomous serpents just for being around my house. If I see them in the woods, I let them be.
He has had some level of medical training, since he’s pharmacists.
However, I don’t think you need a medical degree to ensure a prone man stays prone.
The law isn’t about whether or not you care about the man. Obedience to the law ensures, as much as humanly possible, that we stay civilized and aren’t allowed to conduct justice as each of us defines justice.
My new AF flag came in yesterday and I need to go put it up. It was fun in the courtroom. Be safe
That's a good point. If I were O'Reilly, Matthews, Schultz, Maddow etc., I'd use this Jonty30 quote to smear Free Republic:
If somebody breaks into your house and you kill them, you should probably wipe out their family, including the baby, just in case.
That's not true. The perp wasn't in view after the inital shot, and there is no way to tell if the perp was able to regain his composure, pull out a gun, and kill the pharmacist.
In context, it was a perfectly appropriate quote. The fact that somebody might take it out of context is not my responsibility.
It was an absurd strawman on your part. Nobody ever promoted murdering babies or killing whole families.
The fact that somebody might take it out of context is not my responsibility.
Gee, the left would never take anything out of context to make Free Republic look bad./s
The pharmacist’s actions were in full-view.
His actions were not of a man who thought he was in danger.
If he thought he was in danger, he wouldn’t have moved so casually and kept hus back to the perp and he certainly wouldn’t have stood over him to shoot point blank.
Let the left do their thing. They are becoming more discredited as the days go by.
If you give a man enough rope, he’ll hang himself and that is what the left is in the process of doing.
If removing a threat is the goal, killing some 16 year old punk, who is incapacitated, is not a great way to go about it. You’re going to possibly increase the threat against you by either pissing off his family (who might want revenge) or pissing off the gang he might be in (who would definitely want their pound of flesh).
It doesn’t seem like you’ve really removed the threat when you kill somebody who isn’t a threat to you.
I have just a few questions to (hopefully) further the discussion while (just as hopefully) avoiding inflaming emotions on this clearly volatile matter:
1). Does (or should) the background of the individuals involved weigh into the facts that the jury considers? From a distance, the thug was just that -- a human being to be sure, but a lifetime of criminal behavior. The pharmacist, even with the lies of his military record, evidently had a body of work doing good for others and was law-abiding. As a pharmacist, he doubtlessly fulfilled prescriptions that saved or enhanced the lives of others.
2). Have any of the "heavy hitters" weighed on the verdict? Although I do my own thinking, what do people well-versed in Constitutional Conservatism think about convicting the druggist of murder? The opinions of people who have defended liberty such as our own esteemed Jim Robinson as well as Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin would be of interest in this obviously hot-button issue.
3). Presuming a question were framed about this verdict (and the incident itself) and posed in a debate with the Republican contenders for the presidency, would the answer each gave influence your opinion about that contender?
Hypocrite. And liar.
You are being very dishonest on this thread.
And playing dumb. You have that down.
He has stated he doesn't care.
Very bad for this forum.
He's quite full of himself.
Rally for Jerome Jay Ersland posted on the Mark Levin Show Facebook page.
Travesty: Disabled Gulf War Veteran Jerome Ersland Convicted for Saving Lives from Debbie Schlussel whose Conservatism is at best questionable.
1. In my opinion, the background of the person is irrelevant. He may be on drugs or he may have been stone cold sober, it may be his first crime or thousandth. He didn’t have a father or he came from an intact nuclear family. That is irrelevant to me. If the pharmacist had gotten off six quick shots and killed the thug, I wouldn’t be arguing against the death of the perp. It was the context that matters. The pharmacist had the guy down and out of commision. He only would have had to call the cops, pull up a chair, and keep his gun trained on the thug and waited. If the thug had managed to do anything, other than continue to lie there and the pharmacist had then shot him again and again and killed him, I would not be making the argument that the pharmacist was in the wrong.
2. Nobody has given any links to suggest any prominent opinion-maker has had anything to say, but keep your eye on Townhall, if anybody says anything Mike Adams or Doug Giles would probably be the most likely to say something.
3. Even if I were an American, my opinion of somebody wouldn’t be affected in the least. I’m mostly economic, law and problem solving oriented.
Be specific.
In what way have I shown myself to be a hypocrite and liar?
My position has been consistent on this issue.
The Pharmacist had a history of lies and mental problems, he had a fake fantasy life as a self absorbed, self described war hero and it looks like the murder set up and the fake description of the robbery was a part of that mental state and dishonesty.
Wow, Debbie Schlussel is a lying nut case, she is putting out a fake version of events. Evidently Schlussel just posts anything to get an emotional response from her less than sharp readers.
Wrong, if you can't tell that from watching the druggist himself, then know that when the robber collapsed unconscious from a brain wound, lay in his own blood and blood splatter on his back with his hands out, never moving, and never moved even when he was being shot five times, the coroner and forensics easily could read what happened to the unconscious body.
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.