Posted on 06/15/2018 6:01:58 AM PDT by Simon Green
Janique Walker knows the cost of a split second.
Her younger brother, 17-year-old Charles Macklin, was killed while trying to steal a Jeep from a Chicago fire lieutenant on the West Side last August. The lieutenant had left the Jeep running, and Macklin jumped behind the wheel.
The lieutenant ran in front of the Jeep and shouted, “Get out,” according to a police report. When Macklin began pulling away, the lieutenant drew his gun and fired through the open driver’s side window, hitting the teen in the chest.
Macklin’s last words were, “Sorry, bro,” according to the police report. The teen died on the pavement. He did not have a gun on him.
The lieutenant had a concealed carry license. He was not charged and he was not disciplined by the department, according to spokesman Larry Langford.
“That was investigated by us, and we found no violation of any rules,” Langford said. “The police didn’t arrest, the state’s attorney found no reason to charge. There was no wrongdoing as far as the Fire Department is concerned.”
Walker, 20, has organized protests, started a Facebook page and launched a hashtag on Twitter. She says she hasn’t given up hope of getting justice for her brother.
She believes her brother was found guilty by one man with a gun. Walker said her brother should be alive to stand before a judge and take responsibility for his actions.
“When has it ever become legal to shoot someone because they’re pulling off in your car?” she asked. “Even if (Macklin) did that, if he did steal the car. You’ve got insurance
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Sounds correct.
SVTCobra03 wrote:
“I believe it would be justifiable homicide at night in Texas.”
Yep.
OK. If stealing a car is against the law, the “little boy” seemed to not care about the law. IF the victim of the little boy’s crime shot the thug, er, little boy, and THAT is against the law, the little POS is still dead in spite of the law, just like the car would have been stolen in spite of the law.
Quick little lesson: Don’t be stealing, Punk.
BTW, if the creep was killed because the victim of the thief was in danger of being run over, he had it coming. The little factoid of shooting through the driver’s side window makes me think the victim of the car thief was no longer in danger of being run over and should not have pulled that trigger executing a thief. That’s murder.
Even sans that essential detail, I stand with “You F**k with my property I F**k with your life”...
:: The sister’s attitude of “What’s the big deal, the insurance will take care of it” is telling. ::
Race-baturs call it White Privilege.
“You may defend your own safety with the use of force, but not your stuff.”
You need to study the laws of the state you are in. In Maryland, for example, use of deadly force in defending your property is perfectly legal. It’s completely illegal across the Potomac here in Virginia.
When I first saw the headline line I thought it was something from The Onion.
Where I come from “pulling off” is a euphemism for masturbation and I thought to myself, okay it’s pretty weird to masterbate in a guys car but it’s really not a killing offense.
Yeppers...you got that one correct.
So...MY vehicle, being driven by a yute thug towards me in an attempt to run me over is NOT a personal safety thing?
Once the vehicle becomes a weapon, the fact that it is owned by the one doing the shooting at the driver of vehicle, using said vehicle as a weapon...well, kind of moot point there, huh?
I don't blame him...I would of done the same thing.
And the yute...who of course was an aspiring rap artist and was going back to school and was getting his life straightened out...yeah...to hell with him.
Everyone is thrilled that your brother is dead dummy!
He good boi, dindu nuffin. He goin back to school to be a cosmetologist like Stephen Hawkin.
Correct, the last words being...Sorry Bro
If the fireman was white there would be riots and looting anyway before now.
"....and his Mother cries..."
He should have avoided the vehicle and shot both the left side tires out. But then again not everybody’s Dirty Harry...
I personally believe identity thieves should get the death penalty and it be done immediately after conviction.
I caught the deliberate and intentional omission.
Cop in front of Jeep. Perp begins “pulling away.” Unless the perp was driving backwards, he was driving AT the cop. End of discussion. Sorry lady, but your pigmentation does not give you immunity
LEGAL? As if legal still has any meaning whatsoever. Before long the regular citizens will wonder why only they should follow the law when top cops- FBI, celebrities, foreign invaders, etc. are exempt.
The money quote from the sister:
What if he DID steal your car? You’ve got insurance” !!!!!!
No wonder my insurance is always going up. These thugs think everything is free.
I guess one could also say:
Here is your trophy for your participation.
“You’ve got insurance” = “ We should be able to steal whatever we want because someone else will pay for it”
“When I want somethin’, man, I don’t wanna pay for it.”
Two of those signs really say:
Here is your trophy for ‘participation’.
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.