Armed robbers can now kill victims in self defense and not be charged with murder

He turned and fired a fatal shot because he was himself being shot at.
But he was not being pursued...........he came into the store to rob it armed..........the clerk feeling his life was in danger rushed into a back room got a pistol and came out shooting in defense of his life.
 
Last edited:
He shot after a fleeing suspect who posed no threat to him. That's the point.
Bullshit..........the robber was armed and dangerous......he shot the clerk whilst the clerk was still in the store....thus the b.s. that the robber was being pursued is false.
 
Bullshit..........the robber was armed and dangerous......he shot the clerk whilst the clerk was still in the store....thus the b.s. that the robber was being pursued is false.
The bottom line remains, you don't have the right to shoot someone who is running away.
 
Bullshit..........the robber was armed and dangerous......he shot the clerk whilst the clerk was still in the store....thus the b.s. that the robber was being pursued is false.
The bullets went after the fleeing robber. If you don't know what you're shooting at, you shouldn't be shooting.
 
The bottom line remains, you don't have the right to shoot someone who is running away.
that depends on how you interpet the law.....the law says one is not allowd to pursue.

And also he may have turned whilst running and fired a shot even before the clerk opened fire.....one thing for sure he was within shooting distance thus he shot and killed the clerk whilst the clerk was still in the tore......california came to a erroneous conclusion.....attempting to prevent gun owners fromm shooting their assailant....simply because most perpetrators of violent assault in California are black.....in a nutshell politicians in california are trying to get the black vote.
 
The bullets went after the fleeing robber. If you don't know what you're shooting at, you shouldn't be shooting.
he never left the store he was shot and killed whilst still in the store

He knew exactly what he was shootig at you pc moron.
 
he never left the store he was shot and killed whilst still in the store

He knew exactly what he was shootig at you pc moron.
Which would have been smarter to do, shoot after the fleeing suspect or get behind cover until he was gone? We know how the one option turned out for him.

This case is similar to what happened with Kyle Rittenhouse. He was being pursued and opened fire. Ultimately to be cleared because he was acting in self-defense, despite his attackers thinking they had good reason to attack him.
 
Which would have been smarter to do, shoot after the fleeing suspect or get behind cover until he was gone? We know how the one option turned out for him.

This case is similar to what happened with Kyle Rittenhouse. He was being pursued and opened fire. Ultimately to be cleared because he was acting in self-defense, despite his attackers thinking they had good reason to attack him.
Not similar at all you moron.....the clerk was just doing his job when confronted with a armed robber.....if that is not reason to be in fear of your life....nothing is.

But oh yeah....lhindsight is always 20/20.....what would you have done if you had been the clerk beside piss in your pants and beg the robber for your life...he would probably have shot you anyhow.

typical kalifornia pussy.
 
Not similar at all you moron.....the clerk was just doing his job when confronted with a armed robber.....if that is not reason to be in fear of your life....nothing is.

But oh yeah....lhindsight is always 20/20.....what would you have done if you had been the clerk beside piss in your pants and beg the robber for your life...he would probably have shot you anyhow.

typical kalifornia pussy.
I don't live in California. And I will remind you, the robber was running AWAY when the clerk opened fire, not standing in front of him. What are you going to do, empty your clip into the street, not knowing who you're going to hit?
 
I don't live in California. And I will remind you, the robber was running AWAY when the clerk opened fire, not standing in front of him. What are you going to do, empty your clip into the street, not knowing who you're going to hit?
B.S. The robber was close enough to shoot and kill the clerk who was in the store....he did not run into the street....have you never seen a running man turn and shoot?
 
B.S. The robber was close enough to shoot and kill the clerk who was in the store....he did not run into the street....have you never seen a running man turn and shoot?
Again.....the simple fact is that liberals do not want citizens to have weapons much less shoot at criminals.

Also they want to do away with the common law priniple of self defense.
 
B.S. The robber was close enough to shoot and kill the clerk who was in the store....he did not run into the street....have you never seen a running man turn and shoot?
Did you read the linked story in the OP? According to the article, he was shot outside the store, fell to the ground, then fired back into the store, killing the clerk. So yes, he ran into the street and that's where the clerk shot him, and no, he didn't just stop running to turn around and shoot. If you're running away from a man with a gun, the chances of getting hit drop dramatically with every meter of distance between you. Please do get the facts straight.
 
California would be more likely to secede from the Union than spread that culture to other states. A whopping number of states have attained constitutional carry and relaxed other firearms laws in the past 10 years or so. Suffice to say that our most "progressive" state is actually the most regressive! I really wish they WOULD secede. That would be awesome.. It would be like having a bunion removed.
The far left coast might want to declare itself "liberated" by the chi-coms, but the bulk of the state remains patriotic.

As far as the OP goes my opinion is that once the perp fled the scene, the shooting should have stopped.

I know that's not going to be popular but that's what I would do. Stop shooting at me, and I'll stop shooting back.In TX for the most part the law won't protect you from chasing and shooting a perp unless it's at night on your own property, and it's a felony level theft or serious crime. At least that is how I've come to understand it.


.
 
The far left coast might want to declare itself "liberated" by the chi-coms, but the bulk of the state remains patriotic.

As far as the OP goes my opinion is that once the perp fled the scene, the shooting should have stopped.

I know that's not going to be popular but that's what I would do. Stop shooting at me, and I'll stop shooting back.In TX for the most part the law won't protect you from chasing and shooting a perp unless it's at night on your own property, and it's a felony level theft or serious crime. At least that is how I've come to understand it.


.
Seriously, does anyone want to be the guy who fired into the street at night and hit an innocent bystander? I agree, when someone is running away, you don't shoot after them because at that point it's not defense, it's revenge.
 
Easy.

1. You believe a fallacy.
2. If you were correct, there would be a whole lot more bullets flying around.
3. You are no a mind reader, despite what the back page of your comic book says the foil helmet gives you.
Gun nuts find **Bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, clip, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang** and repeat several times easy. Reasonable force is beyond gun nut's comprehension.

I take it you're a gun nut, I heard your knuckles drag in
 
Gun nuts find **Bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, clip, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang** and repeat several times easy. Reasonable force is beyond gun nut's comprehension.

I take it you're a gun nut, I heard your knuckles drag in
When Cops shoot a perp 23 times in a Gun battle ( then perform CPR and apply Israeli bandages and hold pressure on wounds and yell for Paramedics like the perp is a favorite cousin is too funny to be believed
 
Gun nuts find **Bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, clip, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang** and repeat several times easy. Reasonable force is beyond gun nut's comprehension.

I take it you're a gun nut, I heard your knuckles drag in
Thank goodness we don't have many of those around. They sound scary.

I'd have to own guns to be a gun nut. It would be more accurate to say I'm a Constitutional rights nut.
 
Thank goodness we don't have many of those around. They sound scary.

I'd have to own guns to be a gun nut. It would be more accurate to say I'm a Constitutional rights nut.
Is the Constitution a qualifier for argument for Legalized Fentanyl , Meth , Smack , Crack ,Shrooms ,Molly ... ( Drugs )
 
Is the Constitution a qualifier for argument for Legalized Fentanyl , Meth , Smack , Crack ,Shrooms ,Molly ... ( Drugs )
It could be, as drug trafficking and usage isn't prohibited therein. It would be a tough sell, however, because of the harm the drugs you list cause to society.
 
Thank goodness we don't have many of those around. They sound scary.

I'd have to own guns to be a gun nut. It would be more accurate to say I'm a Constitutional rights nut.
A gun nut has guns as their religion. They religiously spout, "COME TAKE MY GUNS", they feel every scenario requires a gun as the solution, you need to walk everywhere with a gun because of all your pending attacks from enemies, and they must say, "2bd Amendment", on a daily basis, especially at prayer time I've breakfast, dinner, tea, and supper.

You look out of your house and someone is snooping about, you put a light on, shout and they run off. A gun nut advocates the house owner to shoot off 350 rounds, 2 missiles, and a bazooka instead. When they've shot the fleeing burglar in the back, whooped and slapped their neighbour, they claim is was self defence and self defence is not a fallacy. This is the world of a gun nut. Ask 2aguy , that's his daily routine.
 

Forum List

Back
Top