Too bad this disabled vet had a gun, saving a pregnant woman from 2 violent attackers is wrong

[Brain357]

Now we have to pay for the small fortune in medical bills.

That's what you wanted ... That's what you got.

.

That makes no sense.

The only reason we are stuck with their medical bills is because people like you wanted us to pay them ... But I can see how that might have slipped your mind.

.

Oh I see. So you would have them die on the street?

 

[BlackSand]

Now we have to pay for the small fortune in medical bills.

That's what you wanted ... That's what you got.

.

That makes no sense.

The only reason we are stuck with their medical bills is because people like you wanted us to pay them ... But I can see how that might have slipped your mind.

.

Oh I see. So you would have them die on the street?

Where did I say that ... I simply commented on the fact it is ridiculous to complain about what you asked for.
If you don't want to pay for their injuries ... Then you shouldn't have asked to.
If you don't want them to die in the street ... Then get out your wallet.

.

 

[Brain357]

Now we have to pay for the small fortune in medical bills.

That's what you wanted ... That's what you got.

.

That makes no sense.

The only reason we are stuck with their medical bills is because people like you wanted us to pay them ... But I can see how that might have slipped your mind.

.

Oh I see. So you would have them die on the street?

Where did I say that ... I simply commented on the fact it is ridiculous to complain about what you asked for.
If you don't want to pay for their injuries ... Then you shouldn't have asked to.
If you don't want them to die in the street ... Then get out your wallet.

.

When did I ever ask for that exactly? I clearly prefer they didn't get shot in the first place.

 

[BlackSand]

That's what you wanted ... That's what you got.

.

That makes no sense.

The only reason we are stuck with their medical bills is because people like you wanted us to pay them ... But I can see how that might have slipped your mind.

.

Oh I see. So you would have them die on the street?

Where did I say that ... I simply commented on the fact it is ridiculous to complain about what you asked for.
If you don't want to pay for their injuries ... Then you shouldn't have asked to.
If you don't want them to die in the street ... Then get out your wallet.

.

When did I ever ask for that exactly? I clearly prefer they didn't get shot in the first place.

But you did ask to pay for it.

.

 

[Brain357]

That makes no sense.

The only reason we are stuck with their medical bills is because people like you wanted us to pay them ... But I can see how that might have slipped your mind.

.

Oh I see. So you would have them die on the street?

Where did I say that ... I simply commented on the fact it is ridiculous to complain about what you asked for.
If you don't want to pay for their injuries ... Then you shouldn't have asked to.
If you don't want them to die in the street ... Then get out your wallet.

.

When did I ever ask for that exactly? I clearly prefer they didn't get shot in the first place.

But you did ask to pay for it.

.

Ok I will repeat myself. When did I ever ask for that exactly?

 

[BlackSand]

The only reason we are stuck with their medical bills is because people like you wanted us to pay them ... But I can see how that might have slipped your mind.

.

Oh I see. So you would have them die on the street?

Where did I say that ... I simply commented on the fact it is ridiculous to complain about what you asked for.
If you don't want to pay for their injuries ... Then you shouldn't have asked to.
If you don't want them to die in the street ... Then get out your wallet.

.

When did I ever ask for that exactly? I clearly prefer they didn't get shot in the first place.

But you did ask to pay for it.

.

Ok I will repeat myself. When did I ever ask for that exactly?

Oh ... So now you don't think we should pay for it ... Great, then we agree.

.

 

[Brain357]

Oh I see. So you would have them die on the street?

Where did I say that ... I simply commented on the fact it is ridiculous to complain about what you asked for.
If you don't want to pay for their injuries ... Then you shouldn't have asked to.
If you don't want them to die in the street ... Then get out your wallet.

.

When did I ever ask for that exactly? I clearly prefer they didn't get shot in the first place.

But you did ask to pay for it.

.

Ok I will repeat myself. When did I ever ask for that exactly?

Oh ... So now you don't think we should pay for it ... Great, then we agree.

.

Ok you just keep playing dumb games then. When you grow up come back.

 

[BlackSand]

Where did I say that ... I simply commented on the fact it is ridiculous to complain about what you asked for.
If you don't want to pay for their injuries ... Then you shouldn't have asked to.
If you don't want them to die in the street ... Then get out your wallet.

.

When did I ever ask for that exactly? I clearly prefer they didn't get shot in the first place.

But you did ask to pay for it.

.

Ok I will repeat myself. When did I ever ask for that exactly?

Oh ... So now you don't think we should pay for it ... Great, then we agree.

.

Ok you just keep playing dumb games then. When you grow up come back.

What games ... Either you think you should pay the bill or you don't.
If you want to argue over what you have no control over (whether or not they get shot) ... Well that is a silly game.

.

 

[Brain357]

When did I ever ask for that exactly? I clearly prefer they didn't get shot in the first place.

But you did ask to pay for it.

.

Ok I will repeat myself. When did I ever ask for that exactly?

Oh ... So now you don't think we should pay for it ... Great, then we agree.

.

Ok you just keep playing dumb games then. When you grow up come back.

What games ... Either you think you should pay the bill or you don't.
If you want to argue over what you have no control over (whether or not they get shot) ... Well that is a silly game.

.

Well explain not paying then. They are homeless so they clearly won't be paying. I don't think letting them die in the street is really an option.

 

[eots]

Well, this disabled vet made a huge mistake....he saw a pregnant woman being assaulted by 2 violent men.....he tried to intervene and because of his disability he was unable to resist them physically......so he used a gun...and the sad souls continued their violent attack...and he shot them.....
Too bad he had that gun......now two violent criminals who prey on pregnant women have been shot.....what is the world coming to when someone would choose to use a gun rather than allow a violent attack against a pregnant woman go forward.....

Disabled Army Vet Shoots Two Alleged Attackers to Protect Pregnant Woman - Breitbart

Guns don't kill people

 

[The Professor]

This seems like a minor scuffle between friends turned into a shooting. Think of the massive hospital bills for these two that they won't be paying for. I think a cell phone and calling the police would have been better.

Thank God that vet was there and not you. You'd have been as useful to that pregnant woman as dog shit to a camel.

It's really sad when non violent felons lose their ability to effectively defend themselves, making them victims. Write a bad check, lose your gun rights. WTF?

So it is good a minor scuffle between friends turned into two shootings? Huge hospital bills. Father of child possibly dying. I don't get your thinking.

You think the woman wanted her boyfriend shot?

I don't think you understand the seriousness of the situation. This is from the link:

“When Anderson tried to protect the woman, both homeless men reportedly turned on him. His military disability prevented him from fighting them off, so Anderson warned them that he had gun. They allegedly continued to come at him anyway, so he shot them both.”

The law in every jurisdiction is that deadly force may be used when a person has a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury or death. Anderson was both outnumbered and disabled and could not defend himself without the use of deadly force. The sheriff's decision not to charge Anderson appears to be justified.

Some of you may respond that the law enables anyone who feels the least bit threatened to kill someone and get away with it. Nothing could be further from the truth. The law says that one may use deadly force when he/she has a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to avoid serious bodily injury or death. Whether the defendant's belief is reasonable is ultimately a matter for the jury to decide. Self-defense is an affirmative defense which means the burden is upon the defendant to convince the jury. The members of the jury are instructed to judge the defendant based upon what they believe a reasonably prudent person would do in the same circumstance.

 

[Brain357]

This seems like a minor scuffle between friends turned into a shooting. Think of the massive hospital bills for these two that they won't be paying for. I think a cell phone and calling the police would have been better.

Thank God that vet was there and not you. You'd have been as useful to that pregnant woman as dog shit to a camel.

It's really sad when non violent felons lose their ability to effectively defend themselves, making them victims. Write a bad check, lose your gun rights. WTF?

So it is good a minor scuffle between friends turned into two shootings? Huge hospital bills. Father of child possibly dying. I don't get your thinking.

You think the woman wanted her boyfriend shot?

I don't think you understand the seriousness of the situation. This is from the link:

“When Anderson tried to protect the woman, both homeless men reportedly turned on him. His military disability prevented him from fighting them off, so Anderson warned them that he had gun. They allegedly continued to come at him anyway, so he shot them both.”

The law in every jurisdiction is that deadly force may be used when a person has a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury or death. Anderson was both outnumbered and disabled and could not defend himself without the use of deadly force. The sheriff's decision not to charge Anderson appears to be justified.

Some of you may respond that the law enables anyone who feels the least bit threatened to kill someone and get away with it. Nothing could be further from the truth. The law says that one may use deadly force when he/she has a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to avoid serious bodily injury or death. Whether the defendant's belief is reasonable is ultimately a matter for the jury to decide. Self-defense is an affirmative defense which means the burden is upon the defendant to convince the jury. The members of the jury are instructed to judge the defendant based upon what they believe a reasonably prudent person would do in the same circumstance.

My point is he should have stayed out of it. He should have just called the cops. Two friends were having a little scuffle and the girlfriend of one gets pushed down. This vet shows up and instantly the guys forget about what they were fighting about. All signs point to this being a minor scuffle among friends. The vet butts in and instead of a minor scuffle we now have two guys shot. One potentially the father of the unborn child. I doubt the woman would want him shot. And being homeless they aren't going to be paying the hospital bills either so we have to pay those.

 

[BlackSand]

Well explain not paying then. They are homeless so they clearly won't be paying. I don't think letting them die in the street is really an option.

Well then ... You shouldn't let them die in the street.
You are welcome to pay for the hospital bills if you feel like it.
We can contact the hospital and have them send you the bill ... But I doubt you really want to do that.

.

 

[2aguy]

This seems like a minor scuffle between friends turned into a shooting. Think of the massive hospital bills for these two that they won't be paying for. I think a cell phone and calling the police would have been better.

Thank God that vet was there and not you. You'd have been as useful to that pregnant woman as dog shit to a camel.

It's really sad when non violent felons lose their ability to effectively defend themselves, making them victims. Write a bad check, lose your gun rights. WTF?

So it is good a minor scuffle between friends turned into two shootings? Huge hospital bills. Father of child possibly dying. I don't get your thinking.

You think the woman wanted her boyfriend shot?

I don't think you understand the seriousness of the situation. This is from the link:

“When Anderson tried to protect the woman, both homeless men reportedly turned on him. His military disability prevented him from fighting them off, so Anderson warned them that he had gun. They allegedly continued to come at him anyway, so he shot them both.”

The law in every jurisdiction is that deadly force may be used when a person has a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury or death. Anderson was both outnumbered and disabled and could not defend himself without the use of deadly force. The sheriff's decision not to charge Anderson appears to be justified.

Some of you may respond that the law enables anyone who feels the least bit threatened to kill someone and get away with it. Nothing could be further from the truth. The law says that one may use deadly force when he/she has a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to avoid serious bodily injury or death. Whether the defendant's belief is reasonable is ultimately a matter for the jury to decide. Self-defense is an affirmative defense which means the burden is upon the defendant to convince the jury. The members of the jury are instructed to judge the defendant based upon what they believe a reasonably prudent person would do in the same circumstance.

My point is he should have stayed out of it. He should have just called the cops. Two friends were having a little scuffle and the girlfriend of one gets pushed down. This vet shows up and instantly the guys forget about what they were fighting about. All signs point to this being a minor scuffle among friends. The vet butts in and instead of a minor scuffle we now have two guys shot. One potentially the father of the unborn child. I doubt the woman would want him shot. And being homeless they aren't going to be paying the hospital bills either so we have to pay those.

Wait....how do you know exactly what was happening brain...how do you know it was a "little scuffle"...how do you know they weren't close to possbily killing the woman, either with intent or through an accident....I mean...who pushes down a pregnant woman anyway? And do you really want to wait to see if they don't really mean to harm the woman they just pushed down?

You are making a lot of assumptions about a situation you weren't in and that the police have investigated and called a justified shooting....

 

[jknowgood]

The guy told them to stop, they then came after him and after he said I have a gun, they continued to go after him. That's justified.

If you have issues, by all means, call that police department and tell them. Don't tell me.

I'm not saying throw him in jail. I'm saying his butting in with a gun turned a mole hill into a mountain. Now we have to pay for the small fortune in medical bills.

No, with obamacare they are mandated to have insurance. Right?

 

[2aguy]

The guy told them to stop, they then came after him and after he said I have a gun, they continued to go after him. That's justified.

If you have issues, by all means, call that police department and tell them. Don't tell me.

I'm not saying throw him in jail. I'm saying his butting in with a gun turned a mole hill into a mountain. Now we have to pay for the small fortune in medical bills.

No, with obamacare they are mandated to have insurance. Right?

I will now proceed to reason as Brain and other lefties do......

People should not be allowed to stop any crime by defending themseleves.....it costs too much....When an individual simply submits to violent criminal attack, there is only that victims medical costs to pay for......if he fights back and injures the attacker, you now have two people to pay for.

when a victim does engage in self defense behavior, they also increase the risk of escalation from the original attacker, where they might just rape a woman, if she fights back, he might feel compelled to beat her to gain her submission...thereby increasing the cost of the original act beyond simple rape, also, again, the attacker may also be injured turning one woman being raped into two people needing medical attention......

therefore, it is more cost effective to make a law making it illegal to defend yourself from criminal attack..

It is just better for everyone that way.....

 

[Brain357]

Well explain not paying then. They are homeless so they clearly won't be paying. I don't think letting them die in the street is really an option.

Well then ... You shouldn't let them die in the street.
You are welcome to pay for the hospital bills if you feel like it.
We can contact the hospital and have them send you the bill ... But I doubt you really want to do that.

.

No thanks. We all pay higher hospital bills because of things like this.

 

[Brain357]

This seems like a minor scuffle between friends turned into a shooting. Think of the massive hospital bills for these two that they won't be paying for. I think a cell phone and calling the police would have been better.

Thank God that vet was there and not you. You'd have been as useful to that pregnant woman as dog shit to a camel.

It's really sad when non violent felons lose their ability to effectively defend themselves, making them victims. Write a bad check, lose your gun rights. WTF?

So it is good a minor scuffle between friends turned into two shootings? Huge hospital bills. Father of child possibly dying. I don't get your thinking.

You think the woman wanted her boyfriend shot?

I don't think you understand the seriousness of the situation. This is from the link:

“When Anderson tried to protect the woman, both homeless men reportedly turned on him. His military disability prevented him from fighting them off, so Anderson warned them that he had gun. They allegedly continued to come at him anyway, so he shot them both.”

The law in every jurisdiction is that deadly force may be used when a person has a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury or death. Anderson was both outnumbered and disabled and could not defend himself without the use of deadly force. The sheriff's decision not to charge Anderson appears to be justified.

Some of you may respond that the law enables anyone who feels the least bit threatened to kill someone and get away with it. Nothing could be further from the truth. The law says that one may use deadly force when he/she has a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to avoid serious bodily injury or death. Whether the defendant's belief is reasonable is ultimately a matter for the jury to decide. Self-defense is an affirmative defense which means the burden is upon the defendant to convince the jury. The members of the jury are instructed to judge the defendant based upon what they believe a reasonably prudent person would do in the same circumstance.

My point is he should have stayed out of it. He should have just called the cops. Two friends were having a little scuffle and the girlfriend of one gets pushed down. This vet shows up and instantly the guys forget about what they were fighting about. All signs point to this being a minor scuffle among friends. The vet butts in and instead of a minor scuffle we now have two guys shot. One potentially the father of the unborn child. I doubt the woman would want him shot. And being homeless they aren't going to be paying the hospital bills either so we have to pay those.

Wait....how do you know exactly what was happening brain...how do you know it was a "little scuffle"...how do you know they weren't close to possbily killing the woman, either with intent or through an accident....I mean...who pushes down a pregnant woman anyway? And do you really want to wait to see if they don't really mean to harm the woman they just pushed down?

You are making a lot of assumptions about a situation you weren't in and that the police have investigated and called a justified shooting....

The story is pretty clear that the men were fighting. And one of the men is the boyfriend of the woman. So the woman probably got pushed down trying to break up the fight. You act like these were two homeless people attacking a random pregnant woman. These were all friends obviously. Who is this guy the hero of? Both men were shot so clearly not them. I don't think the woman wanted her boyfriend shot so not her. This is a case of a gun making a bad situation much worse. Now the vet shouldn't be prosecuted because they shouldn't have tried to assault him, but it would have been much better had he called the cops.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Better for who? Surely not the pregnant woman or the vet. So better for who?

 

[Brain357]

Better for who? Surely not the pregnant woman or the vet. So better for who?

I think the vet would have had a much better night had he not shot two people. I am sure the pregnant woman would have had a better night if her boyfriend had not been shot.
Woman Veteran who shot boyfriend pulled trigger too soon - Worldnews.com

"The guy that walked up to us, why did he have to shoot?"