Jogger who shot and killed his assailant gets off without charges
261 replies, posted
[QUOTE=NoDachi;27497068]
And I never said 30,000 'murders'.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=NoDachi;27497068]At a rate of [b]30,000[/b] a year. Giving it the highest [b]murder[/b] rate in the developed world.[/QUOTE]
I fail to see your point, untrained civilians across a nation all day, every second, since guns first came into existence or even just 40 years ago still would come out to produce more fatalities than a war that lasted maybe 10 years times 9 or so, it adds up to maybe 50 years tops, in total, compared to the 200 or so we've been around or the 40 since 1979 which is compared.
And this is a good thing?
I read it as "Joggler who shot and killed his assistant gets off without charges".
[QUOTE=NoDachi;27497407]And this is a good thing?[/QUOTE]
Yes because the dwarf wanted to punch that dragon in the face.
Thanks for letting us know you misread Jogger as Joggler.
I find it strange he went for a late night jog and had a pistol in his pocket.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;27497068]I was going by [url]http://www.economist.com/node/17902699[/url].
The economist is an incredibly reliable source.
And I never said 30,000 'murders'.[/QUOTE]
[quote]At a rate of 30,000 a year. Giving it the highest murder rate in the developed world.[/quote]
That was badly worded at best, blatantly falsified at worst. You should have left it as it was in your source.
[url]http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/weapons.cfm[/url]
The murder rate with firearms peaked at less than half that, the other half being suicide with firearms.
Firearms in the US do need tighter regulation (first and foremost keeping them out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill), but you're not helping your argument with blunders like that.
[QUOTE=markg06;27497497]I find it strange he went for a late night jog and had a pistol in his pocket.[/QUOTE]
That's about was strange as someone carrying an umbrella when it's overcast.
There's self defence and there's excessive force.
If he'd fired one shot and killed a kid it wouldn't be so bad, this guy fired 8 times, that's excessive if you ask me.
[QUOTE=Doozle;27497616]There's self defence and there's excessive force.
If he'd fired one shot and killed a kid it wouldn't be so bad, this guy fired 8 times, that's excessive if you ask me.[/QUOTE]Generally when defending one's life, excessive is better than insufficient; especially as, contrary to popular belief, death by getting shot isn't always very quick. One could shoot the attacker once, only for them to keep coming. Then there's the legal complications of shooting to wound rather than to kill; it's generally perceived in US law that shooting to wound seems to indicate your life wasn't in as much danger as you say.
The better question is if he needed to shoot at all, whether the mere sight of the gun would have stopped them attacking.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;27497531]That was badly worded at best, blatantly falsified at worst. You should have left it as it was in your source.
[url]http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/weapons.cfm[/url]
The murder rate with firearms peaked at less than half that, the other half being suicide with firearms.
Firearms in the US do need tighter regulation (first and foremost keeping them out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill), but you're not helping your argument with blunders like that.[/QUOTE]
Meh, maybe I should have realised that most of facepunch wouldn't be able to differentiate between two sentences without additional explanation.
30,00 people [b]are[/b] killed by guns every year, [b]contributing[/b] to the highest murder rate in the developed world.
There you go, one nice easily swallowed sentence pill.
The point remains.
[QUOTE=Doozle;27497616]There's self defence and there's excessive force.
If he'd fired one shot and killed a kid it wouldn't be so bad, this guy fired 8 times, that's excessive if you ask me.[/QUOTE]
Oh i'm sorry Mr. Hardass, would you care to explain how impressively resilient to stress and panicing you are in a [i]life threatening situation?[/i]
[QUOTE=NoDachi;27497726]Meh, maybe I should have realised that most of facepunch wouldn't be able to differentiate between two sentences without additional explanation.[/QUOTE]Don't blame us for shit wording on your part. Grammatically speaking, that's exactly how that was to be interpreted.
[QUOTE=tomoom165;27496366]Fired 8 shots and killed 1 person?
I guess he didn't have Steady Aim.[/QUOTE]
I find it funnier that the handgun had a laser sight too.
[QUOTE=tomoom165;27496366]Fired 8 shots and killed 1 person?
I guess he didn't have Steady Aim.[/QUOTE]
I guess Endurance was his dump stat. :v:
Whoa, whoa, whoa, "use of deadly force if you believe your life is in danger" ?
Does that mean you can actually shoot to death absolutely anyone who gets close to you, as long as you believe he will cut you with a knife ? That's fucking retarded.
Also, yeah, he emptied the whole gun on a kid. THE WHOLE MAGAZINE.
What the hell, do they really sell guns to anyone without even checking if they can shoot without panicking and keep pressing the trigger ?
[QUOTE=Doozle;27497616]There's self defence and there's excessive force.
If he'd fired one shot and killed a kid it wouldn't be so bad, this guy fired 8 times, that's excessive if you ask me.[/QUOTE]
If anything eight shots shows that he actually panicked as opposed to being trigger happy.
Besides one shot would've killed him just the same.
[QUOTE=Billiam;27497851]If anything eight shots shows that he actually panicked as opposed to being trigger happy.
Besides one shot would've killed him just the same.[/QUOTE]
Still shows guns are sold to anyone.
[QUOTE=z0nk3d;27497832]Whoa, whoa, whoa, "use of deadly force if you believe your life is in danger" ?
Does that mean you can actually shoot to death absolutely anyone who gets close to you, as long as you believe he will cut you with a knife ? That's fucking retarded.[/QUOTE]
Uh, I can't just say that "I'm going to shoot you because I think you're armed." It was late at night, he was an easy target, he was outnumbered by people younger than him, and he was just punched in the face.
[QUOTE=z0nk3d;27497832]Also, yeah, he emptied the whole gun on a kid. THE WHOLE MAGAZINE.
What the hell.[/QUOTE]
So?
[editline]18th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=z0nk3d;27497868]Still shows guns are sold to anyone.[/QUOTE]
That's kind of the point of the second amendment.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;27496892]Sorry I miss-paraphrased.
This is what I meant to say:
More Americans were killed by guns in the 18 years between 1979 and 1997 than died in all of America’s foreign wars since its independence.
At a rate of 30,000 a year. Giving it the highest murder rate in the developed world.[/QUOTE]
You're not factoring in Medieval times and the renaissance, plus all times before that, which makes your last statement invalid.
Do you want me to tell you about Cortes and the American empires he murdered? :downs:
[editline]18th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=z0nk3d;27497868]Still shows guns are sold to anyone.[/QUOTE]
Wrong. The man had a gun license, which means he can legally purchase a weapon, so long as he shows his license to prove he can buy it legally. However, whether he was legally able to hold the weapon in public is a different story. The carrying license is separate from the purchasing license.
[QUOTE=redBadger;27497956]You're not factoring in Medieval times and the renaissance, which makes your last statement invalid.[/QUOTE]
Why?
[QUOTE=redBadger;27497956]You're not factoring in Medieval times and the renaissance, which makes your last statement invalid.[/QUOTE]What on earth has the Renaissance and medieval times got to do with the modern US murder rate? Or indeed, deaths of Americans since independence, which I think you'll find was well after the Renaissance.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;27497986]Why?[/QUOTE]
Because there was likely more civilian murders then than there ever was. Also, you're denying the fact that this is true: [url]http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/weapons.cfm[/url]
[QUOTE=redBadger;27498004]Because there was likely more civilian murders then than there ever was. [/QUOTE]What the hell are you talking about? He was referring to murders of Americans within a certain timeframe being more than deaths of US citizens (including soldiers) in wars the US was involved in [b]since independence.[/b] That has got absolutely nothing to do with the time period between the fall of the Roman Empire and the late 1600s.
[QUOTE=Pocoyo;27496730]He shot 8 times, he had the intent to kill not defend himself...[/QUOTE]
His vision was blurred plus if his intent was to kill he wouldn't have called the cops and then stayed with the kid for 6 hours while he was dying, self defense, fuck it, If I had a weapon I would have had a .44 Magnum
[QUOTE=redBadger;27497956]
Wrong. The man had a gun license, which means he can legally purchase a weapon, so long as he shows his license to prove he can buy it legally. However, whether he was legally able to hold the weapon in public is a different story. The carrying license is separate from the purchasing license.[/QUOTE]
"Baker, [b]who had a permit to carry a concealed weapon[/b], immediately called police after the shooting last November and stayed with the dying teen."
[QUOTE=z0nk3d;27497868]Still shows guns are sold to anyone.[/QUOTE]
"require concealed carry applicants to certify their proficiency with a firearm through some type of training or instruction. Certain training courses developed by the NRA[U][/U] that combine classroom and live-fire instruction typically meet most state training requirements."
"Baker, who was out jogging to get fit before applying to join the military, said he always carried a handgun."
[QUOTE]Baker, who was out jogging to get fit before applying to join the military, said he always carried a handgun.[/QUOTE]
:911:
[QUOTE=NoDachi;27496750]Cool fact. More civilians have murdered each other in America with guns, than the entire casualty rate of all the wars America has been involved in since it's inception.
Cooler EDIT: More Americans were killed by guns in the 18 years between 1979 and 1997 than died in all of America’s foreign wars since its independence.[/QUOTE]
Holy shit.
Most people would do the same, he was being assaulted by two people who he had no knowledge of having firearms and knife or whatever. He attacked him first so they were looking for trouble, in my opinion justice has been served.
I honestly would too, most of us would, it's instinct and self preservation is an instinct, it kicks in when you fear your life is in danger. Plus he stayed with the kid, I didn't read the article fully but I assume that when he stayed with the kid he was doing CPR and applying pressure on the wound to help the bleeding slow down or stop.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.