100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Jerome Ersland's Shooting Of Would-Be Robber Sparks Debate | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but
I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well said Sea
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This pharmacist did a huge community service ridding the community of that piece of garbage. oh nice....tell that to his mother I would, I would also tell her the best part of her son ran down her backside during the conception.  hey ya know the thing about karma???? you will!!! laugh at that for a while..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic military training should make own better in tune with a weapon and give one the know-how of a bullet to the head. Generally speaking anyways. I would say the same with cops, but most of them I've seen can't hit the broadside of a barn.
It usually takes me two shots to hit a tin can, but my brother can nail it in one, even without consistent practice. That's usually why I get him to shoot dogs attacking the livestock, because I don't want to drag it out since I'm not as good. I do believe, if it ever came to it, he could hit the skull. I know he could hit the body. We're not gun-nuts, but we do believe in practice. Any responsible gunowner should, even if they never have to use it. Many of the people here in Texas get a concealed carry and never go back to the range. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state Like I said I will not be a judge or jury here.....as a student of psychology you do not know what happens to a persons psyche when a crime is being committed against them in the first placed and since I am not a judgemental person and have not walked a mile in this individuals shoes leading up to this instance I can not tell you what happened to make him act in this fashion or if there was fear or threats of a return etc...etc.....etc....and I would refuse to hang a mans life in the balance even though he took anothers.....we all answer for our sins life always makes us pay our dues.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state Like I said I will not be a judge or jury here.....as a student of psychology you do not know what happens to a persons psyche when a crime is being committed against them in the first placed and since I am not a judgemental person and have not walked a mile in this individuals shoes leading up to this instance I can not tell you what happened to make him act in this fashion or if there was fear or threats of a return etc...etc.....etc....and I would refuse to hang a mans life in the balance even though he took anothers.....we all answer for our sins life always makes us pay our dues.... laws are laws... lack of understanding does not lessen the laws...maybe he will be judged by a higher up, but right now he has been been judged by our courts for breaking the law. it is not that he was trying to defend himself, he did that and then turned it into murder. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state Like I said I will not be a judge or jury here.....as a student of psychology you do not know what happens to a persons psyche when a crime is being committed against them in the first placed and since I am not a judgemental person and have not walked a mile in this individuals shoes leading up to this instance I can not tell you what happened to make him act in this fashion or if there was fear or threats of a return etc...etc.....etc....and I would refuse to hang a mans life in the balance even though he took anothers.....we all answer for our sins life always makes us pay our dues.... laws are laws... lack of understanding does not lessen the laws...maybe he will be judged by a higher up, but right now he has been been judged by our courts for breaking the law. it is not that he was trying to defend himself, he did that and then turned it into murder. And everyone knows how I feel about government laws law enforcement and conformity.......and I will say lack of understanding doesn't but the inability to judge wrong from right in an instant that makes someone snap does..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state Like I said I will not be a judge or jury here.....as a student of psychology you do not know what happens to a persons psyche when a crime is being committed against them in the first placed and since I am not a judgemental person and have not walked a mile in this individuals shoes leading up to this instance I can not tell you what happened to make him act in this fashion or if there was fear or threats of a return etc...etc.....etc....and I would refuse to hang a mans life in the balance even though he took anothers.....we all answer for our sins life always makes us pay our dues.... laws are laws... lack of understanding does not lessen the laws...maybe he will be judged by a higher up, but right now he has been been judged by our courts for breaking the law. it is not that he was trying to defend himself, he did that and then turned it into murder. And everyone knows how I feel about government laws law enforcement and conformity.......and I will say lack of understanding doesn't but the inability to judge wrong from right in an instant that makes someone snap does..... i'm not trying to argue with you, in a way, i think your right, but he clearly broke the law... he had more than an instance to call the police and wait outside for them... the only reason i keep harping on this is so that people will think before they act. he's getting rammrodded because the DA wants to make a statement, to let people know to let the police handle it. he defended himself and the ladies there, no doubt about that. but he should have left it at that... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state Like I said I will not be a judge or jury here.....as a student of psychology you do not know what happens to a persons psyche when a crime is being committed against them in the first placed and since I am not a judgemental person and have not walked a mile in this individuals shoes leading up to this instance I can not tell you what happened to make him act in this fashion or if there was fear or threats of a return etc...etc.....etc....and I would refuse to hang a mans life in the balance even though he took anothers.....we all answer for our sins life always makes us pay our dues.... likewise, we dont KNOW what brought the boy to the point of robbing either, and I Did study psychology in school too we can agree that its a case for the jury, who can decide if it fits the LEGAL definition of MURDER Under most modern statutes in the United States, murder comes in four varieties: (1) intentional murder; (2) a killing that resulted from the intent to do serious bodily injury; (3) a killing that resulted from a depraved heart or extreme recklessness; and (4) murder committed by an Accomplice during the commission of, attempt of, or flight from certain felonies. I could understand a verdict of guilty because, if I was on the jury, I would see there was an intention behind him COMING Back after he was gone and out of danger and getting a SECOND gun and firing SEVERAL Times at someone already disabled with a gun shot to the head. But thats just me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state Like I said I will not be a judge or jury here.....as a student of psychology you do not know what happens to a persons psyche when a crime is being committed against them in the first placed and since I am not a judgemental person and have not walked a mile in this individuals shoes leading up to this instance I can not tell you what happened to make him act in this fashion or if there was fear or threats of a return etc...etc.....etc....and I would refuse to hang a mans life in the balance even though he took anothers.....we all answer for our sins life always makes us pay our dues.... laws are laws... lack of understanding does not lessen the laws...maybe he will be judged by a higher up, but right now he has been been judged by our courts for breaking the law. it is not that he was trying to defend himself, he did that and then turned it into murder. And everyone knows how I feel about government laws law enforcement and conformity.......and I will say lack of understanding doesn't but the inability to judge wrong from right in an instant that makes someone snap does..... i'm not trying to argue with you, in a way, i think your right, but he clearly broke the law... he had more than an instance to call the police and wait outside for them... the only reason i keep harping on this is so that people will think before they act. he's getting rammrodded because the DA wants to make a statement, to let people know to let the police handle it. he defended himself and the ladies there, no doubt about that. but he should have left it at that... no doubt, the first bullet was clearly defense, the bullets from a second gun after RETURNING To the scene, was murderous. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state Like I said I will not be a judge or jury here.....as a student of psychology you do not know what happens to a persons psyche when a crime is being committed against them in the first placed and since I am not a judgemental person and have not walked a mile in this individuals shoes leading up to this instance I can not tell you what happened to make him act in this fashion or if there was fear or threats of a return etc...etc.....etc....and I would refuse to hang a mans life in the balance even though he took anothers.....we all answer for our sins life always makes us pay our dues.... likewise, we dont KNOW what brought the boy to the point of robbing either, and I Did study psychology in school too we can agree that its a case for the jury, who can decide if it fits the LEGAL definition of MURDER Under most modern statutes in the United States, murder comes in four varieties: (1) intentional murder; (2) a killing that resulted from the intent to do serious bodily injury; (3) a killing that resulted from a depraved heart or extreme recklessness; and (4) murder committed by an Accomplice during the commission of, attempt of, or flight from certain felonies. I could understand a verdict of guilty because, if I was on the jury, I would see there was an intention behind him COMING Back after he was gone and out of danger and getting a SECOND gun and firing SEVERAL Times at someone already disabled with a gun shot to the head. But thats just me. Who gives a flying f$%^ why he did it, point is he and his homie went into a store with guns and live amunition and threatened the life of another for personal gain. They got what they deserved, end of story. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since I am not judge and jury I won't even attempt to judge what another does in their own decisions and how he felt in the situation presented here....... but I will say this fact that in circumstances such as this that if even hesitating a moment can have a weapon struggled for and used against the individual protecting self family hearth and home......yet when making the decision to immediately use a weapon and the offender ends up on the raw end of their offense how it can easily become the victim is then the offender and yes I do see something wrong when a law abiding citizen goes to protect themselves and ends up the offender. you do understand he chased one outside, after shooting the other in the head, came back and got another gun from a drawer, then put 5 more bullets in the kid? and the kid did not have a gun...the one he chased out the door had the gun, not the kid he shot... that is not being law abiding, that is breaking the law... his life was not in danger when he put the 5 extra bullets in the kid with the bullet hole in his head...that is illegal in every state Like I said I will not be a judge or jury here.....as a student of psychology you do not know what happens to a persons psyche when a crime is being committed against them in the first placed and since I am not a judgemental person and have not walked a mile in this individuals shoes leading up to this instance I can not tell you what happened to make him act in this fashion or if there was fear or threats of a return etc...etc.....etc....and I would refuse to hang a mans life in the balance even though he took anothers.....we all answer for our sins life always makes us pay our dues.... likewise, we dont KNOW what brought the boy to the point of robbing either, and I Did study psychology in school too we can agree that its a case for the jury, who can decide if it fits the LEGAL definition of MURDER Under most modern statutes in the United States, murder comes in four varieties: (1) intentional murder; (2) a killing that resulted from the intent to do serious bodily injury; (3) a killing that resulted from a depraved heart or extreme recklessness; and (4) murder committed by an Accomplice during the commission of, attempt of, or flight from certain felonies. I could understand a verdict of guilty because, if I was on the jury, I would see there was an intention behind him COMING Back after he was gone and out of danger and getting a SECOND gun and firing SEVERAL Times at someone already disabled with a gun shot to the head. But thats just me. Who gives a flying f$%^ why he did it, point is he and his homie went into a store with guns and live amunition and threatened the life of another for personal gain. They got what they deserved, end of story. I care, as much as I 'care', why the man went BACK to the store to retrieve a gun and continue FIRING At a downed suspect he will suffer his 'consequences', just as this boy who took NO lives did,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peccy
on
Fri 06/03/11 11:35 AM
|
|
1-"The shooting occurred off camera, so Parker’s posture at the time remains unclear."
No one knows for sure what happened, so you are all assuming. "he will suffer his 'consequences', just as this boy who took NO lives did,,," oh come on, the intent was there he just got foiled. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-"The shooting occurred off camera, so Parker’s posture at the time remains unclear." No one knows for sure what happened, so you are all assuming. "he will suffer his 'consequences', just as this boy who took NO lives did,,," oh come on, the intent was there he just got foiled. the intent is unknown, the intent could merely be robbery, not murder and if he was foiled, and took no life, than his life should not have been taken once he was no longer an IMMEDIATE danger to anyones life,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This whole argument reminds me of the aftermath of Columbine.
The kids who did the shooting were called victims as well by the bleeding hearts about a few weeks later and wanted their names included on the memorial. That obviously really rankled some people. The 16 year old came in with intent to rob and since they had a gun, the only assumption the pharmacist could make was they intended to kill. He was not a trained policeman. He was a pharmacist that came in to work and was probably just thinking about getting home to his wife later. These kids came in and terrified everyone, that was clearly their intent at a minimum. He reacted to the situation that he did not plan, expect or want. And now he is going to jail for 1st degree murder. That is the deliberate killing with forethought and planning of another human being. That is the very last thing he should have been charged with. How many here would have had a clear head at that point? He is just an average guy going to work and responding to a terrible situation. Now he is guilty of breaking the law when the kids forced his hand? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the lack of compassion, empathy and respect for life on this site literally turns my stomach.... i truly hope nothing ever happens to any of your children |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This whole argument reminds me of the aftermath of Columbine. The kids who did the shooting were called victims as well by the bleeding hearts about a few weeks later and wanted their names included on the memorial. That obviously really rankled some people. The 16 year old came in with intent to rob and since they had a gun, the only assumption the pharmacist could make was they intended to kill. He was not a trained policeman. He was a pharmacist that came in to work and was probably just thinking about getting home to his wife later. These kids came in and terrified everyone, that was clearly their intent at a minimum. He reacted to the situation that he did not plan, expect or want. And now he is going to jail for 1st degree murder. That is the deliberate killing with forethought and planning of another human being. That is the very last thing he should have been charged with. How many here would have had a clear head at that point? He is just an average guy going to work and responding to a terrible situation. Now he is guilty of breaking the law when the kids forced his hand? truly, this is NOT like columbine those children TOOK lives and LOST their life IN ORDER TO END THAT INTENT< which was clear because they were SUCCESSFUL And had WrITTEN IT AS THEIR INTENT the INTENT Here is not nearly as clear , since these didnt just walk in and indiscriminately shoot to kill anyone it is also different in that the initial 'victim' RETURNED to where the TERRIBLE SITUATION Was AFTER he had gotten away and that victim didnt just RETURN but got a seperate weapon(although he already had a gun on him that could be used, and if PANICKING would probably have BEEN Used subconsciously) and shot the (no longer a threat) Robber/gunman while he was down this is totally seperate from Columbine, where two boys were armed and ACTIVE in attempting to successfully take lives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
adults must try to know the laws where they live and if they are DETERMINED to break them, they should make peace first with the consequences which would follow
my mom has said(As well as my brothers) several times that if her children were ever HARMED By anyone , she would cause HARM to them and she would , I have no doubt follow through, the difference in perspective here is I believe she would deserve to go to jail and she has made PEACE with the fact that she would go to jail for it,, it would be worth it to her, she would not be crying, I hope this was 'worth it' both to the attempted robber and the vigilante victim,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-"The shooting occurred off camera, so Parker’s posture at the time remains unclear." No one knows for sure what happened, so you are all assuming. "he will suffer his 'consequences', just as this boy who took NO lives did,,," oh come on, the intent was there he just got foiled. the intent is unknown, the intent could merely be robbery, not murder and if he was foiled, and took no life, than his life should not have been taken once he was no longer an IMMEDIATE danger to anyones life,,, Two guys go out the door in the parkinglot with guns, everyone on the way out is in danger. |
|
|
|
|
