This is California we are talking about here... No one has been put to death in years. Like Scott Peterson is still on death row at san Quentin and most like will live out his life there...only Texas puts people to death.... People here in cities like Sacramento live in fear from the gangs and they are no joke.. If you lived in a place like that you might understand... Most gang members always carry guns... So are you going to wait to see if they are armed when they are in your house? Sure they were running once they saw the home owner was armed had she not no telling what would have happened.. Has you life been threatened? Probably not and you don't live in constant fear of gangs.

once again, I wouldnt have to 'wait' once I see that they have run away. Threat dissolved.

and yes, I have TWICE been assaulted in my life
once where the mere decision to fight caused him to run away at which time I ran the OPPOSITE WAY,, instead of following, stalking, or continuing to try to harm him.

so, yes, I have been threatened, and Im glad no guns were involved, because we all kept our lives at the end of the day.

Not for me to decide


Laws wouldn't make much of a difference in my world.
Mess with my loved ones and home and you're a dead man.
Chisel that in stone!



Dalai Lama says: It is justified to eliminate evil, in order to save others from harm. How many other victims did your perpetrator victimize? we'll never know.

The home is the only place I agree with the use of deadly force.

john

with all due respect, I dont have the ego to believe I can determine who is 'evil'

and I will not be convinced that human life, which is IRREPLACABLE , is less important than someones property or ego....


as to how many others were 'victims'?

well, in the first case, with the runner,
at least for a couple decades there were no others outside of prison that were victims because we went to TRIAL and he was imprisoned

as to the second case, I wouldnt have justified killing him to save him from assaulting someone else, because, even though I was assaulted, there was no weapon besides his size advantage, I still have my life,, and had no right to declare or decide he shouldnt have his,,,,

It's not about ego harmony... It's about self preservation.

That human life you talked about decided to break something in order to gain access to your person or property.
I guess that's the reason these thugs continue doing what they do... Maybe they too can't believe someone would shoot a nice guy like them for stealing a CD player.

so the cycle of terror continues.

its not about nice or not nice

there are some 'not nice' people posting in this thread, but I still dont have any right to decide if they deserve their LIFE to be snuffed out

its about punishment fitting the crime

the death penalty is not the punishment for b and e, nor theft, and thats how it should be

Ca. law is pretty clear.

Idiot breaks into someone's home, they do, with full knowledge, put their fate into the hands of the homeowner/ occupant.

Hopefully, other wannabes will learn to respect others property and lives.

However, it's highly doubtful.

hopefully, others wont lose their lives or take lives over proprty

but it is,, doubtful,,,

How can you be certain it was all about just property?

And, are you implying, if someone broke in on you to rob or kill your family, you wouldn't kill to save them?

oh, I dont know, because of the words 'intruders', and not 'assailants'

and because they were ON THEIR WAY OUT THE DOOR,,,


I made it pretty clear what I feel constitutes 'saving' my family
Im not worried as much about being robbed, things can be replaced and I wouldnt kill over them


someone in the process of ATTACKING, is one thing, someone in the process of LEAVING/RETREATING is another,,,

It would be rational not to shoot someone in the back, but a person who has just been terrorized isn't necessarily thinking rationally.

Shoot em in the back so they don't come back.

so, give them no reason to not be violent, since the end is the same,,,right?

Granny was a damn good shot.

Great aim.

If ya read the story on the URL, you'll notice the liberal slant they put on the report.

Whether or not the shooting was legally justified is something that I do not know.

Let the courts figure it out.

its what is inevitably always going to have to happen,

let the courts decide

The thugs have been dealt their justice.

Far as I know, no charges were filed agin granny.

The title says they want to sue. Not that they're going to.

I see it as a lose/ lose for any attorney to take the case. And, I don't see NotSoSharpton coming to save the day.

But, oh, wait! The thugs were white.

Apparently, on Staten Island, the penalty for being suspected of selling loose cigarettes in death.

police have the authority , due to their own fears and assaults and not knowing if the person MIGHT hurt them,,,to issue death warrants,,,

the public would like to be given that same authority,, apparently

Didn't you say that about the Treyvon Martin case, then you got all pissy