Oklahoma pharmacist convicted in murder of teen robber is sentenced to life

Fair enough, maybe he did. Isn't that what we have clinical psychiatrists for though? To determine things like that?

I agree, he knew exactly what he went there to do.

Oh save it Mello, he went there with an accomplice with the intention of holding someone up @ gunpoint and robbing (or worse) them. He can rot in hell for all I care.

 

The pharmacist clearly committed premeditated murder. The first time he shot the kid in the head was reasonable. The next five times (after he got another gun AND AFTER he chased after the other robber outside the store) was sick, twisted and wrong.

 

of course...because you value 20 dollars in consumer crap FAR more than the life of a teenage boy.

 

Always nice to see liberals side with juvenile delinquents over real victims.

It's really not hard: don't rob a store at gunpoint, you don't end up shot up. But keep defending retards and idiots, country is full of them as you can see.

Sad our laws protect criminals over law abiding citizens. It's now OK to rob a store and turn the store owner into a criminal.

Liberal bent on this: store owner is rich, the black thug, "Antwun", is just a poor boy from the hood who deserves the rich store owners cash b/c it's not fair he has more then him.

 

Again you missed the point. Its the action that got him shot, not the value of the property stolen. If you commit a robbery with a gun, the owner of the store has the right to shoot you. It doesn't matter how much you intended to steal. Its irrelevent. I'm not weighing human life with a carton of smokes, I'm weighing it against the crime.

 

He was a victim of sytematic racism that left him no other choice but to turn to crime. The store owner should count himself lucky he was not charged with a hate crime because that's almost certainly what this was.

 

Plain as day . . . . .

 

that cut and dry huh? so if you rob a store with a gun, and the clerk is able to subdue you and tie you up...

he can still shoot you?

you can shoot in self defense...you cant execute.

 

Good lord, keep on defending retards. The teenage boy didn't value his own life, which is why he was robbing a store for $20. But nice of you to try and twist it around.

 

Who are you to say? Maybe the man was emotionally disturbed and his repressed aggression came out when two thugs came into his store and tried to rob him at gunpoint.

 

your "liberal bent" is as ignorant as me suggesting youre ok with this because you want to see all teenage black kids shot.

the kid was subdued, and THEN executed.

I dont fault him for the first shot....and I dont think anyone else seems to either.

 

This is a better liberal bend to the story then mine. Well done.

 

really?

is that in the amicus you submitted to the court before the case?

 

The time it takes to subdue another person and tie them up would undoubtedly give a person enough time to cool down from being the victim of a crime.

 

I happened to be working in LA when the liberal Chief of Police was accused that his policemen were the quickest to use their guns of all police depts nationwide. He denied that that was the case. That LA cops did not shoot any more often than other police depts. THAT NIGHT, 2 LA policemen entered a 12 stool doughnut shop. A small room, 12 stools. They spot a guy they've been after. The bad guy and the 2 cops all "slap leather" A gun battle, WITH OTHER CUSTOMERS IN THE SHOP, ENSUES. Both cops EMPTY their service weapons, AND their BACK UP weapons. And BOTH, reload and EMPTY their service weapons again. The, dead, bad guy, whose weapon was found to be empty, but fired, was hit 22 times. The Chief had, "No comment!" There was no trial.

 

I am pretty sure the 1st shot to the head wasn't about subduing him either. I don't know about you, but if someone shots someone in the head, they are wanting to make sure they dont ever get back up from it.

 

I don't think race or anything like that has anything to do with it.

If two people come into a store with the intention to rob it and one of them pulls a gun I think all bets should be off.

I don't think the store owner has the right to torture the robbers but he should have the right to kill them if he wants.

Once you've decided to commit armed robbery I don't think the courts should really be in the business of protecting you from the people you tried to rob.

 

The punk wanted to risk his life for "free" smokes.

First, I'm not a christian, too liberal for me.

Second, it has nothing to do with the value of what the punk was there to steal; it has to do with preserving the value of our society.

Flash mobs and casual theft is not of value to any society. The liberal horde is to blame for this kids death and the store keepers troubles too. For years we have heard from the liberal horde - "$20 ahead of human life." "He just wanted a nice leather coat like you had." "They were just horny young boys and she was out there where she knew better than to be."

If there was not one excuse, not one apology on behave of these punks they would stop and try to be decent people.

 

No you just said it's ok to shoot him....

Now you acknowledge that's not always true?

 

There are alot of people that fly off the handle when placed in a stressful situation. For example, there are women that get off with murder by claiming they were raped multiple times by the victim. Is it really so hard to believe that this guy snapped when two thugs tried to rob him at gunpoint?

 

it was at least a reasonable expectation that he was in danger....

but as always conservatives dont believe in reasonable....they believe in black and white....everything is either ok always, or never.

 

No, I just reject your blame the victim mentality.

 

so if he wants to follow them home, wait until they go to sleep....

then sneak in and shoot them....its fine?

 

im not blaming the murder victim....you are.

 

our society has no value if we place no value on human life