'When has it ever become legal to shoot someone because they’re pulling off in your car?'

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...led-carry-shooting-victim-20180523-story.html

What would you do? Would you shoot someone who was trying to steal your property? Should the fire lieutenant be charged? Even if this homicide is legally justifiable it's important to keep in mind that most homicides by those with concealed handgun permits are not according to data collected by the VPC.

 

No I wouldn't. Why would you? You think a television is worth a life?

 

Many on here will say yes....it’s just ‘tough’ talk. They are all full of it.

 

Check with state law. Some states don’t justify homocide in defense of property, some states do.

 

True. What annoys me, mind you, is that they herd. I hoped individualism would be their nature.

 

We can't access Chicago Tribune from the EU so I don't know if it was mentioned there but this article includes the key line; "The lieutenant fired his weapon at the teen, who was trying to run him over with the vehicle, authorities said.". We've obviously no idea how accurate it is but self-defence could be a legitimate reason for shooting.

 

Law enforcement regards motor vehicles as being deadly weapons. The shooting was more than justified under such standards. Especially when the individual who stole the motor vehicle was attempting to run over the legal owner, thus making it a case of assault with a deadly weapon.

The Violence Policy Center is devoid of credibility in this matter.

 

A motor vehicle is far removed from being a television. A motor vehicle is a deadly weapon when used for such purposes.

Beyond that matter, why should private property be held to a lower standard? What exactly is wrong with deadly force being used to protect private property against theft?

 

This amused me. How is private property held to a lower standard? Are you talking nonsense, as usual?

 

Dumb usually has to pay. If the owner of the Jeep had a gun on you and demanded that you cease stealing the Jeep, would you stop or go ahead take the stupid risk?

 

While the use of deadly force is subject to different interpretations in different states, generally the use of deadly force is not justified in preventing the theft of private property. Meaning the life of the individual who is seeking to deprive you of your private property, is held to a higher level of importance by the state than the actual private property of yourself.

The question must be asked, why is such considered to be an acceptable standard? Why is deadly force not justified for the purpose of stopping a burglary?

 

A TV is barely worth buying out of store.

 

Your Honour, I feared for my life and I fired in defense of my life.

 

I have a top notch self defense attorney chosen Incase I need him. He charges $360.00 hr. How much did your TV cost?

 

good riddance. I wish more people would shoot felons. Society would be better off

 

I dunno...I imagine because most people value a human life to be more than what an iPad costs. Maybe you feel differently. Maybe you feel your life and your loved ones lives are worth only a couple hundred dollars. How unfortunate for you and your loved ones.

 

He absolutely should be charged. The courts should determine the law of the land not some beat cop. By his own admission he was in no physical danger

 

How much will your defence attorney cost? Hint may take more tha 100 hours to argue your case

 

Which by his own admission was not the case

 

we should value the property of honest citizens more than the lives of predatory parasites

 

I would not shoot someone just to prevent him from getting away with my property. Now, if he was trying to run me over with a car, it's another story.

 

That’s why I wouldn’t shoot someone over property. Besides, California doesn’t justify use of deadly force to protect property.
I’ve killed in combat, at the moment it didn’t bother me, but it set in later. I can’t describe the feeling but it’s not good. It’s a club with a lifetime membership you can’t renounce.

 

He couldn't know this.

 

And this is why I beliege what many of the " I am a teflon superman becaus I have a gun" posters do not understand. When there is a shooting, even one in self defence, there are consequences. There are often two victims.

PTSD is real

 

Dumb is subjective. Private citizens are not suppose to be judge, jury, and executioner.