There is another shooting death with the defense using the Stand Your Ground Law in Florida Justified Under Stand-Your-Ground: Choir Director Armed With Stick Being Fatally Shot With Illegal Gun I don't think these are good laws. They're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used.
This is my position as well. You don't get to say "whoops, sorry." and have everything forgiven if you hurt other people. If you kill somebody accidentally, but negligently then that's pretty clearly manslaughter.
A good example of a responsible shooter was the guy at Clackamas town center... he had the shooter in his sights, he could have shot him, but he was unsure if he would hit someone behind the guy so he did not want to take the shot. At that point the shooter's gun had already jammed, so I'm sure he would have weighed his options if the guy was still popping away with his rifle, but at that time the shooting had stopped and he did not think it was worth the risk to others around him to take the shot at the active shooter. That is how you assess your surroundings and weigh the risks of discharging your firearm.
Unfortunately, things are seldom black and white. I generally agree that once you pull the trigger, you are responsible for the bullet. But, to use the Clackamas Town Center example. The guy at CTC drew down on the shooter, but didn't shoot because he wasn't sure he wouldn't hit a bystander. Good on him. Like Nate says, the shooter's gun was jammed at the moment. What if the shooter cleared the jam, and started shooting other people? Should the guy with the iffy shot pull the trigger to stop the guy killing shoppers? What if he killed a bystander in that circumstance? Go Blazers
That's an idiotic post. You should forfeit your screen name for that. Innocent until proven guilty means exactly what it says. Rest assured that he will probably be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter or causing a death by reckless use of a firearm. The girl gang should face federal charges for terrorism, menacing, attempted murder, and hate crimes.
Being arrested does not mean guilt. It means the person won't recklessly use his firearm for a while, during which time the police can gather evidence to show to the judge.
Yes. If you have fired your gun at a person and killed them, there is every reason to believe you have committed a crime.
I think really in any situation like that you have to weigh the risks. If there's a guy randomly shooting people in a mall, you will have to consider the chances of hitting someone else with the very real possibility that the guy could keep shooting 10 or 20 more people. If the shooter's gun hadn't jammed, who knows how many would have died. Obviously you're not going to shoot at him when there's people obstructing your view, but you might have to risk whatever is behind him to stop the rampage. But I'm also someone who has trained with a handgun for many hours. I'm confident in my shot. If it were my dad, who has spent very little time on a handgun but many hours on a rifle, I would hope that he wouldn't shoot unless he felt like he could hit the guy. It would be negligent to shoot in a crowded mall if you don't think your shot has a reasonable chance of hitting your target. A good example would be someone trying to hit the shooter from 50-75 yards away. I know people who could easily make that shot, but there are many who couldn't hit paper at 75 yards with a pistol. Those people should not be shooting unless they are 100% sure. The true problem will fall with the media after the fact. If you hit the guy you're a hero, if you miss and kill a bystander you're going to be a villain and you'll be tried in the court of public opinion long before you see any kind of trial. In my opinion, you shouldn't carry if you aren't comfortable with the weapon. You should train regularly, you should keep your shooting sharp, and you should be prepared for contingencies. By carrying you are accepting the responsibility that you may have to use your weapon, and you assume the risks that go with that. I have a concealed carry permit but I almost never use it because the only time I carry is when I go hunting or when I go on hikes in the woods. Also, side note, I think the mere presence of the guy with the handgun prevented any more killing at Clackamas. The shooter saw him and then ran. In my opinion the guy was a hero just for stepping up and presenting a threat to the shooter that changed his timeline. He accomplished more by not shooting than he probably would have if he had tried to take the guy out.
In today's police state, I think officers are using their firearms much too readily. It seems like every few weeks there's a story about an officer killing someone or something needlessly. I think our police need better training, I think they need to be taught to use their gun as a last resort, and instead should be using their other tools before drawing their firearm. Guns should not be used unless absolutely necessary by police, yet their handgun is the first thing they go for in almost any situation.
Only if you live in a bubble and lack basic reasoning skills. (A) Every year, more than 2,400,000 people in the United States use a gun to defend themselves against criminals–or more than 6,500 people a day. This means that, each year, firearms are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. (B) Of the 2,400,000 self-defense cases, more than 192,000 are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse.
They are not arrested and imprisoned as you suggest should be the case. They are given a fully paid vacation, "cleared" by their peers in every instance of any wrongdoing, and hailed as heroes. The perp is always charged with causing the death.
And? You think I argue against using a gun for self defense? Or do you think I argue against carrying one? You are nuts. LOL Out of your 2.4M number, which is fine, thousands are fired to injure or kill someone. Less than .1%, which is too many.
Your presumption is wrong. If you used a gun in a confrontation it is 60 times more likely you fired it legally than illegally. Without clear evidence of wrongdoing, it would be inhumane and certainly un-Constitutional to jail the gun owner.
The data does not fit your insane world view. It is not unconstitutional to jail someone. It is unconstitutional to not give the person a speedy trial or to not tell them the charges.
So, if the guy with the handgun kills the shooter when he's three rounds into this 30 round mag with his second shot, but kills someone else that was standing beyond the shooter with his first shot....he goes to jail? Go Blazers