Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nope. It changes nothing. The clerk might have felt threatened but he still wasn't.He didn't kill anyone, more than likely wouldn't have, and if you don't want to be charged with murder you'd better wait until he starts shooting.I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.Ordering the clerk into the back room at gun point changes everything.
Dude, If the armed street thug has already killed the clerk, then why bother getting involved. The time to act was before they entered the back room.
And for you to approach an armed street thug in an enclosed room with only one way in amounts to a suicidal act on your part.
Ordering the clerk into the backroom at gunpoint changes everything
The shooter wasn't the one being forced to a back room.Nope. It changes nothing. The clerk might have felt threatened but he still wasn't.He didn't kill anyone, more than likely wouldn't have, and if you don't want to be charged with murder you'd better wait until he starts shooting.I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.
Dude, If the armed street thug has already killed the clerk, then why bother getting involved. The time to act was before they entered the back room.
And for you to approach an armed street thug in an enclosed room with only one way in amounts to a suicidal act on your part.
Ordering the clerk into the backroom at gunpoint changes everything
You have go to be the dumbest person in this forum and the biggest pussy.
If a person has a gun on you and you "feel" threatened, you have the right to defend yourself from that threat. How is a person to know that the thug ordering them into a backroom wasn't going to then kill them.
Nope. It changes nothing. The clerk might have felt threatened but he still wasn't.He didn't kill anyone, more than likely wouldn't have, and if you don't want to be charged with murder you'd better wait until he starts shooting.I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.
Dude, If the armed street thug has already killed the clerk, then why bother getting involved. The time to act was before they entered the back room.
And for you to approach an armed street thug in an enclosed room with only one way in amounts to a suicidal act on your part.
Ordering the clerk into the backroom at gunpoint changes everything
You have go to be the dumbest person in this forum and the biggest pussy.
If a person has a gun on you and you "feel" threatened, you have the right to defend yourself from that threat. How is a person to know that the thug ordering them into a backroom wasn't going to then kill them.
As I said, we'll see. Was it justified or not, up to the state to make the initial call. As for the civil suit against him, that's not even an open question. He'll see the family in court.We'll see, but if there was no threat, it's second-degree murder. Keep that in mind eh?Paint is apparently also a total moron. This is simple stuff. That shooter is not going to be charged with a crime, even in Chicago. You point a gun at someone and a victim or bystander in the vicinity shoots and kills the guy, then it is self-defense. If he is shot fleeing, then you would probably see a voluntary manslaughter charge, but that is not what happened here.PMH is a big criminal supporter. No crime should be punished and he even thinks that humans are a pox on the world so actually adviocates that people be killed. Why he snivels over a criminal getting killed I have no idea.Are you fucking high? He was waiving a gun around, and you think that he is only a threat if he actually pulls the trigger and shoots somebody? That kind of thinking would completely eviscerate self-defense law, you moron.
Son, you need to go think about your position a little more, or sober up.
As of today on Chicago news there will likely be not charges against the good guy…..
You are high again, I see.It would not get thrown out. It's a perfectly valid case since the guy who shot him wasn't being threatened. That's a decent civil rights and wrongful death claim right there. And there's video so, he's kind of fucked if he was just playing the hero. Time will tell but he's going to have an interesting couple of years either way.Nope. It will not go anywhere. It will be thrown out on summary judgment if it is even filed. The fuckwit's family will have to retain counsel on a pro bono basis.As i said, we'll see. Was it justified or not, up to the state to make the initial call. As for the civil suit against him, that's not even an open question. He'll see the family in court.We'll see, but if there was no threat, it's second-degree murder. Keep that in mind eh?
As of today on Chicago news there will likely be not charges against the good guy…..
Wow, but according to the OP there were 1,999,999 exact same cases last night of violet crimes being stopped. Yet all we heard about was one.
Either the OP was lying or....there is no second option...the OP is a liar.
Nope. It changes nothing. The clerk might have felt threatened but he still wasn't.He didn't kill anyone, more than likely wouldn't have, and if you don't want to be charged with murder you'd better wait until he starts shooting.I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.Ordering the clerk into the back room at gun point changes everything.
Dude, If the armed street thug has already killed the clerk, then why bother getting involved. The time to act was before they entered the back room.
And for you to approach an armed street thug in an enclosed room with only one way in amounts to a suicidal act on your part.
Ordering the clerk into the backroom at gunpoint changes everything
Wow, but according to the OP there were 1,999,999 exact same cases last night of violet crimes being stopped. Yet all we heard about was one.
Either the OP was lying or....there is no second option...the OP is a liar.
Wow, but according to the OP there were 1,999,999 exact same cases last night of violet crimes being stopped. Yet all we heard about was one.
Either the OP was lying or....there is no second option...the OP is a liar.
Killing a guy who probably would have left peacefully with some cash is not protecting society. That is not worth a human life. That is why nearly everything like that has,as policy, do what he says and give him the cash. Do not go after him or you're fired. That is for the protection of the customers and the staff.
Meanwhile 12 killed and another 26 injured in the last 72 hours by a gun in the rest of the country:Yes..another shooting for Chicago concealed carry permit holders......one day the criminals will get the point that democrats can no longer disarm the victims of crime...the victims can finally shoot back...
AP News - Police: Concealed carry license holder kills armed gunman
CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago police say a customer with a concealed carry license shot and killed an armed man attempting to rob a neighborhood store.
Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said a masked man walked into the store and currency exchange about 7 p.m. Saturday on the city's southwest side, displayed a handgun and announced a robbery to an employ
Last 72 Hours | Gun Violence Archive
I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.
I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.
Well, you go ahead and live by that sword. Let us know if you don't die by it as well.
I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.Didn't know that robbery was a capital offense? Interesting.Yes..another shooting for Chicago concealed carry permit holders......one day the criminals will get the point that democrats can no longer disarm the victims of crime...the victims can finally shoot back...
AP News - Police: Concealed carry license holder kills armed gunman
CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago police say a customer with a concealed carry license shot and killed an armed man attempting to rob a neighborhood store.
Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said a masked man walked into the store and currency exchange about 7 p.m. Saturday on the city's southwest side, displayed a handgun and announced a robbery to an employ
Ordering the clerk into the back room at gun point changes everything.
I have no issues with not playing John Wayne.I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.
Well, you go ahead and live by that sword. Let us know if you don't die by it as well.
The shooter wasn't ordered to leave.Nope. It changes nothing. The clerk might have felt threatened but he still wasn't.He didn't kill anyone, more than likely wouldn't have, and if you don't want to be charged with murder you'd better wait until he starts shooting.I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.
Dude, If the armed street thug has already killed the clerk, then why bother getting involved. The time to act was before they entered the back room.
And for you to approach an armed street thug in an enclosed room with only one way in amounts to a suicidal act on your part.
Ordering the clerk into the backroom at gunpoint changes everything
Wrong, that constitutes "False Imprisonment" and as any law enforcement official will tell you the odds of a violent outcome increase exponentially when the perp orders you to leave the immediate vicinity of the original crime. This is well known.
The shooter wasn't ordered to leave.Nope. It changes nothing. The clerk might have felt threatened but he still wasn't.He didn't kill anyone, more than likely wouldn't have, and if you don't want to be charged with murder you'd better wait until he starts shooting.Dude, If the armed street thug has already killed the clerk, then why bother getting involved. The time to act was before they entered the back room.
And for you to approach an armed street thug in an enclosed room with only one way in amounts to a suicidal act on your part.
Ordering the clerk into the backroom at gunpoint changes everything
Wrong, that constitutes "False Imprisonment" and as any law enforcement official will tell you the odds of a violent outcome increase exponentially when the perp orders you to leave the immediate vicinity of the original crime. This is well known.
It doesn't matter. If he didn't shoot anyone then he wasn't a threat.Bullshit. The sub-human was a serial armed robber.They were in no actual danger, more than likely. That is now for the state to decide.The victims where not executing Justice, they were defending THEMSELVES. Whether it is a capital offense is of no consequence, fuck breath.Not much good to not take a gun to a robbery like that eh? And armed robbery is still not a capital offense here, and no one was assaulted.You know, Paint, you really are a despicable piece of shit contrarian. The thug was armed. Not only is he guilty of armed robbery but also aggravated assault. If someone dropped dead of a heart attack during the robbery then the thug would be guilty of felony murder.
Fuck that scum fuck. If you have a weapon confronting someone for whatever reason then you are putting a reasonable person in apprehension of immediate death or severe bodily injury, in which case deadly force is both legal and appropriate.,
Kids, you can't just shoot people committing a crime. Now you know.It would be a truly moronic ADA that would bring that case to court. The shooter would be thanked by the members of the jury. You really have no clue just how stupid your position is, do you....We'll see, but if there was no threat, it's second-degree murder. Keep that in mind eh?Paint is apparently also a total moron. This is simple stuff. That shooter is not going to be charged with a crime, even in Chicago. You point a gun at someone and a victim or bystander in the vicinity shoots and kills the guy, then it is self-defense. If he is shot fleeing, then you would probably see a voluntary manslaughter charge, but that is not what happened here.PMH is a big criminal supporter. No crime should be punished and he even thinks that humans are a pox on the world so actually adviocates that people be killed. Why he snivels over a criminal getting killed I have no idea.Are you fucking high? He was waiving a gun around, and you think that he is only a threat if he actually pulls the trigger and shoots somebody? That kind of thinking would completely eviscerate self-defense law, you moron.
Son, you need to go think about your position a little more, or sober up.
