Chicago concealed carry gun owner kills robber...

[westwall]

You, the perps mom, and maybe two others. Good luck with your case!

More than enough, in this case. Actions have consequences eh? Killing someone certainly does.

Yes. The perps actions led to his immediate death. See how that works!

I see that as long as it's a human you don't care for you are all for spilling blood, no matter who does it.

Hey, you're the one who thinks that pretty much everyone should be killed to keep the planet nice. I only don't care when scumbags are killed. Nor do I care who does it.

Not pretty much everyone, all humans. The species is a disease and that is a philosophical position, an acknowledgment that other species also have rights, not a call for blood in the streets as you are doing.

And lo and behold you wish to protect violent criminals who will kill others. See how that works. You accuse me of vigilantism yet here you are advocating vigilantism in the name of protecting the planet. Hypocrite much?

I have to give you credit though! You are consistent in your douchebaggery!

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Money is never worth a human life. Clear enough?

I disagree with you. Most of the people being robbed are poor. Thus they are then forced into a life of crime and the cycle continues. Far better to kill the violent felons then the rest of the poor people are left the hell alone. As usual you're just plain old wrong.

Boy is life cheap to you, why am I not surprised...

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

When normal citizens are taking the law into their own hands, that is vigilantism...

 

[jc456]

Money is never worth a human life. Clear enough?

I disagree with you. Most of the people being robbed are poor. Thus they are then forced into a life of crime and the cycle continues. Far better to kill the violent felons then the rest of the poor people are left the hell alone. As usual you're just plain old wrong.

Boy is life cheap to you, why am I not surprised...

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

it was their choice to go in with a gun and the choice had consequences PERIOD!!!!!

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Well, he got away with the criminal part. Now time for the civil suit, for wrongful death. Killing a guy with paintball gun, see you in court...


Man with concealed carry license who killed attempted robber won't be charged
Man with concealed carry license who killed attempted robber won't be charged

And, once again, you're dreaming. The family will have a hell of a hard time finding an attorney to take this case. And if they do they will lose. The shooter will end up owning the lawyers because the lawyer will lose the counter malicious prosecution case. You really are a one trick pony aren't you.... You truly have no clue how the real world works.

Finding a lawyer for this will take thirty seconds. Proving that the threat wasn't real won't be that hard. Now, had he been robbing the guy who shot him, that would have taken some effort.

The guy had a gun...how can the threat not be real?
If the gun wasnt a threat why'd the robber use it in the first place?
Shoudnt he be able to just ask nicely for all the money?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

More than enough, in this case. Actions have consequences eh? Killing someone certainly does.

Yes. The perps actions led to his immediate death. See how that works!

I see that as long as it's a human you don't care for you are all for spilling blood, no matter who does it.

Hey, you're the one who thinks that pretty much everyone should be killed to keep the planet nice. I only don't care when scumbags are killed. Nor do I care who does it.

Not pretty much everyone, all humans. The species is a disease and that is a philosophical position, an acknowledgment that other species also have rights, not a call for blood in the streets as you are doing.

ah, there's that all human thing again with you, yep kill them all. Not sure why it bothers you since you want everyone dead anyway.

Because until such time it would be nice humans acted better than the dumb animals most of them are.

 

[jc456]

I disagree with you. Most of the people being robbed are poor. Thus they are then forced into a life of crime and the cycle continues. Far better to kill the violent felons then the rest of the poor people are left the hell alone. As usual you're just plain old wrong.

Boy is life cheap to you, why am I not surprised...

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

When normal citizens are taking the law into their own hands, that is vigilantism...

what law did the dude take into his own hands. he was defending another human, not sure I understand your claim.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I disagree with you. Most of the people being robbed are poor. Thus they are then forced into a life of crime and the cycle continues. Far better to kill the violent felons then the rest of the poor people are left the hell alone. As usual you're just plain old wrong.

Boy is life cheap to you, why am I not surprised...

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

it was their choice to go in with a gun and the choice had consequences PERIOD!!!!!

It was the choice of the shooter to shoot, when he more than likely didn't need to.

 

[jc456]

Yes. The perps actions led to his immediate death. See how that works!

I see that as long as it's a human you don't care for you are all for spilling blood, no matter who does it.

Hey, you're the one who thinks that pretty much everyone should be killed to keep the planet nice. I only don't care when scumbags are killed. Nor do I care who does it.

Not pretty much everyone, all humans. The species is a disease and that is a philosophical position, an acknowledgment that other species also have rights, not a call for blood in the streets as you are doing.

ah, there's that all human thing again with you, yep kill them all. Not sure why it bothers you since you want everyone dead anyway.

Because until such time it would be nice humans acted better than the dumb animals most of them are.

and when in the life of humanity has that ever ever happened. So you want something that after thousands of years has never happened have happen. funny stuff maynard.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Boy is life cheap to you, why am I not surprised...

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

When normal citizens are taking the law into their own hands, that is vigilantism...

what law did the dude take into his own hands. he was defending another human, not sure I understand your claim.

Was he? How do we know that? Oh right, we don't. I think the clerk would have survived being shot with a paintball gun, which he wouldn't have used anyway.

 

[2aguy]

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

This substantiates the point I made in another threada bout how we've reversed what upsets us. We celebrate this slaying, this death, this dying shot guy because 'he's bad.' And the guy who killed him 'is good.'

Would we be so quick to celebrate a beautiful high end prostitution service with dozens of top tier pros who announced they were going to provide their services for free for a week? Probably not. Therein lies the problem with our culture. We're ass-backwards.

Uhhh....what?

 

[jc456]

Boy is life cheap to you, why am I not surprised...

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

it was their choice to go in with a gun and the choice had consequences PERIOD!!!!!

It was the choice of the shooter to shoot, when he more than likely didn't need to.

I don't care, he will get the consequence for his choice right? What is the difference? Why are you hell bent to save a villian, I don't get it. Are you one? Are you wanting to be one and are scared to come out of the closet? just curious how a douchebag like you functions in society.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Shoudnt he be able to just ask nicely for all the money?

Maybe. And it was a paintball gun...

 

[jc456]

Boy is life cheap to you, why am I not surprised...

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

it was their choice to go in with a gun and the choice had consequences PERIOD!!!!!

It was the choice of the shooter to shoot, when he more than likely didn't need to.

BTW, I never said it wasn't, just posted up a saying.

 

[jc456]

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

When normal citizens are taking the law into their own hands, that is vigilantism...

what law did the dude take into his own hands. he was defending another human, not sure I understand your claim.

Was he? How do we know that? Oh right, we don't. I think the clerk would have survived being shot with a paintball gun, which he wouldn't have used anyway.

dude, i have no idea what you think I posted but your response ain't for----what law did the dude take into his own hands. he was defending another human, not sure I understand your claim.

 

[2aguy]

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.

People who "live" by that rule tend to wind up in the obits sooner than later.

It's hard to even estimate how many people have lived through one or even several armed robberies. Do as they say and most times no one gets hurt. That would have likely been true in this case as well but you little gun nuts just love to think of yourselves as John Shoot'em Up Wayne. Judge, jury, and executioner.

most times no one gets hurt

Yeah...that's the tricky part isn't it...you never know when "most times" isn't "this time," and when he plans on murdering everyone in the store....

 

[jc456]

Love these stories where a thug bastard gets put down by a carrier!

I'm sure that you do. You are all for vigilante "justice", most gun-nuts are. They can't wait to play John Wayne...

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.,

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.

sure they were assaulted, sorry you lose.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Assholes who ignore the rights of others are indeed cheap. There are too many of them, their actions directly contribute to the lower standard of living that those in the inner cities are forced to endure. How much better do you think the peoples lives, who live in those areas, would be if assholes like that weren't around. I suggest that the cost to society for letting scumbags like that around are far greater than the bullet that put him down.

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

it was their choice to go in with a gun and the choice had consequences PERIOD!!!!!

It was the choice of the shooter to shoot, when he more than likely didn't need to.

I don't care, he will get the consequence for his choice right? What is the difference? Why are you hell bent to save a villian, I don't get it. Are you one? Are you wanting to be one and are scared to come out of the closet? just curious how a douchebag like you functions in society.

Money is never worth killing for.

 

[jc456]

Love these stories where a thug bastard gets put down by a carrier!

I'm sure that you do. You are all for vigilante "justice", most gun-nuts are. They can't wait to play John Wayne...

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.,

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.

The victims where not executing Justice, they were defending THEMSELVES. Whether it is a capital offense is of no consequence, fuck breath.

They were in no actual danger, more than likely. That is now for the state to decide.

says the wanna be criminal.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

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.

People who "live" by that rule tend to wind up in the obits sooner than later.

It's hard to even estimate how many people have lived through one or even several armed robberies. Do as they say and most times no one gets hurt. That would have likely been true in this case as well but you little gun nuts just love to think of yourselves as John Shoot'em Up Wayne. Judge, jury, and executioner.

most times no one gets hurt

Yeah...that's the tricky part isn't it...you never know when "most times" isn't "this time," and when he plans on murdering everyone in the store....

I think it's pretty clear, it's hard to kill someone with a paintball gun...

 

[Lonestar_logic]

What you propose is nothing Law and Order, is vigilantism...

No, it's not. I am not advocating people hunt these scumbags down and kill them. What I am saying is that when these scumbags commit a crime, and are killed in the commission of that crime, I don't care. They played the odds and they lost.

it was their choice to go in with a gun and the choice had consequences PERIOD!!!!!

It was the choice of the shooter to shoot, when he more than likely didn't need to.

I don't care, he will get the consequence for his choice right? What is the difference? Why are you hell bent to save a villian, I don't get it. Are you one? Are you wanting to be one and are scared to come out of the closet? just curious how a douchebag like you functions in society.

Money is never worth killing for.

Then why are there armed guards at all the banks?