Quote:
Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby
The robber didn't actually ever physically harm anyone. The shooter killed someone. If the robber had been disarmed, alive, he would not have been executed for the crime of robbery. The crime of robbery doesn't come with a death sentence. The shooter took the law into his own hands, and executed someone who deserved jail time - not death.
Vigilante justice only encourages people to be violent, it doesn't solve crime. It IS a crime. You don't fight fire with an atom bomb, you don't fight robbery with death.
|
So are you suggesting that no action against the criminal be taken until he kills or hurts someone? I have a CWP in many states, including NY, NJ and MD. These are not given out without extensive class time, interviews, letters (including from a psychologist), and in NY appearing before a judge, with attorney to prove why the need is there (unconstitutional, but that can be for another thread). If this thief was pointing a weapon at any citizen, I would be justified in using deadly force. It would haunt me for the rest of my life, but it is something that would be justified. The argument that the shooter did not have the right to be judge is a sophomoric argument. The shooter acted to preserve innocent life. He was not shot for theft.