[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Opinion based on professional experience or just backside?

If you don't wait to actually see a gun then unarmed individuals wind up dead. Bad things did happen very quickly.

How does it go .... It is better that ten armed men live than one unarmed man be killed ... or something like that.

Experience, yes. Professional, no. And FYI no one was harmed, one arrested (the other guy) and police confiscated a number of illegal weapons (his).

And the saying goes, "better ten guilty men go free than one innocent man suffer unjustly" ... or something like that.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Or you lost an eye.
If you have to wait to actually see the gun, it is likely already being fired. Bad things happen very quickly.

So if I ever see you in a town square, and I observe you putting your hand in your pocket, the law would consider it "reasonable" for me to shoot you?

Because y'know - I shouldn't have to wait to see the gun.

[manaboutown]

[QUOTE=Taltarzac725;2202461And I have a law degree from the U of MN. Class of 1989. The current Attorney General of MN is Class of 1990.[/QUOTE]

My condolences

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

So if I ever see you in a town square, and I observe you putting your hand in your pocket, the law would consider it "reasonable" for me to shoot you?

Because y'know - I shouldn't have to wait to see the gun.

I hope not. I need many adjustments during the day.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

My condolences

I never met him at the U of MN but my roommate/girlfriend Jennifer back then was in the same class. I was writing all the State AGs back in the early 1990s but he was not at that level yet. These letters were about practical materials in law libraries for survivors/victims of crimes. I got a good number of responses back then and then tried to share them through various means. And spotlight them by other ways.

Jennifer said he wanted to make it to the US Supreme Court. I do recall he was a devout Muslim back then. I did hang out with an African American law student a lot my 1st and 2nd year of law school but found more actual friends by my 3rd.

[JGibson]

Even if the guy doesn't get charged I’m sure the family is going to file a wrongful death lawsuit, probably win and bankrupt this guy.

Just remember OJ’s civil case.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by JGibson

Even if the guy doesn't get charged I’m sure the family is going to file a wrongful death lawsuit, probably win and bankrupt this guy.

Just remember OJ’s civil case.

There are groups that would help him with that. One was mentioned in the thread. I try not to get into politics on TOTV.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

So if I ever see you in a town square, and I observe you putting your hand in your pocket, the law would consider it "reasonable" for me to shoot you?

Because y'know - I shouldn't have to wait to see the gun.

Yes! If I am ever causing a scene and you feel in fear of your life (from ME? Now that is funny.), by all means, OrangeBlossomBaby, You may shoot me.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Yes! If I am ever causing a scene and you feel in fear of your life (from ME? Now that is funny.), by all means, OrangeBlossomBaby, You may shoot me.

Oh no - not if you're causing a scene. Just if you put your hand in your pocket. Because who knows - you could be some crazy person who hates country music trying to blend in, and NOT causing a scene. Until that one moment when you choose to reach for your glock.

I have no reason to think you're just reaching for a tissue to blow your nose. I think it's a gun. And I'm a reasonable person. So I'm gonna shoot you before you have the chance to unload your cartridge of death on random line-dancers in the square.

Apparently that is justifiable, if the criteria for whether it's reasonable to shoot someone is "they put their hand in their pocket and you therefore determine there MIGHT be a gun in that pocket."

[bsloan1960]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

So if I ever see you in a town square, and I observe you putting your hand in your pocket, the law would consider it "reasonable" for me to shoot you?

Because y'know - I shouldn't have to wait to see the gun.

No. Apples and Oranges- and you know it. How does your town square example mimic the conditions of gun fire, violence, people feeling terror and worried for their lives that were present at the restaurant? If rather than a peaceful town square the square was full of gun fire, violence, people feeling terror and worried for their lives then your example could be debated by intelligent people.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by bsloan1960

No. Apples and Oranges- and you know it. How does your town square example mimic the conditions of gun fire, violence, people feeling terror and worried for their lives that were present at the restaurant? If rather than a peaceful town square the square was full of gun fire, violence, people feeling terror and worried for their lives then your example could be debated by intelligent people.

We have little facts about that. We would need to know more about the relationships, if any, between the people outside and those inside. It sounds like a personal argument was going on outside and the man shot got angry that those inside were getting involved. Probably some kind of domestic dispute going on outside with the shooting man getting upset about it and started shooting into the air.

This is conjecture though. With no gun found the people in the car might have been doing the shooting up in the air. Unless the man shot has gunshot residue on his hand or hands.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by bsloan1960

No. Apples and Oranges- and you know it. How does your town square example mimic the conditions of gun fire, violence, people feeling terror and worried for their lives that were present at the restaurant? If rather than a peaceful town square the square was full of gun fire, violence, people feeling terror and worried for their lives then your example could be debated by intelligent people.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. OBB has my permission to shoot ME, only, if I stick my hand in my pants.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Oh no - not if you're causing a scene. Just if you put your hand in your pocket. Because who knows - you could be some crazy person who hates country music trying to blend in, and NOT causing a scene. Until that one moment when you choose to reach for your glock.

I have no reason to think you're just reaching for a tissue to blow your nose. I think it's a gun. And I'm a reasonable person. So I'm gonna shoot you before you have the chance to unload your cartridge of death on random line-dancers in the square.

Apparently that is justifiable, if the criteria for whether it's reasonable to shoot someone is "they put their hand in their pocket and you therefore determine there MIGHT be a gun in that pocket."

Probably shouldn't tell you here, but I don't have a Glock. More of a gherkin, actually. Small calibre, single shot. But admit it, them line dancers got it comin'! (Nobody panick! It's just a dumb joke, OK.)

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Opinion based on professional experience or just backside?

If you don't wait to actually see a gun then unarmed individuals wind up dead. Bad things did happen very quickly.

How does it go .... It is better that ten armed men live than one unarmed man be killed ... or something like that.

I don't know... I've never heard anything like that...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

So if I ever see you in a town square, and I observe you putting your hand in your pocket, the law would consider it "reasonable" for me to shoot you?

Because y'know - I shouldn't have to wait to see the gun.

If he's acting in a threatening manner, and you have a reasonable fear for your life, yes...

But you knew that...