Same bloodthirst in the comment section I see.

 

Same lack of accountability I see.

---

Same lack of accountability I see.

Pretty much.

 

How the hell can people discount the fact that there would have been no shooting had a violent felonious crime not been taking place? Seems pretty simple to me. The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun has always been, and will always be a good guy with a gun.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

---

Pretty much.

 

How the hell can people discount the fact that there would have been no shooting had a violent felonious crime not been taking place? Seems pretty simple to me. The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun has always been, and will always be a good guy with a gun.

 

Yup.

 

It's easier to ignore that the guy put a gun to the head of one person. It's hard for them to believe that someone needed to die for the safety of others. It sucks, sure, but sometimes violent things need to happen to bad people.

 

Granted, he didn't die... I'm just trying to prove a point.

---

So its not the robbers fault he got shot?

He was just trying to pull off making a little money.....WITH A GUN.

Sorry, no sympathy here.

Parents that produce losers like this should pay his hospital and prison bills.

 

 

 

How the hell can people discount the fact that there would have been no shooting had a violent felonious crime not been taking place? Seems pretty simple to me. The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun has always been, and will always be a good guy with a gun.

 

 

 

 

 

:thumbsup: to all 3 of the above

---

Not wanting to get shot is probably why he had his own gun.

Didn't work out too good for him...

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

So its not the robbers fault he got shot?

He was just trying to pull off making a little money.....WITH A GUN.

Sorry, no sympathy here.

Parents that produce losers like this should pay his hospital and prison bills.

And for the emotional suffering of the people that had a gun held to their heads!!

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

Too bad he didn't die, now the tax payers have to pay for his room and board for years.

---

Yup.

 

It's easier to ignore that the guy put a gun to the head of one person. It's hard for them to believe that someone needed to die for the safety of others. It sucks, sure, but sometimes violent things need to happen to bad people.

 

Granted, he didn't die... I'm just trying to prove a point.

Seems a whole lot easier to me to just cough up 99 cents for the damn slurpee. I guess the 20 bucks that the slimeball would have gotten in the robbery was worth the bullet holes he can sport for the rest of his life....

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

Any sympathy toward this poo stain is rediculous. Did he have any when he held a gun to someones head? What a joke.

---

I don't see any problem with shooting a person threatening another's life.

 

The other one though, where the robber was leaving the store and was shot in the back, is an entirely different story.

---

THERE IS A SKELETON INSIDE OF YOU.

 

RIGHT NOW. THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

I don't see any problem with shooting a person threatening another's life.

 

The other one though, where the robber was leaving the store and was shot in the back, is an entirely different story.

 

At no point in that other article did it say they were shot in the back, you're just assuming that

---

I don't see any problem with shooting a person threatening another's life.

 

The other one though, where the robber was leaving the store and was shot in the back, is an entirely different story.

Actually it says quite the opposite...

---

I don't see any problem with shooting a person threatening another's life.

 

The other one though, where the robber was leaving the store and was shot in the back, is an entirely different story.

This is pretty simple. A violent felony committed by someone with a lethal weapon equals a legal target. I didn't make the rules, I just know them.

 

Accountability is something that people sorely need these days. But not for the actions of the perpetrator, would any of the violence have happened?

 

This shouldn't be made complicated. Being good to one another, or at least acting legally without malice isn't too much to ask from society. Once someone crosses that line, they and they alone need to accept those consequences.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

This is pretty simple. A violent felony committed by someone with a lethal weapon equals a legal target. I didn't make the rules, I just know them.

 

Accountability is something that people sorely need these days. But not for the actions of the perpetrator, would any of the violence have happened?

 

This shouldn't be made complicated. Being good to one another, or at least acting legally without malice isn't too much to ask from society. Once someone crosses that line, they and they alone need to accept those consequences.

 

I disagree with you on some of the football takes but were definitely on the same page here. 

---

Store owner to armed robber: Mine is bigger
 

Robert Moore was ringing-up a customer around 10 p.m. at the Morning Star Mini Mart, located in the 8800 block of 9th Ave SW, when two men entered the store wearing ski masks. One of the men stayed near the entrance of the store while the other attempted robber approached the counter and pointed a gun at Moore.

 

http://bearingarms.com/store-owner-to-ar...is-bigger/

---

 

This reminds me of my cousin one time.  She picked up a hitchhiker after work (she worked the late shift at the Coal Mines) and the man clearly wanted to rob her.  At least until she started showing off her gun, and talking about it.  At which point he asked to be let out, and she drove on her way.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Three topics on the exact same topic makes for a nice merged thread.

---

Being an armed convict does not supersede a person's right to life. Nor does it mean that the case can or should be closed without proper investigation.

 

The situation would be different if the store clerk was the one doing the shooting since he would actively be defending his own life, but reading the (woefully inadequate) story it was a bystander who wasn't being directly threatened who opened fire.

 

If I owned a store and I was being robbed, and somehow I was able to get a hold of my gun as well.....first reaction is to start shooting. If they are running because they see my gun, so be it.

 

Why do I have to show good judgement when someone enters my property to rob me and I am able to turn the table on them?  If they had the chance to shoot him they would have taken it (or else why bring a gun?)

---

If I owned a store and I was being robbed, and somehow I was able to get a hold of my gun as well.....first reaction is to start shooting. If they are running because they see my gun, so be it.

 

Why do I have to show good judgement when someone enters my property to rob me and I am able to turn the table on them?  If they had the chance to shoot him they would have taken it (or else why bring a gun?)

 

You may need to read DF's post again.

 


As I understand it, the robbery was over, the punks left the store where they were confronted by a bystander, and subsequently shot to death.

The details are sketchy, but I don't agree with vigilantism. Too many people may take the law into their own hands before due process. So without further information on this particular shooting, I only would side with the bystander if he was being threatened at that time.


 

Just need to make sure some rules are still followed. Other than that, they got what they deserved.

---