You are the biggest idiot on these forums. Never once have I seen you make an intelligent post. All you do is troll and call people names.
You are the first person on my ignore list. I'm surprised you aren't on everyone's ignore list.
Gah. The stupidity on display is amazing.
As one of the men was going from door to door outside her home trying to gain entry, McKinley called 911 and grabbed her 12-gauge shotgun.
????? I want to see her hold a 12-gauge shotgun and another gun in each hand and fire."I've got two guns in my hand -- is it okay to shoot him if he comes in this door?" the young mother asked the 911 dispatcher. "I'm here by myself with my infant baby, can I please get a dispatcher out here immediately?"
Mom will not be charged and accomplice is going to be charged with murder...
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/05/9968356-no-charges-for-teen-widow-who-killed-intruder
Did anyone else notice the ex-husband was 58 and she was 18? That doesn't make any difference to the correct outcome of this story though...
Mom will not be charged and accomplice is going to be charged with murder...
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/05/9968356-no-charges-for-teen-widow-who-killed-intruder
Did anyone else notice the ex-husband was 58 and she was 18? That doesn't make any difference to the correct outcome of this story though...
Actually I think most states allow it. It falls under felony homicide where if someone dies in the process of and as a result of a felony you are committing, you get charged with causing their death. I've heard of it being applied when someone had a heart attack during a robbery.
I feel sorry for that woman. Just lost her husband to cancer and now has to deal with having to kill another person. I know it doesn't apply to most of the more gun fanatic nutballs in P&N who would relish in being legally allowed to kill a person, but most human beings don't handle having to take the life of another too easily. There's a reason police have to do mandatory counceling in most states if they are involved in a lethal shooting.
McKinley said that she was at home alone with her newborn that night because her husband just died of cancer on Christmas Day.
Sarah McKinley says that a week earlier a man named Justin Martin dropped by on the day of her husband's funeral, claiming that he was a neighbor who wanted to say hello. The 18-year-old Oklahoma City area woman did not let him into her home that day.
You are the biggest idiot on these forums. Never once have I seen you make an intelligent post. All you do is troll and call people names.
You are the first person on my ignore list. I'm surprised you aren't on everyone's ignore list.
Usually the Mommy has a right to shoot to kill when the intruder threatens here with a knife, but technically until the intruder sees her gun, and is given time to retreat instead of still coming at her, Mommy may have no legal right to use deadly force.
And if Mommy then shoots the fleeing robber in the back anyway after the threat of robber's knife deadly force is removed, ole Mommy is going to be facing murder charges in almost every State in the Union
Because like **ckbeard and **ky and **l, he's a true troll who takes over threads. Ignoring them detracts more than it adds.. If there was a way to ignore them and anyone that quotes them it would help, but also remove 95% of posts.
Jstorm every post you've made in this thread is full of misinformation.
One great thing about radio and usually print news is that it doesn't identify race, so everyone starts without any possible racial bias in evaluating a particular event.Dude I didn't even catch the S to be honest. I didn't know what the hell he was talking about. I didn't and still don't know the race of people involved. But when I read it, its an incredible story, and the part where she put the bottle in the babies mouth first just sounded so cool. Race never even entered my mind, as a matter of fact for several months now I have stayed out of 99.5% those discussions. And many of them that I argued with over the years are no longer here or suspended.
Urban Dictionary is the progressive version of Conservapedia . . .
Actually I should say that Urban Dictionary is being used for the progressive side in the same way Conservadepia was designed to be used by conservatives, as witnessed by what happened to Santorum. While I do take a certain amount of guilty pleasure in that, as Santorum is one opf the politicians I despise, on principle it's a terrible thing to do to a politician simply because you disagree with him, no matter how violently. My main objection to Urban Dictionary though is its destruction of our language.No, actually it is not. Urban Dictionary just tracks slang in actual usage. That said, I don't think in most cases people mean "gay" when they say pansy or sissy.
You are the biggest idiot on these forums. Never once have I seen you make an intelligent post. All you do is troll and call people names.
You are the first person on my ignore list. I'm surprised you aren't on everyone's ignore list.
I dunno, I'm very pro-gun/pro-self defense and I have a problem with an intruder being shot in the back. I wouldn't necessarily convict her or even go to trial, but that definitely requires a public inquest or grand jury in my opinion. I'd have to believe that she was totally panicked, or began firing and hit the intruder after he turned to flee, or something similar, to be okay with that. I would definitely shoot an intruder to protect myself, my family, or even my stuff, even if he isn't visibly armed, but I certainly wouldn't intentionally shoot him in the back, assuming that he is fleeing. Not even if he's fleeing with my stuff.wrong. and you have been proven wrong on this many times over the years but for some reason you will not accept it. no knive no weapon needs to be present to use deadly force inside my home. just being an intruder is enough to blast them. sorry pal but thats the law so stop trying to put your own little spin on it.
and again 100% wrong. why can you not get it through your thick head that being un armed or being shot in the back HAS NO BEARING WHAT SO EVER!
I dunno, I'm very pro-gun/pro-self defense and I have a problem with an intruder being shot in the back. I wouldn't necessarily convict her or even go to trial, but that definitely requires a public inquest or grand jury in my opinion. I'd have to believe that she was totally panicked, or began firing and hit the intruder after he turned to flee, or something similar, to be okay with that. I would definitely shoot an intruder to protect myself, my family, or even my stuff, even if he isn't visibly armed, but I certainly wouldn't intentionally shoot him in the back, assuming that he is fleeing. Not even if he's fleeing with my stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine#Duty-to-retreat, on immunity to civil lawsuitThe only exceptions to this civil immunity are generally situations of excessive force, where the defender used deadly force on a subdued, cooperative, or disabled assailant. A situation meeting this exception generally invalidates the criminal "castle defense" as well.
I can respect that, but - what if it's a retarded kid who doesn't know any better? What if it's a friend or relative you didn't recognize from the back? What if it's a drunk neighbor who forced your door thinking it was his? It's possible that it's an intruder who means no harm; not every intruder is necessarily dangerous. I don't advocate taking chances, but just shooting someone in the back seems harsh. If I saw a weapon, or had some reason to think the intruder was dangerous, then yes, but I'm not going to shoot him in the back just because he's in my home. I don't think I'd ever get over that.If an intruder is my home, they are getting shot period...It doesn't matter where the bullet lands...If I am coming from upstairs and they happen to have their back to me while I am coming down the stairs, it will not matter. They have NO right to be inside my house. Chances are, if they were to leave my property, they would just repeat the process and terrorize another family tomorrow. They have no respect for other people's lives or property. Why should we respect theirs?
It was not my choice to argue over the definition of Pansy.
Please quote the most misinformed post and I will defend it.