guns

[oldngray]

Morally its a judgement call. Whether there is a greater risk of more people being hurt by not taking the shot.

 

[soberups]

From a moral standpoint, do you take the shot if it puts bystanders at risk, i.e. a dark theater in Aurora, Colorado?

Yes.

A lunatic with an AR-15 who is hosing down a crowd of people needs to be taken out, immediately and by any means necessary.

The bystanders in this case are already at risk from the lunatic. Doing nothing will likely result in even more casualties. The moral responsibility for any collateral damage lies with the lunatic, not with the person who is forced to take him out.

 

[bbsam]

Yes.

A lunatic with an AR-15 who is hosing down a crowd of people needs to be taken out, immediately and by any means necessary.

The bystanders in this case are already at risk from the lunatic. Doing nothing will likely result in even more casualties. The moral responsibility for any collateral damage lies with the lunatic, not with the person who is forced to take him out.

and the legal?

 

[wayfair]

and the legal?

Why don't you go to a class, you would learn a lot.

 

[Brown echo]

''DON'T DENIED THE FACT THAT GUN SELLER AND NRA ARE MAKING MONEY OUT OF FEAR AND MUDERS.''

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

It's amazing how using ALL CAPS magnifies any spelling errors .


Resident know-it-all.

 

[Brown echo]

It's amazing how using ALL CAPS magnifies any spelling errors .


Resident know-it-all.

''cOOL sTORY''

 

[soberups]

and the legal?

That would be for a jury to decide.

Assuming a situation identical to the one at the Aurora theater, I have a hard time imagining a DA wanting to prosecute someone who tried to do the right thing and save lives by shooting a deranged lunatic. I have an even harder time imagining a jury of 12 who would convict that person, unless the trial were being held in California or Illinois.

 

[moreluck]

ah. So if you're poor and can't afford to move, your 3 year old daughter's death by a stray bullet is just unfortunate.

So if the shooting was self defense and assuming the shooter was within his rights, who is responsible for the stray bullet and the death it caused?

Was the male in the household a gang member, relative of a gang member, why was a 3 yr old not in bed ??.....she'd be alive if she was.
Lots o time gangs will

''DON'T DENIED THE FACT THAT GUN SELLER AND NRA ARE MAKING MONEY OUT OF FEAR AND MUDERS.''

I usually bet on "muders" at the track !!

Who said those words ?.....using quote marks and all.

 

[Brown echo]

ACCORDING TO THE NRA YOUR CHANCE OF GETTING MURDERED BY A GUN IN THE USA ARE EXTREMLY SLIM!!!!

 

[Babagounj]

I see the poor moving everyday , mostly to other states that offer more government allowed benefits .
Everyone is free to move within this country unless they don't wish to .
Ask any illegal undocumented migrant .

 

[moreluck]

Plenty of moving from L.A. to escape the gangs and they move to Apple Valley......Hesperia or Victorville. That's like jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

 

[realbrown1]

''cOOL sTORY''

You must be "special needs".

 

[bbsam]

That would be for a jury to decide.

Assuming a situation identical to the one at the Aurora theater, I have a hard time imagining a DA wanting to prosecute someone who tried to do the right thing and save lives by shooting a deranged lunatic. I have an even harder time imagining a jury of 12 who would convict that person, unless the trial were being held in California or Illinois.

I would suggest that this is why many commercial entities are adopting "No Gun" policies.

 

[bbsam]

Why don't you go to a class, you would learn a lot.

Because you are such a wealth of knowledge and wisdom.

 

[bbsam]

Yes.

A lunatic with an AR-15 who is hosing down a crowd of people needs to be taken out, immediately and by any means necessary.

The bystanders in this case are already at risk from the lunatic. Doing nothing will likely result in even more casualties. The moral responsibility for any collateral damage lies with the lunatic, not with the person who is forced to take him out.

Strange. Right after Aurora you said just the opposite.

 

[oldngray]

I would suggest that this is why many commercial entities are adopting "No Gun" policies.

So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killer’s apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.

Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/10/did-colorado-shooter-single-out-cinemark-theater/

 

[brett636]

I would suggest that this is why many commercial entities are adopting "No Gun" policies.

Honestly I could care less what official policy a business has regarding guns. I carry concealed so the business in question would never know I have my gun on me unless my life was threatened in a serious way, and by that point my reason for being there has been disrupted enough that it won't matter if they ask me to leave or not.

 

[bbsam]

Honestly I could care less what official policy a business has regarding guns. I carry concealed so the business in question would never know I have my gun on me unless my life was threatened in a serious way, and by that point my reason for being there has been disrupted enough that it won't matter if they ask me to leave or not.

Of course, Brett. Rules are for other people.

 

[brett636]

Of course, Brett. Rules are for other people.

That is exactly the mantra of the criminal element which is why I only concern myself with laws, not corporate policies.