[RUEZ]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Like most people here,I have no problem with Mr. Ersland putting a round into that kids brain pan,

I disagree. I don't think shooting an unarmed man in the head makes you a hero.

[commanderkai]

fifeboy fifeboy:

Except he had time to change guns, which means he had to think about what he was doing.

"Stupid fucker was trying to rob me, after I've been robbed X times in the past, and how these assholes keep coming back for more."

Yeah, I don't think he was really thinking about the consequences of his actions. He was in a rage, but he wasn't really in the right mindset to go out and truly understand the consequences of his actions at the moment.

$1:

So much crap has been stated on this forum about "responsible" firearms owners and how people with concealed carry licence are superior. Well, this shows one of two things: either he thought about it and therefore he committed first degree murder or it is something that can happen to anyone and therefore anyone should not have a handgun in their pocket while dealing with the public. Period.

Or...he's human. I think the third option makes most sense. As much as a former Air Force officer, with a firearms permit might have the training and the discipline to carry and use firearms properly, at the same time, his human failings of rage, anger, and frustration clouded his judgment.

Sure, it can happen to anyone. I don't think that having a firearms license makes you into a emotionless robot. If we start banning things because of human failings, why even allow vehicles, or any other object that can be used as a weapon to be used in the public sphere?

[andyt]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Or...he's human. I think the third option makes most sense. As much as a former Air Force officer, with a firearms permit might have the training and the discipline to carry and use firearms properly, at the same time, his human failings of rage, anger, and frustration clouded his judgment.

Sure, it can happen to anyone. I don't think that having a firearms license makes you into a emotionless robot. If we start banning things because of human failings, why even allow vehicles, or any other object that can be used as a weapon to be used in the public sphere?

We're all human. Are you saying that's an excuse for what he did? How many other murders are committed because of human failings - should they get a pass too?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Sure, it can happen to anyone. I don't think that having a firearms license makes you into a emotionless robot. If we start banning things because of human failings, why even allow vehicles,

An absolutely assinine statement. There is no equating the importance of vehicles in Western society and it's economy, to guns.

[Brenda]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Sure, it can happen to anyone. I don't think that having a firearms license makes you into a emotionless robot. If we start banning things because of human failings, why even allow vehicles,

The only reason why ANYthing is banned is because of human failings.

[fifeboy]

Brenda Brenda:

Robbery (or attempted robbery) is no reason for the death penalty or life in prison. 3 lives are ruined now.
1 kid dead, 1 kid away for life, and one man having the same sentence hanging over his head. For what? For a few bucks.

I hope everyone thought it was worth it.

[fifeboy]

commanderkai commanderkai:

fifeboy fifeboy:

Except he had time to change guns, which means he had to think about what he was doing.

"Stupid fucker was trying to rob me, after I've been robbed X times in the past, and how these assholes keep coming back for more."

Yeah, I don't think he was really thinking about the consequences of his actions. He was in a rage, but he wasn't really in the right mindset to go out and truly understand the consequences of his actions at the moment.

A jury of his peers found him guilty.

commanderkai commanderkai:

$1:

So much crap has been stated on this forum about "responsible" firearms owners and how people with concealed carry licence are superior. Well, this shows one of two things: either he thought about it and therefore he committed first degree murder or it is something that can happen to anyone and therefore anyone should not have a handgun in their pocket while dealing with the public. Period.

Or...he's human. I think the third option makes most sense. As much as a former Air Force officer, with a firearms permit might have the training and the discipline to carry and use firearms properly, at the same time, his human failings of rage, anger, and frustration clouded his judgment.

Sure, it can happen to anyone. I don't think that having a firearms license makes you into a emotionless robot. If we start banning things because of human failings, why even allow vehicles, or any other object that can be used as a weapon to be used in the public sphere?

Rage, OK, Let's say I buy it. Then the logical solution is to remove firearms, especially handguns, from the hands of people out in public. Rage is a common thing: road rage, caught
the bastard with my wife, kid was kissing my daughter, teacher gave me a bad mark, the list goes on and on. If we accept rage as an excuse than we need to remove the tools of destruction from the hands of people so when they have rage attacks they end up punching someone in the nose, not emptying two clips into them.

God, can't wait for Bart to get here

[fifeboy]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

commanderkai commanderkai:

Sure, it can happen to anyone. I don't think that having a firearms license makes you into a emotionless robot. If we start banning things because of human failings, why even allow vehicles,

An absolutely assinine statement. There is no equating the importance of vehicles in Western society and it's economy, to guns.

All I can say PA is it appears you have never been to Oklahoma

[PublicAnimalNo9]

fifeboy fifeboy:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

commanderkai commanderkai:

Sure, it can happen to anyone. I don't think that having a firearms license makes you into a emotionless robot. If we start banning things because of human failings, why even allow vehicles,

An absolutely assinine statement. There is no equating the importance of vehicles in Western society and it's economy, to guns.

All I can say PA is it appears you have never been to Oklahoma

Not a friggin chance. I HATE the states that begin with the letter "O"

[andyt]

Oregon is a very nice state.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

Oregon is a very nice state.

I was being facetious

[andyt]

Yeah, and what, I can't be?

As for Bart, he'll make the argument already made by Commander Kai - that we don't ban cars because some people use them in a rage. So get your arguments ready.

[fifeboy]

andyt andyt:

Yeah, and what, I can't be?

As for Bart, he'll make the argument already made by Commander Kai - that we don't ban cars because some people use them in a rage. So get your arguments ready.

It's my argument bag.

[Freakinoldguy]

RUEZ RUEZ:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Like most people here,I have no problem with Mr. Ersland putting a round into that kids brain pan,

I disagree. I don't think shooting an unarmed man in the head makes you a hero.

There seems to be some disagreement about whether these two youths were armed.

So the question is where are the two unarmed robbers?

$1:

A video from the store showed Ersland firing a pistol at two men after they burst into the store, one of them armed. Ersland hit Parker with one shot, knocking him to the ground, and chased the other suspect out the door. After returning to the pharmacy, he retrieved a second gun and shot Parker five more times 46 seconds after firing the first shot.

I guess Ersland should have asked Mr. Parker if he had a gun like his cohort before he defended himself?

The kid may have been unarmed, but, by bursting into the store with someone who was armed made it difficult if not impossible for Ersland to differentiate who had guns and who didn't.

[Brenda]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

RUEZ RUEZ:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Like most people here,I have no problem with Mr. Ersland putting a round into that kids brain pan,

I disagree. I don't think shooting an unarmed man in the head makes you a hero.

There seems to be some disagreement about whether these two youths were armed.

So the question is where are the two unarmed robbers?

$1:

A video from the store showed Ersland firing a pistol at two men after they burst into the store, one of them armed. Ersland hit Parker with one shot, knocking him to the ground, and chased the other suspect out the door. After returning to the pharmacy, he retrieved a second gun and shot Parker five more times 46 seconds after firing the first shot.

I guess Ersland should have asked Mr. Parker if he had a gun like his cohort before he defended himself?

The kid may have been unarmed, but, by bursting into the store with someone who was armed made it difficult if not impossible for Ersland to differentiate who had guns and who didn't.

The man is not hurt nor wounded, so it was not self defense. When you shoot first (or hit someone first, or stab someone first) YOU are the attacker, not the defender. He has no injuries to prove it was self defense. The fact those 2 kids TRIED to rob his place does not mean the man can just shoot him.