• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

For the time being, I'm going to side with the police. Based on available info, he was not at immediate risk of grievous bodily harm or death and did not need to fire at the thieves.
4 likley younger adults in the dark, without him knowing if they were armed or more of them. The risk of grievous bodily harm or death to the homeowner is likley very high.

People like to say: "Property is replaceable", actually as you get older, it is not replaceable, money = time and time is in short supply as you get older. Also living in a rural area, statistically calling the police means that they will almost always come after the criminals are gone. If you as a property owner do nothing, then the criminal activity will generally get worse, eventually leading to more deaths and the bankrupting of people and businesses.

It's likley in this case a call was made early on, based on my understanding, which could be completely wrong, it also appears that the 3 adults surrendered to the homeowner and awaited the arrival of the police. Since it also appears he did not hit anyone, it's quite possible his shots were deliberate to get the perps to surrender.
 
For the time being, I'm going to side with the police. Based on available info, he was not at immediate risk of grievous bodily harm or death and did not need to fire at the thieves.
Did he actually fire AT the thieves?
 
Back
Top