He is charged with murder so everything is fine there.
War vet with god knows what issues owning a gun and seeing a latino in a car *bo0000 scary*, what could possibly go wrong.
soo. pro-gun nuts: If we all agree that mentally ill people shouldn't own guns. AND being a vet automatically means you have "issues" that cause you to be trigger-happy. should we ban all vets owning guns? sounds pretty retarded, eh? so does your automatic defense of "oh, hes a vet hes cooky"
But there's nothing to debate. What this guy did was not only illegal (you cannot shoot someone for pulling up and being on your lawn or driveway), but it was immoral (you don't shoot someone because they MIGHT be violent and armed. You only shoot them if you are damn well sure they are).
Bottom line is: this old guy was wrong in what he did and should be punished accordingly. Maybe he was profiling, maybe he's just trigger happy, but he did something wrong.
That's why people are debating about gun control - because they assume that's the point you were trying to make when posting this article. They assume this because debating whether or not this guy was in the wrong is so obvious it's not even worth debate.
And in my opinion it is much better to have a small number of strictly controlled gun owners than to have 30% of all households equipped with weapons. Sure, in most cases there will not be any problem ever. But those dumb cowboys are a huge problem!
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
Also, it's should HAVE. NOT "should of". "Should of" doesn't even make sense. If you think you should own a cat, do you say "I should of a cat" or "I should have a cat"? Do you HAVE cats, or do you OF cats?
People are assuming your thread is about gun control simply because the only other thing your thread could be about is whether or not this guy was in the wrong, which is too obvious a question to ask. I'm just sayin'.
Glad he had a gun to protect himself, who knows what could have happened if he didn't ?
Absolute tragedy made even worse by the man refusing to take responsibility for his actions.
---------- Post added 2013-01-31 at 04:06 PM ----------
as nightmarish as this thread is with people thinking it's okay to murder people for no other reason than paranoia I just have one question to ask you. Why would you suicide bumrush in this situation? Cause if you actually thought that there was ANY reason for you to feel threatened and in any danger you wouldn't bumrush the car that you asumed were filled to the brim with gangsters and weapons without knowing that there was no way in hell you would ever make it out alive. Instead of you know, staying in the bastion that was your house.
So unless you are extremly suicidal and just take down as many as possible with you, then it makes no sense to act that way, unless ofcourse you knew they were completly harmless and wanted to take out your aggression on someone you knew had no means of fighting back.
ps: The last part about understanding and learning is the hardest part, legislation can be voted/adopted in a fraction of time, but learning takes generations.
This wouldn't have happened in Canada cuz we would have left this old fart out on the ice floes to die ages ago.
It's like Carousel with Polar Bears.
"But uh, says on your chart that you're fucked up. You talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded!"
On Parole from Retard Rehabilitation since June 6, 2014.
This kind of thread always ends in gun control debate. Since we already have one of those, I'm gonna go ahead and close this. In the future, post any gun-related news in that thread.