TexasCHLforum.com

MechAg94 wrote:I don't think most of us would shoot a fleeing robber, but that is more a result of having the legal consequences repeated over and over. If there were no laws or lawsuits, where would you draw the line?

I would hope the reason to not shoot is based on knowing the difference between what's "right" and what's "wrong". The provisions of law are not always what determines "right" from "wrong". There is a moral element that you appear to discount as a reasonable path when making such a hard choice.

There is no line to be drawn. Absolutes are frequently counterproductive because they fail to account for variable change.
The ability to choose is most definitely a positive aspect to any encounter. It what allows us to de-escalate an encounter rather than taking the path of least resistance with the result being a deadly shooting.

Just my $0.02.

LabRat

A sad situation to say the least.

The women and her BF are criminals - that's a fact.
They committed a break-in and beat the old man, inflicting serious injuries - that's a fact.
The child had nothing to do with this - that's a fact.

If the old man had been previously robbed up to 3 times as stated, then he may have figured this was the way to stop another "imminent?" robbery (and beat-down) and maybe his own possible demise. Only he knows his state of mind.

Shooting a fleeing robber is not something I think I would do. Knowing media accounts of these events are often light on facts and heavy on editorial smudging, I'd have to know more before I would vote to convict. In these circumstances, I tend to give the victim some latitude given he was there and I was not.

I feel sorry for the unborn child; truly an innocent victim.

LabRat