Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Sacre Bleu!

But did he deserve to die in these conditions? [More]
Taking all things into consideration, mais oui!

The little animal had proven himself an incorrigible  savage threat.

I know the law says you can't, but the question posed is what the little piece of merde deserved.

[Via Jess]

2 comments:

Ed said...

The armed robber was shot in the back while he was still holding a shotgun, which means that he was still a threat to the health and safety of all around him, especially the jeweler? The armed robber could have turned and fired in a fraction of a second. Somehow, I am unsympathetic with the outcome of the robber's poor decisions.

MamaLiberty said...

What I'm seeing all too often is a dangerous delayed response by the defenders. Why would he wait until the attacker was running away?

While I very much agree that this kind of vermin must be eliminated where possible, waiting and then chasing after them seems like a very poor idea all around. And yes, the thief could easily have endangered others on the way out. All the more reason to stop the threat at the first confrontation.

Part of this problem is, of course, the sad fact that most people willing to use a gun to defend themselves are not carrying it. They must go somewhere or do something else to get their hands on it. A more immediate and appropriate response to a direct threat like this can hardly be achieved until people keep their guns on their bodies... all the time - and seriously practice the skills required to use them.