Jump to content

Ferguson Grand Jury Has Reached a Decision


AUUSN

Recommended Posts

I'm going to agree with Tex here. The temptation would be strong not to let a bunch of hoodlums get away with destroying and robbing stores under the pretense of racial frustration. If you were going to defend your store, it almost seems like the better way to go would be a big show of force like the 6 or 7 guys armed to the teeth standing outside their shop rather than just hiding inside with a small arsenal ready to blow anyone's head off that comes inside. The former is more likely to deter the looters in the first place. The latter won't because by the time they realize they are in danger, they've already busted in.

i agree too, but in the former you are still bluffing. if they call your bluff then you are forced to turn and run or use deadly force. Is it legal to do so? that was my initial question. It would seem easier to defend a person whose store was being broken into than defend a man who shot would be looters on the sidewalk. Im not saying either is right or wrong, but which would a LE officer or Attorney recommend.

Probably easier to defend the guy who was inside the store and shot someone breaking in-- but why place yourself in a position to defend a possible homicide charge ? As Titan says, board up and go home.

If vandalism were to cost you your livelihood, then what would you do ?

I guess, as hard as it would be (and the fact that you shouldn't have to be making such a choice in the first place), you have to ask...your livelihood or your life?

Some people are willing to fight to preserve their livelihood. I dont know what I would do. i dont even own a gun and frankly dont want one but Im not going to judge the guy negatively who is compelled to be present to do what he believes is right

Seriously?

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 253
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...