Originally posted by normbenign
Nothing in this story identifies the shooter as a "good guy". He was a vigilante, and since unidentified, may have been armed illegally, or engaged in criminal mischief. His gathering his casings, and running indicate a criminal background.
Shooting a car jacker isn't necessarily insane. Many car jackings end up escalating to homicides. A thief employing deadly force can legally be resisted with deadly force.
oooh, so that's what you take away from the story. not that someone tried to stop a crime and ended up shooting the victim.
"Nothing in this story identifies the shooter as a "good guy". "
obviously, he shot someone in the head. pay attention.
"He was a vigilante"
so this guy was a vigilante. what would have made him the good guy with a gun? what had to have been different?
he wasn't supposed to start firing?
"may have been"
how about you keep your maybes to yourself. he may have been ghenghis khan risen from the dead.
"His gathering his casings, and running indicate a criminal background."
or he realized he shot someone and there would be no excuse.
"Shooting a car jacker isn't necessarily insane. Many car jackings end up escalating to homicides. "
so this guy stopped a potential homicide. by shooting the victim himself. so he WAS supposed to start firing?
can you make up your mind? this guy saw a crime. he stopped it with lethal force. through his actions(because those wacky bullets don't always reach the intended target), someone innocent got hurt (forgetting the fact that even the carjackers don't deserve death for their crime, and especially not from a civilian turned judge and executioner).
do you want someone seeing you get mugged/carjacked/etc to do the same, even assuming he doesn't "have a criminal background". do you want someone you have no idea how well trained he is to start shooting in your general direction, with as much chance you will get shot as your attackers?