Twice in the last week...

[MLeake]

... "victims" in the Atlanta metro area have turned the tables on armed robbers.

Twice in the last week, officials have been quick to state that no charges would be filed in those valid, self-defense shootings.

http://www.ajc.com/news/rockdale-shopper-latest-to-773602.html

Maybe if the victims had been unarmed, they would not have been harmed, and would only have lost some cash.

Seems to me, I'd have as much faith in that "maybe" as these gentlemen did. Why let the BG make the decision? He's already shown the poor judgment and moral character required to attempt an armed robbery.

Note: in both robberies, the 2nd robber ran away, and the police don't seem to have any leads yet. Expect each of them to be charged with homicide, for the death of the partner, when they are found.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Expect each of them to be charged with homicide, for the death of the partner, when they are found.

I wonder how often prosecutors actually do that.

 

[Sefner]

I wonder how often prosecutors actually do that.

Frequently in states where it is allowed. MI is one of those states and it happens quite often. It should be common law if you ask me. In non-criminal actions law abiding citizens are held responsible for any unforeseen outcomes of their actions. Why does it have to be different for criminals?

Seems to me, I'd have as much faith in that "maybe" as these gentlemen did. Why let the BG make the decision? He's already shown the poor judgment and moral character required to attempt an armed robbery.

This is a very well-put point that is lost on too many. I've heard many people say that these "killings" don't need to happen; they think that a person losing the money in their pocket is an OK exchange for the life of a person, even if that person is a criminal (as an aside they then accuse us of cheapening human life when they are effectively putting a price on it). This kind of value-judgement on the outcome of a situation is Monday morning quarterbacking at its self-aggrandizing finest. They fail to realize that the situation is not a judgement of outcomes but rather a prediction of outcomes in which one actor has shown evil intent (another way of viewing it is that they are looking at it after the fact and failing to see the choices that had to be made as the situation unfolded without knowledge of what the outcome would be). I'm sure many of us (possibly myself included) would give that BG money if we absolutely knew he would leave after getting it, but we have very little information. In fact the only information we have is that we are dealing with a person who is not afraid to break the law in order to do harm to other people. This is what has to be acted upon.