Serious question, if there was a CCW holder and they did take a shot and it ended up killing the kid, what percentage of blame would you put between the "pranksters" and the CCW holder who took a bad shot?
Obviously the gunman would not have had to make such a tense decision if the people weren't faking a kidnapping, but do we really want to live in a society where people can make their own decisions about what calls for deadly force?
I am a definitely a supporter of CCW laws as I think they are a better deterrent to petty crimes than rent-a-cops and slap on the wrist punishments for property crimes. I think the responsibility, however, should be on the person that escalates the situation, and in my hypothetical (which we can all agree to hate hypothetical stories) the onus would be on the shooter and would hopefully deter people from pop-shots to try to stop crime.
I think I went too much P&N with this post, and I apologize, but I expected a lot of "shoot 'em" comments at the site the story came from, not so much here.
Obviously the gunman would not have had to make such a tense decision if the people weren't faking a kidnapping, but do we really want to live in a society where people can make their own decisions about what calls for deadly force?
I am a definitely a supporter of CCW laws as I think they are a better deterrent to petty crimes than rent-a-cops and slap on the wrist punishments for property crimes. I think the responsibility, however, should be on the person that escalates the situation, and in my hypothetical (which we can all agree to hate hypothetical stories) the onus would be on the shooter and would hopefully deter people from pop-shots to try to stop crime.
I think I went too much P&N with this post, and I apologize, but I expected a lot of "shoot 'em" comments at the site the story came from, not so much here.
Facebook
Twitter