• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Pharmacist shot at two would-be robbers, one dead

Pepsei

Pepsei

Lifer
pharmacist Jerome Ersland shot at the two would-be robbers. Ersland fatally shot 16-year-old Antwun Parker and the second suspect was able to safely flee the scene. Ersland was charged with Parker's murder on Wednesday.
Click to expand...

link with videos

Hmmm, without reading the article, Isn't it your right to defend youself with deadly force if you think your life is in danger?
 
So maybe read the article and related links to find out?

Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said that Ersland was justified in shooting Antwun Parker once in the head. But Prater said Ersland went too far when he shot Parker five more times in the abdomen while Parker lay unconscious on the floor.

Had Ersland's first shot been fatal, he would not face charges under Oklahoma's Stand Your Ground Law, Prater said.

However, Prater said security video shows that Ersland chased the second man outside before returning then walked past Parker to get a second gun before going back to fire the fatal five rounds into Parker's abdomen.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: Venix
So maybe read the article and related links to find out?

Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said that Ersland was justified in shooting Antwun Parker once in the head. But Prater said Ersland went too far when he shot Parker five more times in the abdomen while Parker lay unconscious on the floor.

Had Ersland's first shot been fatal, he would not face charges under Oklahoma's Stand Your Ground Law, Prater said.

However, Prater said security video shows that Ersland chased the second man outside before returning then walked past Parker to get a second gun before going back to fire the fatal five rounds into Parker's abdomen.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Don't fuck with Oklahoma?
 
yeah I still don't feel bad. Robber deserved every single bullet.


can't he plead temporary insanity like everybody else lol
 
Originally posted by: Exterous
Originally posted by: Venix
So maybe read the article and related links to find out?

Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said that Ersland was justified in shooting Antwun Parker once in the head. But Prater said Ersland went too far when he shot Parker five more times in the abdomen while Parker lay unconscious on the floor.

Had Ersland's first shot been fatal, he would not face charges under Oklahoma's Stand Your Ground Law, Prater said.

However, Prater said security video shows that Ersland chased the second man outside before returning then walked past Parker to get a second gun before going back to fire the fatal five rounds into Parker's abdomen.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Don't fuck with Oklahoma?
Click to expand...


If "Oklahoma" is going to be the pharmacists nickname, I'm sure someone will
 
I just don't get why he did this. Everything was fine. Then he puts five more slugs in him? Was it out of anger? If so, yeah, he deserves to be charged.

This story is just crazy.
 
Thats awesome, coming back and putting 5 more shots into him. maybe he was putting him out of his misery. This guy should be congratulated.
 
Originally posted by: Pepsei
pharmacist Jerome Ersland shot at the two would-be robbers. Ersland fatally shot 16-year-old Antwun Parker and the second suspect was able to safely flee the scene. Ersland was charged with Parker's murder on Wednesday.
Click to expand...

link with videos

Hmmm, without reading the article, Isn't it your right to defend youself with deadly force if you think your life is in danger?
Click to expand...

He did defend himself, everything was fine, the threat was nullified and then he went on shooting an incapacitated body like he was playing Halo... that might be where the line was drawn. You know, just saying...

Yeah the thieves broke the law. So did this guy. 2nd degree murder charges would be justified.
 
before returning then walked past Parker to get a second gun before going back to fire the fatal five rounds into Parker's abdomen.
Click to expand...
I see no problem with the charges. He stepped over the line.
 
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I just don't get why he did this. Everything was fine. Then he puts five more slugs in him? Was it out of anger? If so, yeah, he deserves to be charged.

This story is just crazy.
Click to expand...

Get in a life threatening situation and people don't do rational things. For example, if you are one of those dipshits trying to get away from the cops in a high-speed car chase, expect to get your ass beat once they catch you. It's time for the courts to recognize normal human behavior, even if such behavior isn't rational.

I haven't clicked on the link so have no idea if this is applicable here, but if you try to rob someone and put them in danger, you put into play a lot of human behavior like this. The robber is the source of this, not the person who goes batshit on the robber.

(And I consider myself a left-wing tree-hugging anti-gun liberal. Hah!)
 
Originally posted by: Exterous
Originally posted by: Venix
So maybe read the article and related links to find out?

Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said that Ersland was justified in shooting Antwun Parker once in the head. But Prater said Ersland went too far when he shot Parker five more times in the abdomen while Parker lay unconscious on the floor.

Had Ersland's first shot been fatal, he would not face charges under Oklahoma's Stand Your Ground Law, Prater said.

However, Prater said security video shows that Ersland chased the second man outside before returning then walked past Parker to get a second gun before going back to fire the fatal five rounds into Parker's abdomen.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Don't fuck with Oklahoma?
Click to expand...

That's way over the top. That's murder. I don't care if scumbags get killed while committing a crime, but if he no longer posed a threat to anyone that's murder.
 
Originally posted by: Dirigible
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I just don't get why he did this. Everything was fine. Then he puts five more slugs in him? Was it out of anger? If so, yeah, he deserves to be charged.

This story is just crazy.
Click to expand...

Get in a life threatening situation and people don't do rational things. For example, if you are one of those dipshits trying to get away from the cops in a high-speed car chase, expect to get your ass beat once they catch you. It's time for the courts to recognize normal human behavior, even if such behavior isn't rational.

I haven't clicked on the link so have no idea if this is applicable here, but if you try to rob someone and put them in danger, you put into play a lot of human behavior like this. The robber is the source of this, not the person who goes batshit on the robber.

(And I consider myself a left-wing tree-hugging anti-gun liberal. Hah!)
Click to expand...
But in this case, he already shot the guy, and he was down. Then he WENT BACK and got ANOTHER gun and shot him five more times -- while he was already incapacitated. That's just fucked up no matter how you look at it.

 
Wait, so they are saying the shots to the abdomen killed the kid and not the headshot? something?s not quit right with that.
Unless it was a large caliber the abdomen shots probably would have been more then survivable, assuming some amount of help was called in, that and if major veins and arteries weren?t hit.
Either way the headshot should have killed the person instantly.
 
In most states you can only shoot someone if you are in mortal danger. If the person starts to flee you cannot shoot them . Some states like Florida have amended the rules to also include the right to shoot a fleeing subject.
 
Originally posted by: Matthiasa
Wait, so they are saying the shots to the abdomen killed the kid and not the headshot? something?s not quit right with that.
Unless it was a large caliber the abdomen shots probably would have been more then survivable, assuming some amount of help was called in, that and if major veins and arteries weren?t hit.
Either way the headshot should have killed the person instantly.
Click to expand...


Head shots do not always kill, lots of people recover from head shots. Firing squads target the heart for a reason. It is the one place you can shoot people and they will always die.
 
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: Dirigible
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I just don't get why he did this. Everything was fine. Then he puts five more slugs in him? Was it out of anger? If so, yeah, he deserves to be charged.

This story is just crazy.
Click to expand...

Get in a life threatening situation and people don't do rational things. For example, if you are one of those dipshits trying to get away from the cops in a high-speed car chase, expect to get your ass beat once they catch you. It's time for the courts to recognize normal human behavior, even if such behavior isn't rational.

I haven't clicked on the link so have no idea if this is applicable here, but if you try to rob someone and put them in danger, you put into play a lot of human behavior like this. The robber is the source of this, not the person who goes batshit on the robber.

(And I consider myself a left-wing tree-hugging anti-gun liberal. Hah!)
Click to expand...
But in this case, he already shot the guy, and he was down. Then he WENT BACK and got ANOTHER gun and shot him five more times -- while he was already incapacitated. That's just fucked up no matter how you look at it.
Click to expand...

Fucked up, yes. I'd like to think I wouldn't do that, but by no means am I sure I wouldn't do something similar in a similar situation. Get the adrenaline pumping and even after the threat is removed it takes a while for normal people to act rationally. It's hard for me to blame the non-instigator in such a case.

In conclusion, people are crazy monkeys. The law does not acknowledge this.

Edit: Most people don't acknowledge this either.
 
I don't think anyone has a problem with the first or subsequent shots to take down the threat but there's definitely a red flag to unload a few more rounds after they're down and no longer poses a threat.
 
Originally posted by: Dirigible
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I just don't get why he did this. Everything was fine. Then he puts five more slugs in him? Was it out of anger? If so, yeah, he deserves to be charged.

This story is just crazy.
Click to expand...

Get in a life threatening situation and people don't do rational things. For example, if you are one of those dipshits trying to get away from the cops in a high-speed car chase, expect to get your ass beat once they catch you. It's time for the courts to recognize normal human behavior, even if such behavior isn't rational.

I haven't clicked on the link so have no idea if this is applicable here, but if you try to rob someone and put them in danger, you put into play a lot of human behavior like this. The robber is the source of this, not the person who goes batshit on the robber.

(And I consider myself a left-wing tree-hugging anti-gun liberal. Hah!)
Click to expand...

So I can only kill people I'm mad at? Thanks for clearing that up :roll:
 
Originally posted by: Dirigible
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: Dirigible
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I just don't get why he did this. Everything was fine. Then he puts five more slugs in him? Was it out of anger? If so, yeah, he deserves to be charged.

This story is just crazy.
Click to expand...

Get in a life threatening situation and people don't do rational things. For example, if you are one of those dipshits trying to get away from the cops in a high-speed car chase, expect to get your ass beat once they catch you. It's time for the courts to recognize normal human behavior, even if such behavior isn't rational.

I haven't clicked on the link so have no idea if this is applicable here, but if you try to rob someone and put them in danger, you put into play a lot of human behavior like this. The robber is the source of this, not the person who goes batshit on the robber.

(And I consider myself a left-wing tree-hugging anti-gun liberal. Hah!)
Click to expand...
But in this case, he already shot the guy, and he was down. Then he WENT BACK and got ANOTHER gun and shot him five more times -- while he was already incapacitated. That's just fucked up no matter how you look at it.
Click to expand...

Fucked up, yes. I'd like to think I wouldn't do that, but by no means am I sure I wouldn't do something similar in a similar situation. Get the adrenaline pumping and even after the threat is removed it takes a while for normal people to act rationally. It's hard for me to blame the non-instigator in such a case.

In conclusion, people are crazy monkeys. The law does not acknowledge this.

Edit: Most people don't acknowledge this either.
Click to expand...

That is because it is not the law's job to acknowledge this. To an extent, the law can try to come around to you, for example in some states you can be charged with a crime of passion, but it does not excuse what you did.

If I got drunk and decided to light someone's house on fire, i would not be in the right state of mind, but it would still not be excusable in the eyes of the law.
 
Originally posted by: NFS4
(And I consider myself a left-wing tree-hugging anti-gun liberal. Hah!)
Click to expand...
But in this case, he already shot the guy, and he was down. Then he WENT BACK and got ANOTHER gun and shot him five more times -- while he was already incapacitated. That's just fucked up no matter how you look at it.

[/quote]

I'm lookin at it and I'm not seeing anything fucked up with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top