Quote:
Originally Posted by ziadel
what if I told you, I have a friend, who while he was camping left his camp for a few minutes, and upon his return he found a guy, just some guy, had gotten into his car, had found his shotgun, and was looking it over. So my friend whips out his .45, puts two rounds in the guys chest, then calls the cops, and was then asleep in his sleeping bag 45 minutes later. No grand jury, no getting arrested, just a pat on the back from the local law enforcement.
|
Frankly I'm somewhat surprised that Manx has continued this discussion as long as he has.
There is practically nothing right with the scenario outlined here, granted it's a little thin on the details. "looking it over"=shot and possibly killed. I think it is a safe assumption that the poster would have mentioned if there had been any other threatening behavior etc. by the person with the shotgun (i.e. pointing it at him etc.) so I am assuming that there was none. Regardless, for you to laud local law enforcement for "patting him on the back" and sending him on his way is absurd. Maybe he was justified and maybe he wasn't but he should have at least seen the inside of a courtroom for a grand jury to decide. Shoot first, ask questions later is a stone age mentality, and i can't believe that there is a current debate about it.
Also, the more you continue to cite Vermont, the less I'm inclined to think that you've been there. If you look a little deeper into the Vermont culture I think you'll find that the reason for the low crime rate is more due to the homogeneity of the population and other socioeconomic factors, not the fact that all the hippies are packing. Also, most states with few large urban areas and relatively low population density have lower crime rates, for many factors that I'm not going into right now.