Quote:
|
Originally Posted by krwlz
And that right there, is the flaw in our legal system. Our criminals have too many rights.
|
Wow, I don't want to morph this thread into a criminal rights thread so I'll just say I completely disagree with our system being flawed because of criminal rights. However, I don't think either of our assumptions about that issue necessarily need to influence a discussion about this case.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
This is what intrigues me. Presumably (we don't have ALL the facts) he acted lawfully, that is in self-defense right? If so, why should he be the one in trouble? It just seems odd to me that we would protect the criminal and punish the victims.
|
We are talking about two acts here. The second act, his gunfight with Lee, is likely legal, though there is some question about self-defense since he chose to get involved, but in most states it would fly. The first act, him firing at the outside gunman, is legally questionable. That act was clearly not self-defense because he was personally in no danger either before he chose to involve himself or when he shot at the criminal. As you said, we don't have all the facts, but that situation could be problematic for the delivery guy because he essentially assaulted that robber. In most cases, that is alright to a level of necessity and it very well might have been necessary in this case. But the question then is if it was necessary for their protection or if his actions actually heightened the danger through armed conflict and made it more likely innocent people would be harmed. Luckily it didn't turn out that way, but that is part of the inherent problem with vigilantist behavior. If he had not been their the robbers would've gotten their cash and escaped leading to a police investigation that may or may not have apprehended them, still no one is harmed or dies. However, what if the outside criminal didn't run at the shot, he did after all have a guy essentially shielding him, but returned fire or moved his victim into the delivery guy's path? What if he missed Lee and/or Lee didn't miss? These events would have led to at least the deliverers injury and would have made it much more likely more innocents could be harmed. He would at least have been somewhat liable for that. Again, luckily that did not happen and everything worked out well. Nonetheless there are good reasons that this sort of vigilante action frowned upon and often illegal.