I've been reading everyone's opinions on the OKC pharmacist who shot and killed the 16 year old robber.

The question obviously is was the 57 year old in the right or in the wrong?

Me personally (attack if you must) say that the 1st shot was self defense, the next 5 were shots the followed were an act of murder.

Just my opinion.

Many of you saying that it was an act of self defense I pose this to you; when OUR US SOLDIERS go into a country and start pointing guns in other citizens faces can we be upset when our soldiers get shot at and killed? Are the other countries not simply fighting against our invasion? Using the same logic that some people are using to demonize the 16 year old kid couldn't it be used to demonize are soldiers as well?

Now I'm not against our military so those of you who don't wanna think before you post please stop now. I'm mearly just stating, if you bash one and support the other, are you being a hypocrite?

My personal opinion in the case of the pharmicist and the 16 year old is that both are wrong.

I'm all for self defense, but at what point does self defense turn into murder?

I'm sorry for all of you who are thinking "Well GeechQuestInfo must be a terrorist, he's not supporting the robbery of a hard working American is he"? or "TERRORIST!!! Our troops NEED to be over fighting for our freedoms"

I'm merely asking for all of us to be a little bit more aware of both sides point of views, especially on a day like today and during the moment of time we are in.

Hope everyone, whether you agree or not, has a GREAT DAY!!! I love you all!

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
I'm all for self defense, but at what point does self defense turn into murder?

When you walk back to the unconscious body on the ground and cap him 5 more times.

Is there a link you can post to the story?

One of the great things about this country is that people don't have to be tried and convicted on message boards or newspapers.

Also there is a difference between "kill" and "murder".

In my own belief system the decision is made by the perpetrator. It is a hard thing to think about ahead of time and nobody ever wants to think about taking a life.

As for me, my decision is made already about the actions I would take and under what circumstances. I have reconciled my beliefs spiritually, ethically and within the laws of my jurisdiction.

Anyway, I don't know the specifics of the case but having taken care of many gunshot victims in my life I can tell you that a single shot is very unlikely to incapacitate an attacker or deter an attack.

I think that concept is hard for folks without extensive military, law enforcement or even gang experience to understand. There is absolutely no time to make a decision WHEN the attack happens. A determined attacker with nothing to lose, amped up on illegal substances, can move from 21 feet away to physical striking range faster than a typical human can react.

That is why I firmly believe the shoot/no-shoot decision must be made ahead of time. There is no way to evaluate/judge/react/respond while considering moral/legal recourse when you have less than a second left to live.

Unfortunately nefarious characters understand this. They have made the decision to use force (even deadly force) and have nothing to lose.

I would encourage you to read my thread in the Survival forum about criminals and gun shows. The linked research study has interesting insight about how criminals with nothing to lose approach lethal force.

If or when a human life is threatened or even sever harm appears to be imminent or likely to result, I believe the individual has the right to protect them self. In such rare circumstances that individual is likely to be very, very afraid for their welfare and may over react. Multiple shots may be excessive, however, guaranteeing ones own safety and perhaps the welfare of others is not necessarily going to happen with just one shot. If someone has put another human being into this rare and unfortunate circumstance they alone are accountable for it's result. The shooter may have over reacted but so what? They have every right to assume the worst including the possibility of multiple assailants not immediately perceivable. Guaranteeing one assailant no longer poses a threat is just a good safety precaution. Mistakes are made, but the initial mistake of threatening the welfare of another human being is the greater and overriding cause of the effects that follow.

Believing we should some how imprission people left and right for their behavior or mistakes is fundamentally wrong. No one gets away with anything in this world no matter what it seems. Everyones behavior down to the smallest detail like stepping on an ant will be accounted for. Debts will be payed by the natural karmic processes arranged from higher regions. Almost everyone is taken at the time of their death for judgment and dispensation. We all life and relive lives in this world with events transpiring that are the result of such repayment of debt positive or negative. Making ourselves the judge of others is also a karmic inducing event. Be wary of adding to your own sins by rushing to control and judge others as criminal and punishable. We should never punish the purpose of jail two fold. To restrict access to the public by those considered a danger to it and to rehabilitate them in a reasonable time frame. Housing people merely on some intellectual argument is a serious mistake.