What the fuck? How can anyone defend that? I won't morn the loss of an armed robber, but the guy deserves to be punished for that, no question.
Everywhere up to point 4 I don't have any problem with. Everything after point 3 is premeditated murder.Stimey wrote:
http://gawker.com/5806220/where-does-self-defense-end-killer-of-robber-convicted-of-murderhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBBlEhm … r_embeddedWhere Does Self Defense End? Killer of Robber Convicted of Murder
Hamilton Nolan — In May of 2009, Oklahoma City pharmacist Jerome Ersland was at work when two teenagers came in to rob his store. What happens is caught on the surveillance video above:
1. Two teens burst into the store, one of them waving a gun.
2. Ersland shoots at them. The one with the gun runs out the door; the other is hit and falls.
3. Ersland exits the store in pursuit of the fleeing robber. Failing to catch him, he comes back into the store.
4. Ersland walks back behind the counter and retrieves a second gun.
5. Ersland walks back to where the fallen robber is, leans down, and shoots him multiple times, killing him.
Yesterday, Ersland was found guilty of first-degree murder. He faces life in prison. The case has divided public opinion along perfectly predictable lines. So we're just going to leave that set of facts right there, and you can all say what you think.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I just wonder what made him do it. I'm sure this was brought up in court, and I'm sure he answered, but why the hell would he go through the trouble?
Agreed. He was shot and no longer a threat. Then he was executed. Man should be charged and convicted.Nic wrote:
Self-defense ended after he shot him the first time, it was all execution after that. Deserves the murder charge.
Defiantly murder, but better for society as a whole. One less future shitbag that we wont have to worry about.
A tragedy to be sure, to have a career as a pharmacist cut short in its prime. Seriously, although I shed not one tear for the dead robber, it is true this was not self defense, on the other hand I do not see how this is first degree murder either.Stimey wrote:
http://gawker.com/5806220/where-does-self-defense-end-killer-of-robber-convicted-of-murderhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBBlEhm … r_embeddedWhere Does Self Defense End? Killer of Robber Convicted of Murder
Hamilton Nolan — In May of 2009, Oklahoma City pharmacist Jerome Ersland was at work when two teenagers came in to rob his store. What happens is caught on the surveillance video above:
1. Two teens burst into the store, one of them waving a gun.
2. Ersland shoots at them. The one with the gun runs out the door; the other is hit and falls.
3. Ersland exits the store in pursuit of the fleeing robber. Failing to catch him, he comes back into the store.
4. Ersland walks back behind the counter and retrieves a second gun.
5. Ersland walks back to where the fallen robber is, leans down, and shoots him multiple times, killing him.
Yesterday, Ersland was found guilty of first-degree murder. He faces life in prison. The case has divided public opinion along perfectly predictable lines. So we're just going to leave that set of facts right there, and you can all say what you think.
I agree wholeheartedly.lowing wrote:
A tragedy to be sure, to have a career as a pharmacist cut short in its prime. Seriously, although I shed not one tear for the dead robber, it is true this was not self defense, on the other hand I do not see how this is first degree murder either.Stimey wrote:
http://gawker.com/5806220/where-does-self-defense-end-killer-of-robber-convicted-of-murderhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBBlEhm … r_embeddedWhere Does Self Defense End? Killer of Robber Convicted of Murder
Hamilton Nolan — In May of 2009, Oklahoma City pharmacist Jerome Ersland was at work when two teenagers came in to rob his store. What happens is caught on the surveillance video above:
1. Two teens burst into the store, one of them waving a gun.
2. Ersland shoots at them. The one with the gun runs out the door; the other is hit and falls.
3. Ersland exits the store in pursuit of the fleeing robber. Failing to catch him, he comes back into the store.
4. Ersland walks back behind the counter and retrieves a second gun.
5. Ersland walks back to where the fallen robber is, leans down, and shoots him multiple times, killing him.
Yesterday, Ersland was found guilty of first-degree murder. He faces life in prison. The case has divided public opinion along perfectly predictable lines. So we're just going to leave that set of facts right there, and you can all say what you think.
Umm, because you don't have the right to take someones life if it's not in self defense? How was the kid a threat? He was disarmed, wounded, and on the ground. I guess we should allow cops to shoot people after they've been handcuffed too right?
Big men with a gun. You're both pussies that would never have the balls to pull the trigger. Talk a big game on an internet forum though.
Big men with a gun. You're both pussies that would never have the balls to pull the trigger. Talk a big game on an internet forum though.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Jay wrote:
Big men with a gun. You're both pussies that would never have the balls to pull the trigger. Talk a big game on an internet forum though.
Self defense implies that there is a direct threat on your life. If there is no direct threat on your life and you decide to whip out your gun and shoot someone, it's murder in the 1st.
I hope the irony is not lost on you retards when the great state of Oklahoma sentences him to die by lethal injection.
Edit - Seeing that he was sentenced, life in prison will do just fine too.
I hope the irony is not lost on you retards when the great state of Oklahoma sentences him to die by lethal injection.
Edit - Seeing that he was sentenced, life in prison will do just fine too.
Last edited by Jay (2011-05-28 15:08:14)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
First degree murder requires planning and calculation. This guy did not wake up in the morning and plan to kill anyone. Yes it was murder, but it does not meet the criteria for first degree murder in my unprofessional opinion.Jay wrote:
Umm, because you don't have the right to take someones life if it's not in self defense? How was the kid a threat? He was disarmed, wounded, and on the ground. I guess we should allow cops to shoot people after they've been handcuffed too right?
Big men with a gun. You're both pussies that would never have the balls to pull the trigger. Talk a big game on an internet forum though.
and honestly although I have never been put to the test, I seriously do not think I will hesitate to shooting someone that threatens my family. Suffice it to say, you do not want to be the one to test me.
When the guy went back and changed guns it showed premeditation.lowing wrote:
First degree murder requires planning and calculation. This guy did not wake up in the morning and plan to kill anyone. Yes it was murder, but it does not meet the criteria for first degree murder in my unprofessional opinion.Jay wrote:
Umm, because you don't have the right to take someones life if it's not in self defense? How was the kid a threat? He was disarmed, wounded, and on the ground. I guess we should allow cops to shoot people after they've been handcuffed too right?
Big men with a gun. You're both pussies that would never have the balls to pull the trigger. Talk a big game on an internet forum though.
and honestly although I have never been put to the test, I seriously do not think I will hesitate to shooting someone that threatens my family. Suffice it to say, you do not want to be the one to test me.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Kinda weak in my opinion... He was pumped up on fear and adrenaline no doubt. Clearly not in the right frame of mind. Also, I think consideration should be taken to the roll these criminal played in their own demise. They drew out the worst in a person, by threatening him with death, that otherwise would have remained a peaceful non-assuming citizen.Jay wrote:
When the guy went back and changed guns it showed premeditation.lowing wrote:
First degree murder requires planning and calculation. This guy did not wake up in the morning and plan to kill anyone. Yes it was murder, but it does not meet the criteria for first degree murder in my unprofessional opinion.Jay wrote:
Umm, because you don't have the right to take someones life if it's not in self defense? How was the kid a threat? He was disarmed, wounded, and on the ground. I guess we should allow cops to shoot people after they've been handcuffed too right?
Big men with a gun. You're both pussies that would never have the balls to pull the trigger. Talk a big game on an internet forum though.
and honestly although I have never been put to the test, I seriously do not think I will hesitate to shooting someone that threatens my family. Suffice it to say, you do not want to be the one to test me.
I would also like to stress that, me personally as a gun owner and CCW permit holder, I do not wish to be placed to the test of taking another persons life. I do not go to bars, or any other places that would risk confrontation. I carry for protection, and not because I think I am a bad ass.
Last edited by lowing (2011-05-28 15:37:04)
Don't know what was going through his head tbh, totally lost it I guess. He fucked up.
Agree it's murder.
Agree it's murder.
inane little opines
you don't know what was going through his head? I would hazard a guess, of fear, anger, and frustration all fueled by adrenaline from the fact that the man just had a gun pointed at him with the threat of death. Is that really so hard understand?Shocking wrote:
Don't know what was going through his head tbh, totally lost it I guess. He fucked up.
Agree it's murder.
I know, but still. You have to make quite a leap from there to actually pulling the trigger I reckon.lowing wrote:
you don't know what was going through his head? I would hazard a guess, of fear, anger, and frustration all fueled by adrenaline from the fact that the man just had a gun pointed at him with the threat of death. Is that really so hard understand?
inane little opines
Well, I feel sorry for the guy. and yes it is murder, but I would have hoped the circumstances that took him there would have been considered by this forum if not the jury.Shocking wrote:
I know, but still. You have to make quite a leap from there to actually pulling the trigger I reckon.lowing wrote:
you don't know what was going through his head? I would hazard a guess, of fear, anger, and frustration all fueled by adrenaline from the fact that the man just had a gun pointed at him with the threat of death. Is that really so hard understand?
Dunno, what does the law permit? It's not like he did this involuntarily.
On the other hand people in general are usually completely unaware or not understanding of the circumstances involved in something like this. Take the "collateral murder" video for example and how much flak that got.
On the other hand people in general are usually completely unaware or not understanding of the circumstances involved in something like this. Take the "collateral murder" video for example and how much flak that got.
inane little opines
Well, I'm not that knowledgeable on the US laws, but i wouldnt say its murder.
Murder has to be planned.
So i guess, manslaughter maybe??
But definitely not self defense. We here have 2 types of self defense. Regular and exces. Exces means you were completely out of you mind and pissed off and went too far.
Im afraid this wouldnt fall under the latter (or regular for that matter). Why? Simple. He didnt need to pumps those few extra rounds in the kid afterwards to defend himself.
Now, i know, we cal all say that there was exces ebcause he was adrenaline fueled and angry, but that does not take away the fact that after he ran after the 2nd kid he wasnt in any life threateing danger.
He also seemes pretty calm to. Grabbing a second gun, slowly walking over to the kid and shooting him multiple times.
I'm also pretty sure that any semi-skilled lawyer/DA could turn it into murder pretty easily.
Murder has to be planned.
So i guess, manslaughter maybe??
But definitely not self defense. We here have 2 types of self defense. Regular and exces. Exces means you were completely out of you mind and pissed off and went too far.
Im afraid this wouldnt fall under the latter (or regular for that matter). Why? Simple. He didnt need to pumps those few extra rounds in the kid afterwards to defend himself.
Now, i know, we cal all say that there was exces ebcause he was adrenaline fueled and angry, but that does not take away the fact that after he ran after the 2nd kid he wasnt in any life threateing danger.
He also seemes pretty calm to. Grabbing a second gun, slowly walking over to the kid and shooting him multiple times.
I'm also pretty sure that any semi-skilled lawyer/DA could turn it into murder pretty easily.
no he didn't do it involuntarily, but what he did do was a reaction out of fear brought on by 2 criminals that threatened him with death.Shocking wrote:
Dunno, what does the law permit? It's not like he did this involuntarily.
On the other hand people in general are usually completely unaware or not understanding of the circumstances involved in something like this. Take the "collateral murder" video for example and how much flak that got.
Sometimes, a criminal is going to fuck with a person more crazy than they are, I do hate it that this guy has to pay the price for what those criminals brought out in him.
I'd say it's manslaughter too.
Isn't the definition of Manslaughter a killing after control of the situation has been achieved, if he'd left the guy after shooting him the first time it would be self-defense.
Isn't the definition of Manslaughter a killing after control of the situation has been achieved, if he'd left the guy after shooting him the first time it would be self-defense.
It's probably the "shooting multiple times" bit that got the jury
Hope for him he can appeal.
Hope for him he can appeal.
inane little opines
yeah i guess.Sturgeon wrote:
I'd say it's manslaughter too.
Isn't the definition of Manslaughter a killing after control of the situation has been achieved, if he'd left the guy after shooting him the first time it would be self-defense.
it would be murder if he thought to was planning on killing those kids as soon as they walked in (or before that) regardless of them robbing him or not.
Damn shame, though. Because he really gave em what they deserved.
Well tbh I wouldn't go as far as call it deserved to execute the kid when he's already shot, unarmed on the ground.
inane little opines
ALL things considered I think man slaughter would be the most appropriate. Although I would not have given a second thought to a ruling of innocent on grounds of self defense. I will take dead criminals over victims turned guilty, by the actions of criminals.Sturgeon wrote:
I'd say it's manslaughter too.
Isn't the definition of Manslaughter a killing after control of the situation has been achieved, if he'd left the guy after shooting him the first time it would be self-defense.