Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd
I don't disagree with any of that, except that I don't like the idea of someone "protecting" their property from being pissed on with a gun.
If the guy's safety was threatened, well yes, by all means.
Pawnmower's reasoning does make some sense, that the rocks were probably thrown first, thus the gun play may be justified.
|
I think it's pretty safe to assume that rocks were thrown first. Why? Because if rocks were thrown second you're saying a guy who unprovoked is willing to shoot someone....but magically when people start throwing rocks at him decides to STOP shooting. Reason would say if he's willing to shoot you before you throw rocks he's going to keep shooting at you when you start. No way could a small group drive him off before he fires off a bunch more rounds.
Now that could have happened....but it's a hell of a lot less likely than having a bunch of drunks start throwing rocks first.
Still it was stupid for all involved and the outcome will affect all for the rest of their lives.
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t*rd by the clean end"
|