View Full Version : Druggist in OKC is convicted of murder
funkfool
05-27-2011, 14:29
Druggist in OKC is convicted of murder
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20110527_222_A15_CUTLIN912500)
by: NOLAN CLAY NewsOK.com
Friday, May 27, 2011
5/27/2011 8:39:47 AM
OKLAHOMA CITY - An emotional jury decided Thursday that pharmacist Jerome Jay Ersland is guilty of first-degree murder for fatally shooting a masked robber two years ago in an Oklahoma City drugstore.
Jurors recommended life in prison as punishment.
Two co-workers at Reliable Discount Pharmacy told jurors that Ersland was a hero who saved their lives on May 19, 2009.
But prosecutors called him an executioner who shot a wounded, unarmed robber five more times after the robber had fallen to the floor unconscious and was no longer a threat.
The surveillance footage is posted here...
If the guy is down and not armed... he is no longer a threat...
DeusExMachina
05-27-2011, 14:44
Yep...that guy really wanted to kill someone.
[/size]
The surveillance footage is posted here...
If the guy is down and not armed... he is no longer a threat...
I didn't hear about this the first time, and as I read it my first thoughts were that this action was unjust, until the last line, when yeah... five rounds into someone on the floor is just wrong.
H.
BushMasterBoy
05-27-2011, 15:05
He should have put 60 rounds in him like the SWAT team...conviction just another injustice in my view. They enter his business witn the intention of committing a felony and got what they deserved. Another sign that this country turned to crap...wtf...you lose your right to life, liberty & happiness when you enter another mans business armed and ready to do possible harm and also rob him. I hope the Governor or Obozo hands the guy a pardon...screw the rest of ya
KevDen2005
05-27-2011, 15:47
He should have put 60 rounds in him like the SWAT team...conviction just another injustice in my view. They enter his business witn the intention of committing a felony and got what they deserved. Another sign that this country turned to crap...wtf...you lose your right to life, liberty & happiness when you enter another mans business armed and ready to do possible harm and also rob him. I hope the Governor or Obozo hands the guy a pardon...screw the rest of ya
The president can't pardon him
and I think you mean the pursuit of happiness
HBARleatherneck
05-27-2011, 16:03
right or wrong. play stupid games win stupid prizes.
KevDen2005
05-27-2011, 16:14
right or wrong. play stupid games win stupid prizes.
+1 for that...And I am going to steal that line
CrufflerSteve
05-27-2011, 16:42
His shooting of the perp looked pretty cold. Bad, bad thing for a civilian carrying. Bad for an LEO also. Even so, if I had been on the jury I would not have found for 1st degree, something lesser or I would have deadlocked it. To me, it isn't premeditated when the adrenalin is still flowing from the initial incident. I'm sure somebody who execute a wounded bad guy shouldn't be allowed to touch a gun again but I disagree of life in prison.
Steve
clublights
05-27-2011, 16:52
I don't see how this can be seen as anything other then a execution ...
The Bad Guy was already down.. with an apparent head shot. then after a bit of time you walk up and at point blank pump 5 more rounds into the guy?
that's just wrong.. you shoot to stop the threat not to kill . once the bad guy is down he's down.
Sad part is if it was a head shot ( like has been said in the news report) the guy would probably have died anyways and the "good guy" would not be going thru all this. the video would have shown he acted correctly. but as soon as he walked up ... pump up on adrenaline or not.... and pumped more rounds into the guy .. he went from good guy to bad guy himself.
mcantar18c
05-27-2011, 17:22
+1 for that...And I am going to steal that line
My cousin broke his arm recently... I asked my aunt how it happened, she said it was when he was practicing "parkour" (is that what it's called?... the thing where you run around and jump off buildings and do flips and shit). I shrugged and told her that line... she slapped me.
Moral of the story: be careful where you use that line [Tooth]
Anyway, on one hand I can't support shooting unarmed people laying on the ground... but then again if you try to rob someone at gunpoint, i.e. put someone's life in danger, you've got it coming to you and I don't have sympathy for anything that may happen to you. He'd have to be pretty dumb to think he would get this past a jury though.
Too bad he didn't kill the guy with the gun too.
rockhound
05-27-2011, 23:16
sad that the bad guy has more right than the victim.
touchy feely justice, part of the problem with this country.
personally I would not have killed the guy, only cause I know the line that he crossed,
ideally, he saved the tax payers the cost of a trial. i have no sympathy for the perp.
if you walk in intending to do harm to another or use that type of force to commit a crime you deserve everything that is coming to you. if we were more on the side of the victim and less on the side of protecting scumbags then we would be in a better place.
+1 for that...And I am going to steal that line
Don't worry, he stole it from a guy who stole it from another guy who saw it on the interweb.
if the country was the way it should be, you should be able to kill someone that threatens your life and your liveleyhood.
but the way it is now, no threat means no shoot.
if the guy was on the ground, the store owner was not smart for finishing him.
Watch the video Elhuero. The clerk chases the gunman out of the store, comes back in, walks behind the counter (passed the unconscious guy on the ground), then comes back out from behind the counter to do the community a favor, I mean kill the guy.
Yes, he crossed the line and murdered the guy. I wouldn't have done it. He still did the community a favor though.
Watch the video Elhuero. The clerk chases the gunman out of the store, comes back in, walks behind the counter (passed the unconscious guy on the ground), then comes back out from behind the counter to do the community a favor, I mean kill the guy.
Yes, he crossed the line and murdered the guy. I wouldn't have done it. He still did the community a favor though.
oh yah, I agree.
I'm not bemoaning the loss of life.
he performed the the coup de gras and now he's been found guilty, I hope he gets a light sentence.
i think this is an outrage. if a guy brandishes a gun in a threatening manner, all his rights should hence forth be forfeited, that includes right to life. yeah sure its a little cold and id never be able to walk up to an injured guy and pop him five more times, but i don't blame someone who does and don't think they should be punished. you know maybe if more people were armed in this country and the criminals weren't always victimized, crime rates might go down. if i was LEO, i would have walked in, looked at the guy, looked at the tape, then shook the man's hand and told him to have a good day. this is just like the crap in some states where if a guy breaks in and threatens you you have to show you retreated to the absolute last place in the house you could and that you were cornered. its bullshit. if someone comes in and threatens me or my family hes being shot one foot past the door frame.
clublights
05-28-2011, 02:15
i think this is an outrage. if a guy brandishes a gun in a threatening manner, all his rights should hence forth be forfeited, that includes right to life. yeah sure its a little cold and id never be able to walk up to an injured guy and pop him five more times, but i don't blame someone who does and don't think they should be punished. you know maybe if more people were armed in this country and the criminals weren't always victimized, crime rates might go down. if i was LEO, i would have walked in, looked at the guy, looked at the tape, then shook the man's hand and told him to have a good day. this is just like the crap in some states where if a guy breaks in and threatens you you have to show you retreated to the absolute last place in the house you could and that you were cornered. its bullshit. if someone comes in and threatens me or my family hes being shot one foot past the door frame.
So he should just be allowed to be judge, jury and exuctioner???
Yeah I don't see a flaw in THAT plan at all ...... :rolleyes:
KevDen2005
05-28-2011, 04:09
sad that the bad guy has more right than the victim.
touchy feely justice, part of the problem with this country.
personally I would not have killed the guy, only cause I know the line that he crossed,
ideally, he saved the tax payers the cost of a trial. i have no sympathy for the perp.
if you walk in intending to do harm to another or use that type of force to commit a crime you deserve everything that is coming to you. if we were more on the side of the victim and less on the side of protecting scumbags then we would be in a better place.
Well that is actually how are system has always been set up (playing devils advocate)...if you really look at a lot of the things in the Constitution and put yourself in the frame of mind of the framers (no pun intended) and think of what they had experienced it will become pretty obvious why criminals have all these rights.
I for one am in very much in support of the idea that I would rather see 100 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man imprisoned (obviously I am a romantic).
For this scenario however, I just cannot support the continuing shooting of a person if the threat has been stopped. 1st degree murder might be a little steep though
clublights
05-28-2011, 05:58
After reading the "full article" link from link in the OP
http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacist-found-guilty-of-murder/article/3571542
I think the jury's decision starts to make more sense....
The 5 "execution" shots were from a DIFFERENT gun .. thats right folks... a second gun .
He lied to investigators about the whole deal ... even faked a wound.
Lied and said he was a combat vet that " had killed people" in Desert Storm.... he never left his AFB in Oklahoma...
And the topper on the cake to make me not want to stand behind this guy ...
He tried to sneak in a handcuff key to the court room the day he was convicted. ( he had been out on bail)
and as for Criminals getting treated better?
The kid on the floor with the bullet wound to the head... unconscious I might add..... became the victim the moment the other guy decided to pump 5 more rounds into him.
This pharmacist was the victim till that moment.. and was within his rights to life and liberty all that jazz till he grabbed that second gun and went back at the guy on the floor.
What he shoulda done is after he shot the one kid and the other with the gun ran out is used the counter for concealment ( Doubt it was thick and tough enough to provide true cover) and kept his weapon trained on the guy on the floor while watching the door... and waited for the Calvary to arrive.
Not grabbed a second gun and commit cold blooded murder.
Byte Stryke
05-28-2011, 06:18
second gun, third gun... reloaded a 30 round Magazine with Steel cores... The FELON instigated and or participated in a violent crime forcing the, now defendant, into a high adrenaline situation of "fight or flight."
No one should have to try and flee their home or place of business due to an invasion.
It is my earnest belief that any criminal(s) committing a violent crime against otherwise peaceable citizens, upon commission or participation of such crime have forfeited any and all rights or expectations of leniency.
If you break into my home and endanger myself, my child or my wife. I will make sure of only two things:
Your Blood will be found in a high velocity spatter consistent with multiple gunshot wounds on the inside of my residence
The jury will never hear your testimony.
Bank on it.
So he should just be allowed to be judge, jury and exuctioner???
Yeah I don't see a flaw in THAT plan at all ...... :rolleyes:
yep. a guy points a gun at you and threatens you you bet your britches you should be allowed to be judge, jury and executioner. besides, for any gun owner thats basically the decisions you have to make when in these types of situations. we just don't all come to the same verdicts.
even if the guy is an old dirty bastard who is unethical i still don't think this warrants 1st degree murder. as some others have stated, when a perp takes those types of actions he should forfeit all his rights.
You guys amaze me how quickly you turn against someone. Had that been you who had a gun pointed at you and you shot your mindset might be different. How do you know the threat was neutralized? I can't see it on the video.
One less bad guy who will more than likely commit the same crime again and again until he is caught and we wind up paying his bed and breakfast the rest of his life or at least sporadic spurts as he enters and exits the prison system.
Yeah, the guy who was shot didn't have a gun, but his accomplice did. He came in with the armed robber, he put his mask on next to the arm robber, so he was an accomplice to armed robbery. Plus the guy doesn't know if he has a weapon concealed on him.
It isn't like the druggist went out of his way, drove through the crime ridden part of town, talked some smack to some guys and then dropped them in cold blood. the robbers came to him. they started the fight, one of them brandished the weapon, one of them came there with the ability and or intention to kill. His accomplice knew what he was doing, he came with the intention to at a minimum rob the guy if not cause physical harm. The robbers are to blame for entering the store, giving up their rights by committing a felony. Sucks to be them.
After reading the "full article" link from link in the OP
http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacist-found-guilty-of-murder/article/3571542
I think the jury's decision starts to make more sense....
The 5 "execution" shots were from a DIFFERENT gun .. thats right folks... a second gun .
He lied to investigators about the whole deal ... even faked a wound.
Lied and said he was a combat vet that " had killed people" in Desert Storm.... he never left his AFB in Oklahoma...
And the topper on the cake to make me not want to stand behind this guy ...
He tried to sneak in a handcuff key to the court room the day he was convicted. ( he had been out on bail)
and as for Criminals getting treated better?
The kid on the floor with the bullet wound to the head... unconscious I might add..... became the victim the moment the other guy decided to pump 5 more rounds into him.
This pharmacist was the victim till that moment.. and was within his rights to life and liberty all that jazz till he grabbed that second gun and went back at the guy on the floor.
What he shoulda done is after he shot the one kid and the other with the gun ran out is used the counter for concealment ( Doubt it was thick and tough enough to provide true cover) and kept his weapon trained on the guy on the floor while watching the door... and waited for the Calvary to arrive.
Not grabbed a second gun and commit cold blooded murder.
all the things you listed the guy did are petty and don't really matter. the robbers entered his business with the intention to rob and or worse. one of them was armed. both committed felonies. He was the victim, is the victim and is now a victim of a BS court decision. I think he should be cleared or any wrong doings. I don't know if he was a doctor but I am not. If I can't pronounce someone dead legally, I still consider them to be a threat. In a situation like that, all means necessary will be used, which includes a second or third gun until I feel the threat is neutralized. I can't see in the video if the guy was unconscious, he could have been moving around, he could have been reaching in his pocket for something. hell, cops have dropped people for reaching for their wallet or a water pistol or a phone and they are trained officers.
you guys condemning this man for taking the life of a criminal who was intent on committing a Felony and possibly causing harm to the man or his staff physically is of great disturbance to me. How he did it may not have been what you would have done, but what was going through his mind at that moment you will never realize. Thoughts of a couple of robbers taking everything from you because they need some drug money.
What would you say if there was no video. Just the facts. two guys came in. one got away, the other was shot six times with two firearms. The bad guy was killed. applaud him and say he did a great job defending his property and his business?
That's just the issue Sniper, when this story is told without the video, it all sounds legit. Upon viewing the video though, it shows things that are hard to argue with. For instance, how can the pharmacist argue that he felt in danger by the downed POS when he walks passed the guy with his back turned in the video? He doesn't look real scared of him to me. I don't think he should get 1st degree murder either, but after sitting in the court room during part of a murder trial where the guy also got 1st degree murder, I can tell that this guy hardly had a chance of getting anything else.
With all this spotlight on the shooter and the dead POS, what about the first POS, the one with the gun? $10 says that the mama of the dead POS, recognized the gun holding POS. Where is he? Was he arrested?
DeusExMachina
05-28-2011, 12:50
This thread has certainly revealed potential murderers.
Shooting someone five times who is lying down on the ground, unconscious, is murder know matter how much you think you should be taking the law into your own hands.
BushMasterBoy
05-28-2011, 14:00
How do you know the guy won't suddenly pull out a weapon and kill you? Reminds me of the cop in Penrose that arrested two twin brothers for shooting at a dog. Handcuffed em both and put them in his patrol car, one had a handcuff key, the other had a Glock. Cop got a bullet to the head, twins got life without parole.
Whats to say the robber did not have a concealed weapon...pharmacist was just being sure the guy could do him no harm...just like SEAL team six...they were taking no chances. I find the judiciary as pathetic as the executive branch. I know "make my day" applies to the home, but does it apply to the business place as well? The state seems to have priveleges that do not apply to the common citizen and I will forever distrust government. Every day I pray God protect me from the Government.
Scanker19
05-28-2011, 14:09
Should he have treated his wounds? What if he let him die there on the ground? Elevate the legs, Invite him over to fuck his sister? One less POS in America.
Bad time to say, but gotta: "Two in the head, you know they dead."
He was on the ground, no need for the extra body mass shots... or was he still wigglin'?
He was a criminal, P.I.H.
Ok, I'll stop before I'm banned. HA.
clublights
05-28-2011, 15:06
With all this spotlight on the shooter and the dead POS, what about the first POS, the one with the gun? $10 says that the mama of the dead POS, recognized the gun holding POS. Where is he? Was he arrested?
They caught him and charged him with 1st degree murder.. he pled guilty . will be out when he is 19 ... he was 14 at the time of the crime.
clublights
05-28-2011, 15:25
all the things you listed the guy did are petty and don't really matter. the robbers entered his business with the intention to rob and or worse. one of them was armed. both committed felonies. He was the victim, is the victim and is now a victim of a BS court decision. I think he should be cleared or any wrong doings. I don't know if he was a doctor but I am not. If I can't pronounce someone dead legally, I still consider them to be a threat. In a situation like that, all means necessary will be used, which includes a second or third gun until I feel the threat is neutralized. I can't see in the video if the guy was unconscious, he could have been moving around, he could have been reaching in his pocket for something. hell, cops have dropped people for reaching for their wallet or a water pistol or a phone and they are trained officers.
you guys condemning this man for taking the life of a criminal who was intent on committing a Felony and possibly causing harm to the man or his staff physically is of great disturbance to me. How he did it may not have been what you would have done, but what was going through his mind at that moment you will never realize. Thoughts of a couple of robbers taking everything from you because they need some drug money.
What would you say if there was no video. Just the facts. two guys came in. one got away, the other was shot six times with two firearms. The bad guy was killed. applaud him and say he did a great job defending his property and his business?
Still a threat??
If he still felt the guy was a threat why walk away with your back to him .. he didn't run .. not even jog to get the second gun .. he walked . with his back to him .. then felt comfortable enough to walk with up close enough to put the muzzle 18-24 inches away .. the bad guy didn't come at him till he was that close he approached the bad guy and fired form that close... and from the look on the video did it fairly calmly .
If he had not walked by the guy twice I'd feel different. yes this is true. if before he chased the other kid around the building. if he had popped the guy on the floor a couple more rounds I'd feel ok about it ... but he fired those other 5 shots a full minute after the first shots flew... 60 seconds is FOREVER in a situation like that.
Fine Maybe I'm arm chairing him a bit much. I just agree with the jury on this one.. he committed murder. plain and simple.
Was anyone else killed besides the guy the Pharmacist shot? Was he charged with murder as an accessory since he lead the robbery or something?
clublights
05-28-2011, 16:08
Was anyone else killed besides the guy the Pharmacist shot? Was he charged with murder as an accessory since he lead the robbery or something?
No one else killed I can find .....
I guess it was as an accessory ...
they also charged two other guys that were the getaway drivers/ planners of the robbery... they got convictions on them for murder too..
Interesting. Both the robbers, and the target of the robbers being charged with the murder of one of the robbers. Seems kind of inconsistent.
This thread has certainly revealed potential murderers.
Shooting someone five times who is lying down on the ground, unconscious, is murder know matter how much you think you should be taking the law into your own hands.
So according to your logic are navy seals committed murder when they shot and killed osama bin laden when he was unarmed.
clublights
05-28-2011, 16:54
So according to your logic are navy seals committed murder when they shot and killed osama bin laden when he was unarmed.
Osama was a legitimate military target.
this robber was not.
DeusExMachina
05-28-2011, 17:44
So according to your logic are navy seals committed murder when they shot and killed osama bin laden when he was unarmed.
If orders were to apprehend Osama and he was found/made not a threat and one of the team put 5 rounds into him, wouldn't he have to answer for his actions?
Scanker19
05-28-2011, 23:13
Is killing anyone ever "right"? Regardless of the reason how can anyone justify it? Cause of laws? Cause god said so? Cause we're at war? Those are just words, beliefs, convictions.
It should never be okay to kill someone, but sometimes it has to be done.
Osama was "unarmed".......so. This POS in OK was trying to rob someone, who knows if they would have taken everyone in back and executed them. Is that the same "murder" as shooting a robber who just threatened your life. We're splitting hairs here over who was the biggest POS, the dead guy has my vote.
This should happen more often.
DeusExMachina
05-28-2011, 23:25
Is killing anyone ever "right"? Regardless of the reason how can anyone justify it? Cause of laws? Cause god said so? Cause we're at war? Those are just words, beliefs, convictions.
It should never be okay to kill someone, but sometimes it has to be done.
Osama was "unarmed".......so. This POS in OK was trying to rob someone, who knows if they would have taken everyone in back and executed them. Is that the same "murder" as shooting a robber who just threatened your life. We're splitting hairs here over who was the biggest POS, the dead guy has my vote.
This should happen more often.
Wow, that post was bipolar!
There's a big, thick line between being a law-abiding citizen and defending yourself, and executing someone in cold blood. This is most definitely the latter.
We have a system of laws and whether or not you agree with all, none or some of them, they exist. It's what separates us from animals.
Shooting an unarmed and unconscious person, criminal or not, throws society out the window. He may have deserved it. He may have not. It is not the "guy with the gun"'s decision. I fully support using guns to defend your life, but that was not defense. That was a firing squad.
Cases like this make being a gun owner and a self-defense advocate harder every day. There are people who decide they are the hand of God when holding a firearm. Those people should stay very far away from them.
Scanker19
05-28-2011, 23:58
But why does it throw society out the window? Cause someone says so? Laws exist because we make them.
What would a lawless society be?
The post is bipolar because who are we to say who should be killed? Who are we to say who shouldn't? The law? cause that works 69% of the time every time. Our judicial system is flawed and will always be flawed.
Killing in war is okay though? Why cause some guy said so? Be it a president, a king or a terrorist leader who the fuck are they to "okay" the killing of another human.
My point is regardless of who you are, where you come from, what laws we apply killing is never ok, but necessary. What I believe separates us from animals is how we apply that logic of how we select who dies and who lives, that decision making process could be in laws, rules, actions, or no actions.
The argument is the same that people apply to prisons. They always say "you judge a society on how they treat their inmates". It doesn't say its a bad society if they treat them bad, or a good society treats them bad. Its open ended as is the death question.
I do not have these answers, that's the fun part of being alive.
Its late and I've been cleaning guns for a few hours so the fumes are starting to get to me.[BDay]
Can we stop comparing this to war and Osama? It is a completely different thing.
DeusExMachina
05-29-2011, 00:09
But why does it throw society out the window? Cause someone says so? Laws exist because we make them.
What would a lawless society be?
The post is bipolar because who are we to say who should be killed? Who are we to say who shouldn't? The law? cause that works 69% of the time every time. Our judicial system is flawed and will always be flawed.
Killing in war is okay though? Why cause some guy said so? Be it a president, a king or a terrorist leader who the fuck are they to "okay" the killing of another human.
My point is regardless of who you are, where you come from, what laws we apply killing is never ok, but necessary. What I believe separates us from animals is how we apply that logic of how we select who dies and who lives, that decision making process could be in laws, rules, actions, or no actions.
The argument is the same that people apply to prisons. They always say "you judge a society on how they treat their inmates". It doesn't say its a bad society if they treat them bad, or a good society treats them bad. Its open ended as is the death question.
I do not have these answers, that's the fun part of being alive.
Its late and I've been cleaning guns for a few hours so the fumes are starting to get to me.[BDay]
A lawless society would be shooting a guy in cold blood and having no one to answer to for it.
My point was, even though a system is flawed does not mean we can decide to do away with it at a whim. What if the druggist was a child molester, would it be OK that the robber shot him to death?
War is "OK" because it is two armed combatants shooting at eachother. There are things like the Geneva Convention, the UN, etc. to try and keep things "civil". Remember, there are things called "war crimes".
So you believe stopping a threat and then executing the former-threat is a necessary killing? Think long and hard before you answer that.
Things are never so black and white to callously make the decision to take another human's life without due process.
Remember, shoot to stop the threat. Not shoot to kill. Shoot to kill will put you away for a long, long time.
Scanker19
05-29-2011, 00:30
A lawless society would be shooting a guy in cold blood and having no one to answer to for it.
A lawless society would be a perfect soceity. There would be no reason to have laws. i.e. computer fraud laws didn't exist in the 1920's.
What if the druggist was a child molester, would it be OK that the robber shot him to death?
Yeah.
War is "OK" because it is two armed combatants shooting at eachother. There are things like the Geneva Convention, the UN, etc. to try and keep things "civil". Remember, there are things called "war crimes".
It's only "ok" for those who don't fight such as the leaders who send people to die.
So you believe stopping a threat and then executing the former-threat is a necessary killing? Think long and hard before you answer that.
Depends normally I'd say yes but it would have to depend on the situation, but it is no more my choice than it is a jury of your peers. I know law says it is but I'm talking that universal plain of thinking.
Things are never so black and white to callously make the decision take another human's life without due process.
You are 99% right.
Remember, shoot to stop the threat. Not shoot to kill. Shoot to kill will put you away for a long, long time.
I would argue they are one in the same. If you are shooting to wound you're not in that much imminent danger.
No one said that you shoot to wound. That isn't a concept.
DeusExMachina
05-29-2011, 00:35
I never said shoot to wound. I said shoot to stop a threat. Shooting to kill makes you look like a murderer.
Which I guess is OK for a lot of you guys in this thread...
I'm honestly surprised at the complete disregard for legal ramifications some of you have. And I know some of you with those opinions also carry. Shocked is probably a better word than surprised.
But of course, I'm just going to attribute a lot of it to "yeah, that guy should have been killed! As long as I wasn't pulling the trigger..."
clublights
05-29-2011, 05:08
Deus has pretty much said everything I would say here .. but I have one more thing to add.... And I'm gunna pick on jordan since he was the last one talk about it in this way
The way jordan says he " just needed killin" is EXACTLY why and HOW the anti-gunnies not only try to take away our guns, but manage to keep things like constitutional carry away from us.... since they say that is HOW you and I will act. This is how they said we would act when we got Concealed Carry ...
very dangerous position for folks of our ilk to take in my humble opinion ...
Byte Stryke
05-29-2011, 08:44
I think we can all agree here that this is a prime example of why you must practice with your firearm and increase your proficiency with it as to not require the other 5 rounds to save your life and protect your family.
2 should do it.
:)
said this on another board and I still stand by it:
enter a store pointing a weapon at the owner/employee, they have teh right to cook you over a spit and eat you as far as I'm concerned.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.