Oklahoma City pharmacist found guilty of murder | NewsOK.com Ersland; the former Pharmicist in OKC who shot a robber 5 times, stopped the threat. He then chased another of the fleeing robbers out of the pharmacy. Afterwards, he returned to the first assailent and executed him with a different gun. “This defendant made himself judge, jury, executioner,” Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Chance said before a packed courtroom. And the sad truth is that he did... He took it upon himself to end the life of another human being. The human being was far from innocent of violent crimes; mind you, but no longer posed a threat to Ersland or anyone else nonetheless. Ersland has just officially joined the ranks of convicted murderers. He won't have the luxery of being executed though. He'll spend the rest of his life rotting in prison with other murderers, rapists, thugs and violent natured individuals. He is an elderly man who will likely not live to see his first parole board. It's a shame too. He didn't seem like a particulary evil person. He actually brought pictures of his dog to the Court and offered to give the pet to someone that could take care of it. He did this because he finally resigned himself to the fact that he wasn't coming back. He was; at that point, more concerned for the welfare of his beloved animal than he was for himself. Does that sound like someone that would be capable of murder? Not to me but evidently he was. Only because he bought into one seriously flawed fallacy: Shoot to kill. Keep shooting the bad guys until they are dead. If he had his head right before the incident, his anger would not have gotten the better of him. His attitude would not have been so skewed that he would have performed this in front of his own security camera. Shooting to kill had become so ingrained in him that he obviously did not even realize he was doing anything wrong. If the teenager had lived through the robbery he would likely be the one facing a jury instead. If Ersland had not returned to execute the individual on the spot, the assailent would have likely expired anyway. The difference is inarguable intent. He made his intent known the instant he decide to return his frusteration towards an immobile assailent. At was also at this point that he shamed most other firearms advocates and empowered anti-gun zealots. This is exactly the consequences we can avoid with understanding that gun owners are held to higher standing of moral objectivity. Most of us who carry a weapon had to pass background checks and spend many hours studying before being issued a permit. Some of us may have spent more time standing in line for the ID to be issued than we have actually practiced with our weapons. I am sure I am not that only person who has heard or seen at least one "home defense" weapon that was bought and quickly tossed in the drawer to be forgotten unless it is needed. I would opine that is not the case for the majority of CCL holders. The majority of us understand some basic concepts before tucking a gun in our holsters. Before carrying a weapon, we must fully understand the damage the weapon can impose. We must commit ourselves to acheiving good and proper proficiency with it. We must harden our mental resolve to the fact that we may have to employ the weapon but only if our lives are threatened. We must know the law and how it is currently being interpreted. It may be up to us to intercede violence among other innocents until authories arrive. We must understand we are not heros or peace officers who are commissioned to apprehend suspects or delve out justice. Most of all we must NOT allow anger to turn our defense into vile, murderous intent. We must understand the difference between shooting to stop the threat at hand and shooting with intent to kill. The latter of which, just made Jerome Ersland into a convicted murderer.