There IS No Such Thing As An "Ex-Marine".

Discussion in 'The Club House' started by gorknoids, Dec 27, 2008.

  1. JiroZero713

    JiroZero713 Active Member

    1,071
    0
    36
    Smart Mother right there.

    Doesn't even look it....and that's a good thing. Bad guys don't know what hit them. Most of them are cowards anyway....and that accomplice got hit square in the spine....paralyzed immediately.
     

  2. ScottG

    ScottG New Member

    1,614
    0
    0
    Murtha's an ex-Marine isn't he??
     
  3. falseharmonix

    falseharmonix New Member

    1,728
    0
    0
    while I support the man's right to defend himself against an armed attacker, I must say watching that video makes me wonder about a few things...

    The accomplice (the one without a gun) was shot in the back, while attempting to flee. IMO, he is no longer a threat (not to mention that he was never armed, or if he was, never drew a weapon on the viewing area of the tape).

    Is shooting someone in the back legal? I can't imagine that it is.

    Also, I have to wonder where the first round ended up that the jeweler fired (the one that shattered the glass door).
     
  4. 1861

    1861 New Member

    353
    0
    0
    looks like a total rightous shooting to me .

    Or as they say in Illinois , PAY TO PLAY!
     
  5. Kent E

    Kent E New Member

    49
    0
    0
    How does he know what's going to happen? How does he know the guy isn't armed? I say you rob a store at gun point YOU GET SHOT!
     
  6. falseharmonix

    falseharmonix New Member

    1,728
    0
    0
    Well, he didn't (and I don't) know that he wasn't armed. I do know that he never brandished a weapon in the camera's view (but again, this doesn't mean he wasn't armed).

    But what I do know is that he was shot in the back while fleeing. He wasn't returning fire, and he didn't 'appear' to be reaching for a weapon. I'm not trying to say the shooting was not justified. I totally agree with the force he used. I just think that someone who is running away from you is no longer a threat.
     
  7. gorknoids

    gorknoids New Member

    2,396
    0
    0
    I thought about that, also. I concluded that turning your back on an armed victim does not give you some sort of magical immunity. The first round doesn't matter. All that mattered was that the victim lived.
     
  8. SGT-MILLER

    SGT-MILLER New Member

    2,350
    0
    0
    Have any of you ever been in a gunfight?

    I seriously doubt that the store owner was in a logical state of mind at the moment.

    His body was pumped full of adrenaline and he was experiencing the "fight or flight" syndrome.

    Basically he was pulling the trigger until his gun was either empty or his brain got a chance to register things again. That's why people have tunnel vision or things slow down during a big threat. The brain is having problems digesting all the info and body chemicals at once.

    Probably shouldn't become internet tactical experts on this issue, people. The Marine (once a Marine always a Marine) acted in a way to defend his life. End of story.
     
  9. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    4
    0
    'Zactly...
     
  10. falseharmonix

    falseharmonix New Member

    1,728
    0
    0
    No, thank God I haven't been in a gunfight.

    I imagine there was a lot of adrenaline pumping, his military instincts were likely kicking in, and he probably wasn't thinking "if I shoot this guy, is it legal?"...

    But thats not what I'm trying to say. I was posing the question of shooting someone in the back merely from an 'after the fact' standpoint, or a "what if I were in this situation" type of question. Judging from the video it appears as though he did not face any legal repercussions from his actions, and like I said earlier, I completely agree with his actions. I was just simply wondering...

    And for the record, I do not pretend to be an expert on anything, especially gunfighting.
     
  11. SGT-MILLER

    SGT-MILLER New Member

    2,350
    0
    0
    Well, if it's a "what if" type question, then I would say that I would've done the same thing.

    I would view the robber, and his/her accomplice both as threats to my life. Since a gun was not visible on the accomplice, I would not be able to confirm nor deny it's presence. I would have fired on both of them since they are both acting as one entity to commit the crime. I would not be willing to take the chance of letting the accomplice draw a possible hidden weapon and get a line of sight on me.

    Hopefully no one here on this forum will have to go through what that Marine did. I am thankful that he was unharmed.
     
  12. jvanwink

    jvanwink New Member

    6
    0
    0
    No such thing as an "Ex" Marine

    I was told by a Senior Marine that there are Marines and EX Marines. An EX Marine is a Marine that has been Dishonorable Discharged or received a Bad Conduct Discharge!
     
  13. dog2000tj

    dog2000tj New Member

    8,176
    2
    0
    Wow, I know that place. :eek:

    That jewelry store is about 3 miles from where I live, located on Rt 304. I hadn't heard anything in the local news about a jewelry robbery recently. :confused:

    Good for the shop owner. Although here in NY he is probably fu*#ed for shooting aomeone, especially the criminal he shot in the back. NY loves to protect the criminals more than the victims. :mad: