Quote:
Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy
Very interesting legal hypothetical here. The marine had every right to defend the fallen officer as if he was defending himself. The facts are a little light to make a definite decision. Did the marine feel as though the shooter was still a threat, to himself, the officer or his son in the vehicle? If so, then it's a good shooting. About stopping and getting involved... again, too light on the facts.
I dont think this is vigilanty justice - too little time between the first shooting and the marine shooting.
Im surprised more liberal, gun fearing groups arent up in arms about this... the guy was a scumbag and the situation was so specific, the risk of a slippery slope into wide spread vigilanty justice, is minimal.
|
That's a good point that I hadn't considered. Acts of vigilantism tend to be more premeditated. This was more an act of Samaritism ... the marine just happened to be in the right place at the right time to do something.