Let’s say you’re visiting a relative and they step out to run an errand, leaving you alone. Then a total stranger boldly walks into the house without permission. Then they become “disruptive.”
What do you do?
A Miramar, Florida man faced exactly that situation earlier this week and shot the intruder, killing him. It turned out that, according to media reports, the homeowner knew the man. Exactly what that means isn’t clear.
According to local10.com…
Police said they havenāt made any arrests and investigators are working to determine whether the shooting was a case of self-defense.
Police may also be seeking a search warrant to further investigate inside the home. They said everyone inside of the home was cooperating with detectives.’
The news account is admittedly light on details. Was the “intruder” a friend? An angry neighbor? A real-life Kramer type who feels he can walk in at any time? Another bizarre Florida Man? And what does “disruptive” mean?
We clearly don’t have enough information from the sketchy news report, but tell us what you think in the comments. A gun should never make an appearance, let alone be used except as a last resort to prevent death or grievous bodily harm. What would you have done?
As you have pointed out the facts are not clear. The answer is simple, if I thought I was going to be in a situation that resulted in major injury or death, I would shoot the person. If I had other alternatives like calling the police, I would use them first rather than resort to violence. Seems to me that is just common sense.
Hmmmm…..it might be considered rude for a house guest to kill another guest without an immediate threat of bodily harm or death. Is such cases, one should carefully dispose of the body, clean up the blood, and correct any other disorder that may have been caused by the incident. Certainly, that is the only way you will be invited back.
Or get out the skinnin knife and start boiling water. Never let a friend of a friend go to waste.
Further evidence that possum cannot be domesticated. They are wild and they like it that way.
“They are wild and they like it that way.”
I bet they like to ‘do it’ Possum-style… š
Bathtub, chain saw, heavy duty lawn bags. And lots and lots of bleach.
Mann Industries has been providing corpse-grade quicklime for many many years.
To be only slightly more serious, in Mexico the cartels hire “disposal experts,” usually guys with some college freshman level chemistry education. One of them was called “El Sopolero,” which means “The Stew Maker.” His method involved 55-gallon drums and a mix, 50-50 by weight, of quicklime and lye, or so I have read. Better living through chemistry!
Like John Wick, make a call, dinner for one
Groceries is gettin’ high, gotta do what ya can ta get by.
You’re telling me. I was at the supermarket this morning. I was in the produce aisle and said “Please don’t be high,” but all the apples were smoking something in little glass pipes with Hunter Biden.
Long pig, enjoyed globally for millennia. Years ago in very rural central BC, my buddy (with spousal unit and their two little kids in attendance) had a big dude in nothing but a trenchcoat walk into his house, stand at the bottom of the foyer stairs and repeat “you all have to leave now” a few times. Needless to say they did, out the back door. He was thinking the worst, a bomb or weapons but it turned out the guy was a recently released local(ish) nuthouse resident off his meds. But that was my buddy with his family; I would’ve no doubt pointed things at him and contested just exactly who tf was about to “leave right now”. Cops said he was harmless. Uh huh. Buddy had a shotgun (locked up, as per The Law) but said he never even thought of it. This was the middle of nowhere and the guy was on foot. Shit can and does happen out of the blue, anywhere, anytime.
Pig farm. They cannot use recovered DNA after it’s passed through a Porker’s Digestive system.
Find your neighborhood Pig Farmer and stay on his good side.
I guess rude is an acceptable possibility when death is a more definite possibility.
Given the choices presented in the headline, why not just take the simple answer and pick “both”. Shoot, scram, scoff.
You can always text your friend later. Or, more fun, wait for them to text you when the come home to find a dead guy on the floor.
It’s like the best practical joke ever except it’s neither practical nor a joke.
“Or, more fun, wait for them to text you when the come home to find a dead guy on the floor.”
This ^.
Innovative approach; stretching the mental faculties. Not falling into the folly of thinking that former assumptions are the entire range of response.
Remaining alone in a friend’s house is a non-starter. Leaves one open for finding out the friend isn’t. All sorts of claims for damages not your doing can be lodged. Not worth the risk. Leave, and come back later.
There are levels of friendship. Those friends who would die for me and I for them, yup, I would defend their property, also. Admittedly, I have very few such friends, but, there they are.
Sam, respectfully, you’re speaking of ‘acquaintances’, not a ‘friend’. At least in my understanding of the terminology.
“…youāre speaking of āacquaintancesā, not a āfriendā.”
Working from the standpoint that a ‘friend’ is an acquaintance, until the relationship is seriously tested.
Ex: If you have “friends” from work (real “friends” as you would see them), and you are dismissed unfairly, how many of those “friends” would resign over the unjust firing? Which among them will assist paying your bills, making rent, or buying groceries? For how long?
Many of us will not be able to separate the categories until we are buried on a rainy day. At which point, the distinction will be meaningless to us.
Sam, I can separate them. And I do. And they return the honor. Jus sayin…
I’d have said ,” Howdy, what are you doing here?” Then if he started tearing shit up I’d a said ” Wow Bob’s really gonna be pissed when he gets back.”
@Sam I Am is right. Unless I was cornered with no way out, I would have left the home. Not my call. I hope that person who used the gun has good insurance…he/she will need an attorney for sure.
If the intruder whom I don’t know, becomes disruptive, and I have my weapon on me, he will be instructed to leave. If he escalates, my weapon will be drawn while being instructed once again to leave. At that point he better leave.
To be honest I would have left the house and called the friend who had left and advised them of what was happening. The friend can then either decide to call the police or come home and deal with the acquaintance. I’m not going to risk shooting someone over someone else’s stuff. I know I’m in the minority with all the He-men and the other tough guys/girls who regularly post here.
“To be honest I would have left the house and called the friend who had left and advised them of what was happening,”
Good response. Evaluating the shooter is irrelevant.
More information required.
Absolutely right!
Being ādisruptive” isn’t enough to shoot or to even think about drawing your gun. I’d like to hear the entire account. Are there witnesses outside of the shooter?
One has to ask:
What was being disrupted?
Was the disruption so important that a life had to be taken?
Just too little information to reach a reasonable conclusion.
“Just too little information to reach a reasonable conclusion.”
Not at all. The exercise is not judging the shooter’s action, but given what you do know, “What would you do?”.
The matter can be broken down into segments: “While visiting a friend, friend leaves the residence. While alone in the residence, another person simply walks into the residence. You are armed. “What would you do?”
Uh… assess the situation and act, hopefully, accordingly.
Then, depending on the outcome, probably curse the fates and furies before calling the cops.
“Uhā¦ assess the situation and act, hopefully, accordingly.”
Yeah, but…
I hope beyond hope I never need to find out in person.
EDIT – Actually, I did, up to a point.
One of the two times I’ve drawn a gun was when I was inside someone’s home doing some painting with nobody else but me, and a guy walked in, saw me, began advancing towards me while jabbering about something somewhat incoherent.
I turned towards him, began drawing the Taurus 6-shot .357 I was carrying that day and advised him he needed to leave the house right *now*. As soon as he saw the revolver, he did a rapid 180 and marched right back out and disappeared.
I have to wonder if the guy in the article did any of that (verbal warning followed by the draw) before firing at the intruder.
EDIT ā I had the place opened up because of the paint fumes I was generatingā¦
It’s Florida. Lock the freaking door.
Damn straight, Ralph.
I’m anal about keeping doors to the outside locked at all times unless exiting and entering… š
If the shooter felt he was a threat the shooting is justified.
Nothing like a scant information article! My pastor has a habit of “dropping in” unannounced. Since he’s also a friend(& a gun owner)it’s cool. I had an old girlfriend years ago I looked up after a High School reunion. While I was saying hi 2 different people including the jerk who knocked her up just walked through the door. He got belligerent with her(paid no support). I was still really big & muscular 35 years ago & he left after I threatened him. No guns but it sure turned me off to my former love. That & not locking your door!!!
“If the shooter felt he was a threat the shooting is justified.”
Maybe.
The defender in a DGU does not decide if the shooting was justified. That decision is lies entirely in the hands of police, DA, judge/jury.
Sam, I think he was right, at least as far as Florida self-defense law goes. *If* the shooter was legally-allowed to be there, and it seems the homeowner invited him inside in the first place. Legally there, felt threatened, it might well go his way.
He will probably be sued out the ass by the dead guy’s family, I suspect.
Either way, that’s a situation that shouldn’t have had to happen in the first place… š
“Sam, I think he was right, at least as far as Florida self-defense law goes.”
The shooter never gets to decide what is right, no matter the law. LE, DA, judge and jury decide. You can explain yourself, your lawyer can explain yourself, neither you nor your lawyer can make a final determination that you were “right”.
The question remains, “What would you do?”, given the information provided. The incident is a “teaching moment”, not an analysis and judgement moment.
Maybe dead guy was homeowner’s best friend and didn’t know shooter, thinking he was the intruder into friend’s home???? One would have expected at least couple quick questions to buy time, assess threat….”Who are you?” “Why are you here?”
Lethal force is a LAST resort, especially without direct threat to one’s person. Distance is your friend. Exit. Call your friend or 911 for input.
So we get no details but you want us to make a decision!?! Uh huh
Matt, take a step back.
Scenario: Alone in friend’s residence. Someone you don’t know just walks in the door. What would you do? Someone you don’t know just walks in the door and starts acting in a manner you analyze as strange (“disruptive”). What you you do?
The above is enough information to form thoughts about how you would respond. The details of the event that serves as the example are actually irrelevant (because it was someone else’s event). Given the setup (not the results), what would you do?
It is easy to fall into the view that one is evaluating the actions of another, justifying or criticizing. In this case, the question is not what would you do differently, but simply, “What would you do”, faced with the need to make a choice of how to respond.
I’ve had my belief, that people are basically good, severely tested recently. I no longer think that I would go out of my way and/or put myself at risk of harm for someone else just because I am armed.
If I had an opportunity to remove myself from a dangerous situation, I would take it.
If I was being directly threatened and had no other choice, I hope that I would protect myself. I really can’t predict how I would react in such a situation.
As the Mighty Bosstones sang, “Might be a coward, I’m afraid of what I might find out.”
“I really canāt predict how I would react in such a situation. ”
That is a valid answer to, “What would you do.” Maybe something to ponder longer. If one simply awaits a situation to “see how it goes”…. indecisiveness would not necessarily be an advantage.
If you step back, it is possible to make a prediction such as, “I would never be alone in someone else’s domicile.” Or, “I would go with my friend.”, Or, “I would lock the door and not let anyone else enter.” It’s a brain exercise, not a test.
āDisruptive.ā Is that anything like āmostly peaceful?ā
There you go, bringing FIRE into itā¦
Different States would handle this according to their own laws. I suggest that if anyone is interested you look up the relevant laws for your location, and prepare yourself accordingly.
This couldn’t possibly be a situation where a husband/boyfriend walked in on an unexpected guest. Or, a couple of other scenarios I’ve seen that could explain this. The explanation probably won’t make sense. It seldom does to a sensible mind, but there it is.
Gad, he was invited inside by the owner. So, he had a legal right to be there.
As I understand Florida law, the DA could rule that a good shoot, criminal charges-wise.
The dead guy’s family on the other hand, will likely bankrupt him in civil court, and I wouldn’t blame them one bit.
A crap sandwich, all the way around… š
Geoff, what I read was that the homeowner knew the subject. Nothing about an invitation. I know lots of people who are definitely not invited to my home.
Not enough facts. I would hate to be the gunowner though.
“Not enough facts.”
Actually there are. The question is “What would you do”, not whether or not the shooter was justified.
Fact: You are present in a friend’s home, while your friend is absent.
Fact: While present, a person unknown to you enters the residence.
Fact: The person who entered displays behavior you (not other people) deem questionable.
Question: What would you do?
Display even more questionable behavior in the hopes of scaring them off/just for fun?
“Display even more questionable behavior in the hopes of scaring them off/just for fun?”
There ya’ go. Thinking out of the box is always a good exercise. Nicely done.
How else would you end up with a dialogue like the one below in your life?
Officer: “So, you’re saying he just ran away?”
Me: “I wouldn’t say he “just” ran away”.
Officer: “OK, what happened right before he ran away?”
Me: “I went into the other room and came back naked, covered in cranberry sauce while waving around a gun, dancing and singing I’m a Little Teapot. At that point he fled out the front door with a look of abject terror on his face”.
Officer: “I’m not sure which of you might be considered the wise man but one of you probably fits that description”.
Yes! Life is short, often tedious. Why not enjoy these golden opportunities tossed our way? Be the wild card.
Do you mean like questioning who you are? And why are you here?
To tell you the truth, that is when I just go to a cafe and try to call my absent friend and the local LE. I would try to get a picture of the person/their vehicle and license number. I can’t protect his stuff if I do not know his friends(and neither can they).
Unless one of you has been load valubles from the home into your vehicle, I would think it would be time to retreat
“To tell you the truth, that is when I just go to a cafe and try to call my absent friend and the local LE. ”
Good conclusion to the mental exercise presented. Describing what you would do, not trying to compare what was done with whether it was the best response.
This smells fishy. As a host, I would have invited my friend to accompany me on the errand. Especially if I knew he was carrying. Two guns are better than one.
This situation smells like a setup to me.
Nah man Strawberry went to see some friends and they dont fck around so the other dude couldn’t go.
If he was on his bike with the sidecar look out he might start having flashbacks.
Comment under moderation
What?! Ttag does that? Say it ain’t so…
Without reading the article: The first choice is to always flee. Don’t be a hero.
With reading the article: My house, fuck you. Knowing the man is not the same as letting the man into your house for an argument – and even if he did, it’s his word vs. a dead man.
“This situation smells like a setup to me.”
Could be, but still a good “brain-teaser” to self-evaluate assumptions about ourselves. Not a situation calling for judgement about the actual shooter’s thoughts and response.
What the hell does “disruptive” mean? He came at you with a knife? Or did he take to singing “I Am Henry The Eight I Am” at the top of his lungs?
“What the hell does ādisruptiveā mean?”
For the purpose of the exercise, “disruptive” means whatever you want it to mean. How would you react to this, that or the other. Set up your own circumstances and relay your thoughts on response.
Friend conveniently leaves on “an errand”, uh huh.
Person enters while homeowner is out and “Became ‘disruptive'” eh?
Sounds like someone owes his dealer or ripped off a junkie.
“Police may also be seeking a search warrant to further investigate inside the home.”?
Yep everything illicit in the home will be flushed down the toilet prior to a search warrant being issued.
Does seem an awful lot like murder by proxy for someone in a side business, doesn’t it?
The whole thing stinks to high heaven. There IS alot more going on here (in the story).
Leave if you can; shoot if you must.
Or: shoot if you must; leave if you can.
Ha! Edit: shoot if you can; leave if you must. Doh…
Assume it was a set up to kill you, then deal with your āfriendā.
This is prob the most correct answer.
Not enough info. āDisruptiveā can mean anything from annoying to dangerous. Trying to burn the house down could be “disruptive”. Teasing the dog could be “disruptive”. One might require the use of force, the other probably not.
If “I feared for my life” is more than adequate for police then it should be even more than adequate for so-called “private citizens”.
“Not enough info.”
Plenty of info for the assigned task: Reply with what you would do.
The general, understandable, knee-jerk response is to try to make a judgement, based on the narrative, of whether or not the defender made the “right” decision. That is not the homework assignment.
Given what is available, how would you likely react? The word “disruptive” can mean anything you like, even the visitor telling a string of bad jokes.
So, pick an unwelcome behavior of any type, then reply to the question with what you would do under the facts delivered, and your choice of “disruptive” behavior. The drill is not one of judgement of the defenders actions, but of what you would hypothetically do. An acceptable reply is, “If I don’t like the looks of the visitor, I would….”; there are other scenarios available.
Overall, the author of the posting is presenting a thinking exercise; test your assumptions, your training, your mindset. Others just might benefit from your insight.
Unless specifically asked to stay, I would have either accompanied the friend on the errands, or left and come back another time. If asked to stay, much would depend on both the friend, and the actual behavior of the disruptive drop in visitor. Start busting things up, or becoming violent or threatening violence, cell would come out to first call 911, get pictures of visitor, then phone friend. If it came to an actual threat of imminent violence, then if I could not get away, the weapon would come out. Use of deadly force is only if I have no other option.
“If asked to stay, much would depend on both the friend, and the actual behavior of the disruptive drop in visitor.”
Good reply; describing your thinking, not evaluating whether the defender in the original post acted properly. The essence of “What would you do?”.
@Rider/Shooter
“Sam, I can separate them. And I do. And they return the honor. Jus sayinā¦”
If you have friends who would resign their jobs over your unjust firing, provide financial support while you find a new job, you are truly blessed, and very rich. Good on ya’, mate.
I had that happen once.
” I quit!”
What about you Mike?
” If possum quits I am too.”
Also had a boss who told me “do whatever it takes, I got your back.” Then when I got in trouble for the decision I made he denied all knowledge.
“I had that happen once.
ā I quit!ā
What about you Mike?
ā If possum quits I am too.ā ”
If Mike also actually quit, you have a true friend indeed.
Sam, I am proud to say, and fortunate enough to say, that I do indeed have two friends exactly like that. We’ve been thru some things together and they know and understand what it takes, what right from wrong is and that they will have to live with any consequences of their actions or inaction. I trust them completely and they me. I’m betting you’ve experienced the same. A guys gotta return the favor though and remember to never ask too much. My ‘acquaintances’ however, well, they are what they are and function at differing levels.
“I trust them completely and they me. Iām betting youāve experienced the same. ”
Actually, no. I have no “friends”, only short or long acquaintances. Never has anyone I know volunteered even a promise to sacrifice “lives, fortunes and sacred honor” as a protest to any unjust action I ever endured. Likewise, never have I offered the same to others. I have, however, provided limited financial assistance to some who were unfairly treated by employers.
Sam, that’s unfortunate you have not had that experience among ‘friends’. It’s a good feeling to know someone is true and every bit as good a feeling to understand you have the fortunate opportunity to reciprocate if ever need be. I was more rather thinking of the Colonel (if I have that correct) than any others when I mentioned you “having experienced the same”. Even just one, friend or life partner, is enough. And good on you for helping others, I’ve done the same and only once regretted it.
WHEW ON COMMENTS , SKIN N EAT UUUAAA NAW , HOWEVER NEVER THOUGHT OF THAT SCENARIO ,
IF VERBALLY COULD’T FIND OUT WHY PERSON THERE , LEAVES PEPPER SPRAY AND / OR SHOOTN TIME . SOME THING TO THING ABOUT .
WOUNDER IF HAD TIME TO FIND OUT WHY THAT PERSON DID THAT USUALLY AND IF COULD HAVE HAD TIME TO CALL OWNER ? GUESS NOT , SHOT HIM .
@strych9
“How else would you end up with a dialogue like the one below in your life?”
Boy howdy. You are close to a terrorism charge, there. Gonna take a whole case of O’Douls to get that image outta my head.
I know it looks like candy kids but dont eat it, its cranberry covered strych9
Possum, I’ve done the dribble honey routine on some women I’ve ‘known’.
Messy, but the whole ‘dance’ can get messy in *delightful* ways… š
Pop rocks in the right place, heh heh.
*Sniff*
I can imagine…
The Possum is my long-lost brother… š
*snicker*
There’s a Monty Python-esque skit in here somewhere about a guy who checks himself into mental health because he’s having hallucinations that he looked at his neighbors house and saw a possum shove a Jolly Rancher up some girls ass.
Only to be told by a doctor who looks like Geoff that actually it’s not a hallucination because possums are the freaks of the animal kingdom.
“I know it looks like candy kids but dont eat it, its cranberry covered strych9”
That’s terriff for this early in the morning/late at night.
“Knew the man” is less than helpful. it covers anything from a close friend to a stalker.
āKnew the manā is less than helpful. it covers anything from a close friend to a stalker.”
Great. Use your own definition of the indefinite terms in the article, than reply with what you would do The point is not evaluating the action of the shooter, but think about what you would do in similar circumstances.
“Shoot or GTFO ā What Would You Do?”
what the heck does “disruptive” mean? If its imminent threat to life or to inflict serious bodily harm, yeah I’m inclined to shoot them. But in reality, no one here can really answer the question as to what they would do based upon the information provided so far because no one here was there where and when this ‘disruption’ happened.
“Letās say youāre visiting a relative and they step out to run an errand, leaving you alone. Then a total stranger boldly walks into the house without permission.”
Kinda biases the view a little. We don’t know from the information provided if the person actually had prior permission or not from the absent-person-running-the-errand. For all we know right now the person could have had prior permission but became defensively excited over discovering the ‘relative’ in the house not knowing he was there and thinking him an intruder and that could have been the ‘disruption’.
and yeah if you can get away safely then run, but if there is no other way out and its imminent threat to life or to inflict grievous bodily harm then shoot them.
Don’t be afraid to run away if you can, as long as the threat would not remain imminent to you or another if you did run away – ‘stand your ground’ does not have a meaning of ‘always and each and every time’ attached to it and does not obligate you to do so, its only a legal principal that you can and not that you are obligated to do it. In today’s world with today’s criminals its more unlikely though you would not be able to run away safely because they tend to come in groups more than one-on-one thus more chances to stop you from running away but sometimes people are still able to run away safely. Its a tough call sometimes, I mean, for example, if the bad guy is about to kill the convenience store clerk and you can stop it by using your gun and the bad guy is not paying any attention to you and you can run away safely are you going to run away and let the clerk die?
Its all more of a situation dependent thing.
“We donāt know from the information provided….”
Precisely. If you were faced with that situation, what would you do? The reported actions of the shooter are completely irrelevant. This is not a judgement exercise regarding the shooter, but a brain exercise, putting yourself mentally in questionable circumstances. What would you do?
So if we do NOT know the exact nature of the threat or if the intruder was or was not armed in any way. It would seem from the comment tatbthe ‘intruder’ was known to the shooter so maybe there is a bit of back history of which we also have no knowldge. I would also question why the shooter had a handgun to hand unless he had some fore-knowledge. If he DID have forknowledge and was armed then the shooter HAD INTENT and that must be considered at least manslaugfhter and her in the UK it would probably be MURDER but who knows in the USA. At least, in the UK [if any weapon was used with undue and unproportional force let alone a gun] and most of the civilised world the shooter would have found himself behind bars whilst being investigated.
Thank God we live in the “uncivilised” United States where we can be armed without the assumption that we “intend” to do harm. If the intruder threatens, we have the right of self-defense.
We don’t give a fat rat’s ass what would happen in the UK.
Albert, when compared to population size and reported and unreported;
1. Those in the U.K. live in the #1 land of ‘mass shootings’ and violent crime.
2. The United Kingdom has had a gun ban in place for years. In the UK gun related crime has risen 27% in five years and the number of firearms seized has quadrupled. One of the strictest gun control schemes in the world yet violent gun crime continues to rise among a mostly disarmed populace of prey. Firearms are easily available to criminals despite an almost total ban of firearm ownership among law-abiding citizens.
The U.K. has had many mass shootings ā just not all shot in the same incidents and not by the definitions we use in the U.S. but collectively in terms of numbers shot by criminals over time, considering reported AND not reported to authorities, and population size. In this sense there are mass shootings in the U.K. almost daily across the country if its considered that four or more are shot by criminals across the country every day both reported and not reported. And since the time of imposing more strict gun control, violent crime has become more brutal and today the U.K. is the violent rape capital of Europe and the most likely spot in the world to be knifed.
Not my house so I would’ve just left if I wasn’t directly threatened.
Call to LE and the “friend” to let them know someone was in the house that I didn’t know.
Maybe the “someone” in the house steals everything, sets the house on fire or whatever. Again, not my house and rather than confront, I’ll exit the situation.
“Again, not my house and rather than confront, Iāll exit the situation.”
Taking proper advantage of the brain exercise presented. Good on ya’.
grab the last five tallboys and set on the lawn. hide the johnny drum. rain, garage.
he had better decide to un-arse the area quickly or be carried out..
Don’t you think you may mention to your guest someone is dropping in? Depends on how hostile the person coming in is. If I drew down on them as they were hostile and they didn’t have the sense to cease hostilities that is a special kind of stupid.
That said “who the fuck are you?” certainly seems an appropriate question.
If it was a Good friend’s house I’d tell them politely ish to leave, Dave will be back soon come back then. If it escalated, draw, tell intruder to park their ass on the floor while I call Dave. At that point if it escalated further Dave’s guna need a new rug.
If it wasn’t a good friend I wouldn’t have been waiting in his house.
Dave’s not here.
… man.
“If it was a Good friendās house Iād tell them politely ish to leave, Dave will be back soon come back then. If it escalated, draw, tell intruder to park their ass on the floor while I call Dave.”
Much better response than, “Not enough info to determine if the shooter acted properly.” We can learn from this.
Personally, GTFO is my default option outside my home / protecting loved ones. If I am forced into a DGU, I will shoot, on target to the best of my skill and I will have no regrets. Any gun gun fight you avoid is a win. Not really enough facts to make a call in this case.
“Not really enough facts to make a call in this case.”
Except for the last sentence, your comments were instructive; thanx for that.
The last sentence is off target. The “question” was never, “Did the shooter act properly”? The entire question was simply, “What would you do?”.
Depends on whether you are a Christian, your state and municipalityās political outlook, your skeletons in the closets, including online comments, and whether there is an election soon to take place
Second that on an upcoming election. Judges and prosecutors turn into real hard asses when up for reelection.
I guess in your book, so to speak, atheists need not even apply, bereft as they are of any moral compass. Is that what you were implying? Because it was.
@Rider/Shooter
“I was more rather thinking of the Colonel.”
You would be correct, in that case; she was my absolute friend, best friend. My words were related to people outside my marriage. But the Colonel would not sacrifice her career in protest over unfairness toward a co-worker or acquaintance. Nor expect anyone to do so for her. Nonetheless, I am happy, and pleased, to know you have true friends in your life. It is unquestionably a good thing.
Sam, “nor expect anyone to do so for her”. Yes, nor would I. As I said: one has to understand to not ask too much. And also yes: I’m fortunate indeed, “rich” as you put it, to have two such friends in this world of sentient insanity and selfishness. They feel as I do: that ‘we’ are ultimately all we really have. Cheers.
Comments are closed.