Debate Magazine

Applying Castle Doctrine, This Guy Would Have Been Shot

Posted on the 10 February 2012 by Mikeb302000
I don't agree with the laxer Castle Doctrine laws; I agree with Laci that they amount to a license to kill.
Given the circumstances shown in this video, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out this man who intruded was in fact in some way harmlessly and innocently impaired. While it is possible that impairment was from a controlled substance, it is just as possible that he had an unexpected reaction to a prescription drug. In any case, for unintentionally intruding while in a state of impairment and confusion, he certainly doesn't deserve to be shot, killed or injured. Too many of our gun loons make the unwarranted leap that anyone who is present without an invitation is dangerous, intends harm, and deserves gun violence from them for reasons of self defense.
Clearly, that is NOT true, and this is just one example of that. Good for this woman for responding the way she did, and thank god for this man's sake that she wasn't one of our blood lusting violence prone gun lunatics.
From MSNBC.com:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog

Magazine