The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old July 16, 2011, 02:13 PM   #201
cracked91
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 17, 2009
Posts: 385
Quote:
Why explore "possibilities" that you admit are inconsistent with the evidence?
I dunno, It just seems to me that "I put him out of his misery" might not have looked to good in writing. Again, I don't believe thats what happened, but, I wasn't there. Were any of you?

Quote:
You are NOT trying to kill someone, you ARE trying to STOP THEIR ACTIONS.
In a case I recall reading on this board, a cop got into a gunfight with a BG. After said BG fell in front of him, Officer Jared Reston pulled him in close put his pistol to his head and shot him 3 times. In my super humble and honest opinion, I believe shooting someone 3 times in the head in rapid succession is saying die! Die! DIE! I know intelligences above mine will probably disagree. But Reston had been shot what, 6 - 7 times? He had every right to think "damned if im going to let this kid put one more hole in me". I believe he did the right thing. I also believe he intentionally KILLED the suspect.

Back to the topic. I do find it complicated. Very complicated. As do a huge population of gun owners. But thats because we can't allow the written law to be our morality compass. A criminal scumbag is someone again, in my very low and humble opinion, who goes looking for a looking for someone to victimize.

Quote:
It is called self control.
Bingo. This is what I think actually happened. He lost self control. Maybe out of fear, more likely out of anger. And thats why we find it complicated.

Ersland was put in a situation where he lost self control by criminals. Had he never been put in this situation, I believe he would have lived out the rest of his loony life, without committing a felony.

But because the criminals chose to victimize him, one is dead, he is behind bars, and alot of other ones are probably going to be rich.

I know what he did was wrong. I know why he was convicted. I also know that there are several people in AZ who legally carry a concealed firearm who have never taken a CCW class (because we no longer have to) that would probably do something similar if they were put in a similar circumstance. I don't call these people evil.

What Antwun Parker had originally planned to do was evil. Forcibly take money from someone who had worked hard for it. Kill him if he did not comply. I believe he got what he had coming, just as Jerome Ersland did. But now he is a martyr for the criminal society, and Jerome Ersland is a martyr for many in the gun owning society. It is a complicated situation. Legally, no. Not a bit. Morally and ethically, quite a bit. To me anyway.
cracked91 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 02:27 PM   #202
m.p.driver
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 552
Two local punks walked into a local mart at 5:30 am.Made the 55 year old clerk lay on the floor.Emptied the till and got mad because of the total,so one walked over to her and shot her twice in the back of the head with a .357.One was out in 8 they other in 12 years.It makes you wonder about the judicial system and whether its time to go back to 1800's justice.
m.p.driver is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 02:44 PM   #203
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,734
Let's avoid wishing to go back to eras before we had decent legal protections.

It's very nice to posture that a BG should get short shrift. However, if they came for you, you would be wanting your modern rights. Those were not golden days for everyone.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 03:12 PM   #204
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
You need to watch the WHOLE video. Tell me if you see ANY adrenaline dump.
__________________
"The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949
Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBBl...feature=fvwrel

I have seen the whole video, but what is on the video does not in the least show what is going on in his mind and body. I have heard statements that he thought he was going for a gun again and that is why he shot him the last 5 times. That my friend is exactly the same situation as the lady in the Idaho store I noted above from my CCW class. His statements are that he never intended to kill anyone, just stop them.

Secondly, how can you see an adrenaline dump on video? That is an internal event and who knows what he perceived. If his testimony was that he thought the man was reaching for his gun, then that is the only evidence of it happening. Sadly, he made so many pretrial statements that were interpreted as lying that he could not assume and affirmative defense. He probably had a poor choice of attorneys who did not proceed with an affirmative defense. That once again is just one more reason you don't speak to ANYONE but an attorney after such an event, PERIOD.

The physiology of the Adrenaline dump are quite well documented and the effects take several minutes to wear off. In the psychological aftermath of the original shooting where he WAS shot at first, is there not indeed an element of doubt as to his motives in shooting the creep the second time? was it intentional premeditated murder or a physiologic reaction limiting his ability to reason. I have never had anyone point a gun and SHOOT at me, but the two times I have had an adrenaline dump in my life, my judgement right after the event was definitely impaired. Folks that are in a life or death situation get "jumpy" and we cannot judge them in the same manner outside of the effects of getting shot at first and then reacting pumped up with super physiologic levels of adrenaline.

Sorry, but all of those folks condemning this man's action should walk in his shoes for a moment. Murder 1?? I suspect that he will have that reduced one of these days if not commuted entirely. What the video does not show is whether the punk did have any involuntary or voluntary movements that could have been interpreted as reaching for his weapon. In that case, the first and SECOND shooting should be justified. Simply on the basis of stress physiology, this man should have been given the benefit of the doubt and God forbid, if I am ever in such a situation, I would hope for that benefit of the doubt as well.

Last edited by Alaska444; July 16, 2011 at 03:22 PM.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 03:33 PM   #205
icedog88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2011
Location: norwich ct
Posts: 737
As a combat vet, I have seen and experienced adrenaline. After putting down bg, and they still move, I have NEVER seen one of my fellow Marines empty his mag, run back to ammo man, get more ammo, go back and shoot more. No shots were fired at him, and the perp he shot was unarmed. If you think bg poses a threat, you don't turn your back on him calmly,then step over him lol. And no, he is not a martyr. A martyr gives their lives for a cause. Not try to weasel out of trouble with lies.
__________________
"The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949
Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]
icedog88 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 03:35 PM   #206
Don H
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2000
Location: SLC,Utah
Posts: 2,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaska444
What the video does not show is whether the punk did have any involuntary or voluntary movements that could have been interpreted as reaching for his weapon.
What weapon is that?
Don H is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 03:50 PM   #207
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,734
I doubt modern legal doctrine would regard an adrenaline dump as sufficient for a diminshed capacity defense. Esp. with his planned actions which don't speak to the irrational and immediate.

I've read lots of reviews of self-defense law and haven't seen that raised.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 03:51 PM   #208
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaska444
What the video does not show is whether the punk did have any involuntary or voluntary movements that could have been interpreted as reaching for his weapon.
What weapon is that?
__________________
Don

Quote:
Oklahoma City Pharmacist Jerome Ersland faced this situation on May 19, 2009. He was 57 years old (now 58) retired military. Two female friends/co-workers were in the store as well and were horrified by the robbers who burst in wearing ski masks. Ersland had a gun he fired one bullet which hit one robber in the head then proceeded to chase the other one out of the store. On returning back into the Pharmacy Ersland believed that the downed robber was moving and trying to get back up while reaching for something behind his back. Ersland believed that the robber had a gun and fired 5 more shots into the robber. The entire incident lasted 46 seconds.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2547467/posts

Sadly, without his testimony in his trial, we don't have his side of the story. Is it a good shooting? Absolutely not. Is it murder 1? Not in my mind.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 03:53 PM   #209
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff

Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 8,967
I doubt modern legal doctrine would regard an adrenaline dump as sufficient for a diminshed capacity defense. Esp. with his planned actions which don't speak to the irrational and immediate.

I've read lots of reviews of self-defense law and haven't seen that raised.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
I am not a lawyer, but I am a physician and the physiology of such a situation is extreme as Masaad Ayoob describes in several of his books, writing and speaking. If anyone has access to him by email, it would be interesting to see his opinion on this case.

On the other hand, the person that killed Harvey Milk got off on the "twinkie" defense!!

Quote:
The fact that White had killed Moscone and Milk was not challenged, but — in part because of the testimony from Blinder and other psychiatrists — the defense successfully convinced the jury that White's capacity for rational thought had been diminished; the jurors found White incapable of the premeditation required for a murder conviction, and instead convicted him of voluntary manslaughter. Public protests over the verdict led to the White Night Riots.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie_defense


If I was on this man's jury, voluntary manslaughter is more like the maximum I would invoke. Sorry, but if you have ever been in a situation where you get "whited out" from an adrenaline dump, you ain't a normal rational being for quite some time.

After my car accident, even though I suffered only a few bumps and bruises, I was completely disoriented for a few at least a minute or more and unable to remember a couple seconds of the encounter. Obviously, I saw the other car before it hit me, but that part of the episode is completely gone from my memory. I remember starting through the intersection with the green light, then all of a sudden I was in slow motion even though I had yet to see the car about to hit me. Obviously, I had seen him but that is blanked out.

I remember hearing his tires screeching and the shadow of his car as it hit my left rear wheel. My SUV did a complete summersault in the air and I did have a falling sensation but did not realize that I was actually up in the air spinning and then landing fortunately on my left front tire first and then the rest came down. I thought I was on my side but actually the car was upright. It took me a few seconds to get oriented and I couldn't speak for a few seconds. When I got out of the car, I had to ask a bystander what had happened even though I was "there" all the time in the front seat so to speak of the whole thing.

Adrenaline rushes are something to behold and they do give you tunnel vision, a white out sensation from the vascular response in the eyes and brain and loss of rational thought with disorientation. If the twinkie defense works for diminished capacity, what of this situation. Who knows if anger was also behind this pumped up with adrenaline as well. Sorry, that is not premeditation even though he did go and get another gun. I can readily testify that his physiology was greatly altered at the time of the second shooting. Voluntary manslaughter if anything should have been the max in my opinion. Folks are certainly welcome to their own opinion, but that is mine. I believe that there is sufficient doubt for the murder 1 conviction.

Now, who is responsible for his adrenaline dump? The folks that robbed him. How much blame should we assess to them for causing this entire incident?

When I was charged by the dog, after he charged, I never saw him again. When he charged, I was fortunate to have had a 2x4 right beside me from the last house in the area to be completed. I had already picked it up before he charged me. When he charged, I lifted it up over my head and charged at him. He blinked and ran away. When I came to my senses in a few seconds he was gone but out of rage I smashed the 2x4 into the street as hard as I could. If the dog was still before me, I doubt I would have stopped as long as the stimulus was there.

Sorry, I just don't get the murder 1 charges and I doubt I ever will no matter what other folks believe. I would not convict murder 1. The only person who knows or may know what was going through his mind is the pharmacist and we didn't hear his side in trial. I don't like this verdict and that is just my opinion. As I said, folks are welcome to their own opinion, but mine won't change.

God bless,

Alaska

Last edited by Alaska444; July 16, 2011 at 04:15 PM.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 03:54 PM   #210
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,461
No, the vid does not show the suspect, but forensic evidence indicated he was flat on his back, hands out, unmoving. He wasn't reaching for anything, voluntarily or otherwise.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011

Last edited by Double Naught Spy; July 16, 2011 at 07:32 PM.
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 04:00 PM   #211
icedog88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2011
Location: norwich ct
Posts: 737
The same laws that say it's illegal for them to rob, states it's illegal to kill an unarmed, defenseless human. We want the robbers to serve max sentence, why not a murderer?
__________________
"The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949
Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]
icedog88 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 04:16 PM   #212
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
icedog88
Member

Join Date: April 16, 2011
Location: norwich ct
Posts: 47
The same laws that say it's illegal for them to rob, states it's illegal to kill an unarmed, defenseless human. We want the robbers to serve max sentence, why not a murderer?
__________________
"The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949
Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]
I don't believe it was murder 1. If you wish to argue for manslaughter, so be it. Murder 1, no, I don't believe it for a minute. Just my opinion, you are welcome to your own opinion.

God bless,

Alaska
Alaska444 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 04:28 PM   #213
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Surprise Ending to Ersland Case

On one hand, the state of Oklahoma has passed legislation supporting the right to keep and bear arms and Oklahoma even has a member of the Congressional Delegation who serves on the the Board of the National Rifle Association. But a jury of 8 women and 4 men found a man guilty of 1st Degree Murder for defending his business, his employees' lives and his own life from men trying to rob them at gunpoint.

Friends, this is alarming on many levels. We have had the case where Demetrius Johnson dies mysteriously while in police custody and it is largely overlooked by the media and now, we're seeing a man who should have been tried for manslaughter being convicted of 1st Degree Murder.
http://mickeyhomsey.blogspot.com/201...land-case.html

Last edited by Alaska444; July 16, 2011 at 04:34 PM.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 04:47 PM   #214
icedog88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2011
Location: norwich ct
Posts: 737
I guess you are right to point. you certainly are entitled to your opinion. I for one am glad the people who were in the jury saw it differently. The prosecution had all the evidence that was needed. And because someone decides to right an article in the news, doesn't make him a credible source for the rule of law either.
__________________
"The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949
Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]
icedog88 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 04:55 PM   #215
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
#214
icedog88
Member

Join Date: April 16, 2011
Location: norwich ct
Posts: 48
I guess you are right to point. you certainly are entitled to your opinion. I for one am glad the people who were in the jury saw it differently. The prosecution had all the evidence that was needed. And because someone decides to right an article in the news, doesn't make him a credible source for the rule of law either.
__________________
"The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949
Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]
When I was in high school, I woke up hearing the radio speak of the arrest of my brother's best friend for committing the first murder in our small town. He was a bully no doubt and an incredible all American football player that live to drink, party, play football and fight. This time, at a party, the brother of the girl who threw the party at their house kicked him out the door for being too rowdy. He turned around and stabbed him in the heart with a hunting knife at the door. He was convicted of manslaughter and got a 5 year sentence. Not a good outcome in my opinion but manslaughter was the charge. I could go along with a manslaughter charge for this guy due to diminished judgement from the stress of the situation, but murder 1? Sorry, I just don't buy it.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 05:26 PM   #216
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
huntinaz selectively quoted me, and responded to his version of the quote:

Quote:
Quote:
If the guy had killed Ersland's pharmacy tech, I might see a lesser charge
Why? He may very well have killed somebody, but the pharmacist happened to shoot first. So it's ok to off somebody for murder, but not for attempted murder? There is no difference whether somebody else died or not. If he ended the fight with the first shot, then other casualties make no difference.
I never said it would be "ok to off somebody." I said that, given those theoretical circumstances, I could have seen Ersland's emotional state having been reasonably driven to a point where Murder 2 or Manslaughter might have been more appropriate.

However, given the circumstances as they were, Murder 1 was appropriate.

If you're going to partially quote somebody, you should ensure that what you leave of the quote actually carries the original meaning, and not the one you would like to have as a straw man.
MLeake is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 06:03 PM   #217
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,987
Quote:
I wonder...I have an old friend who practiced law for many years and according to him, a jury can do what they feel is right and don't necessarily have to strictly adhere to the judge's instructions. But the problem with that is, it sets new precedent, and causes problems with the law and future trials, and whatnot, so most judges no longer expain this part of their rights as jurors. Was this an accurate statement? And if so, what is the real reason that judges conceal that option for jurys?
No. and therefore no.

The only thing that can establish a precedent is a ruling by a higher court on a point appealed after a trial or an appeals court ruling, or in some rare cases after a request for an opinion on something like the constitutionality a law or regulation.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 06:11 PM   #218
GoOfY-FoOt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 1, 2011
Location: West Central Florida
Posts: 463
OldMarksman, if you remove the precedent part, is the rest true? Does a jury in fact have to strictly adhere to the judge's directions? Or, do they have leeway in such things, that are not necessarily black and white? And, if they do, why have judges stopped giving them this information?
__________________
BILL @ Strongside Arms, Inc. - 1479 W. C-48 Bushnell, FL 33513 352-568-0017
--------------------------------------------------
“Why worry when you can pray? He [God] is the Whole, you are a part. Coordinate your abilities with the Whole.” ~Edgar Cayce~
GoOfY-FoOt is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 06:12 PM   #219
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,987
Quote:
Posted by Alaska444: don't believe it was murder 1.

...murder 1? Sorry, I just don't buy it
So, you are saying that you do not believe that Ersland specifically intended to kill Parker.

Just what is it that you think he was trying to accomplish?
OldMarksman is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 06:30 PM   #220
redstategunnut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 14, 2009
Location: see name
Posts: 405
A jury can return any verdict that twelve people unanimously agree upon.

They are not given the instruction that they can ignore the law because the law matters.
redstategunnut is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 07:13 PM   #221
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
OldMarksman
Senior Member

Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,281
Quote:
Posted by Alaska444: don't believe it was murder 1.

...murder 1? Sorry, I just don't buy it
So, you are saying that you do not believe that Ersland specifically intended to kill Parker.

Just what is it that you think he was trying to accomplish?
Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.[1] State laws in the United States vary as to definitions of "premeditation." In some states, premeditation may be construed as taking place mere seconds before the murder. Premeditated murder is usually defined as one of the most serious forms of homicide, and is punished more severely than manslaughter or other types of murder - often with the death penalty or a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premeditated_murder

Not sure what the definition of premeditated or first degree murder is in OK, but for sake of argument, let's go with this one.

Was he thinking rationally at the moment of the second shooting?

Understanding the physiology of the fight and flight adrenaline dump, I would give him the benefit of the doubt at that point.

Quote:
When our fight or flight system is activated, we tend to perceive everything in our environment as a possible threat to our survival. By its very nature, the fight or flight system bypasses our rational mind—where our more well thought out beliefs exist—and moves us into "attack" mode. This state of alert causes us to perceive almost everything in our world as a possible threat to our survival. As such, we tend to see everyone and everything as a possible enemy. Like airport security during a terrorist threat, we are on the look out for every possible danger. We may overreact to the slightest comment. Our fear is exaggerated. Our thinking is distorted. We see everything through the filter of possible danger. We narrow our focus to those things that can harm us. Fear becomes the lens through which we see the world.
http://www.thebodysoulconnection.com...ter/fight.html

If you feel he can develop a felonious premeditation ONCE his fight or flight was activated by pistol in his face, that is your opinion, but I would never venture such an opinion against a law abiding citizen placed in the ultimate stress test, your life or theirs. Give me a break. Do you really believe he was in his NORMAl rational brain to have the faculties to rationally decide, I am going to kill this kid on purpose?

Sorry, I take him at his word that in his agitated state of fear he thought he saw the kid moving in a purposeful manner for a gun. We can at this time categorically state he was wrong, but were you there and did you see in an altered adrenaline filled state of mind what he saw? I believe he saw a man moving and wrongly interpreted that as moving for his gun. I have witnessed many severely brain injured people in a 20 year career to understand that they have involuntary movements especially right after injury that could be interpreted as a deliberate movement. In that scenario, there is no murder whatsoever, it is still self defense no matter how ugly the situation looks on ONE view of a video camera. What if we had a second camera showing the kid moving in such a manner that a reasonable person could believe he was reaching for a gun like this man testified.

I believe that there is sufficient doubt to render not guilty on murder 1, but perhaps find guilty on manslaughter.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 07:14 PM   #222
OuTcAsT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2006
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,197
Quote:
He lost self control.
DING DING ! We have a winner !

the loss of "self control" lead him to commit a cold blooded murder, the jury was right on !
__________________
WITHOUT Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech. Silence Dogood

Does not morality imply the last clear chance? - WildAlaska -
OuTcAsT is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 07:18 PM   #223
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,409
Quote:
You're lying to yourself if you think shooting someone is not trying to kill them.
1. Saying a thing, even repeatedly does not make it so. I provided the evidence to show that using a gun in self-defense, even shooting someone in self-defense is not anywhere near an automatic death sentence for the attacker.

2. Judging others by what goes on in your own head is likely to result in false conclusions. You have no idea what I believe or what I think.
Quote:
...under the influence of a massive amount of adrenaline that your body in not used to. How long is a "moment?" It varies between who you talk to. If you think the adrenaline wore of in the 30 seconds it took him to fetch the other pistol you are dead wrong.
Questions like "How long is a "moment"? brings to mind a quote by a former president--"It all depends on what the meaning of "is" is." We all know what a "moment" is even though it's a subjective term. And while a person might have a momentary lapse while under extreme stress, it's really stretching things to say that "momentary" amounts to a walk in the sunshine, fetching another gun and shooting an unconscious man multiple times. A jury of his peers didn't buy the idea that it was merely a "momentary lapse" and they clearly made the right decision based on the video evidence.
Quote:
I'm saying IF he would have died with the first shot or the sixth, he'd be just as dead.
I see you emphasized the word "if". Which is correct since that makes your comment pure speculation as I stated it was. The point is that no one knows what the outcome would have been had the pharmacist not murdered the man on the floor and therefore any comments trying to justify the pharmacist's actions based on what might have happened are pure speculation.
Quote:
You are not thinking clearly.
I think a lot of people, you included, are completely missing the point of this thread.

NOW IS YOUR CHANCE TO THINK CLEARLY.


NOW is the time for you to make decisions about what you will and won't do in a deadly force encounter. You can choose NOW to do the right thing or you can persist in the idea that it's simply out of your hands once the adrenaline starts coursing through your system. Or worse you can decide right now that you're going to kill your attacker whether you have to break the law to do it or not.

As pax noted in an earlier post, it seems quite plain that Ersland was set on killing his attackers, not just on ending the encounter. That's why he pursued one down the street shooting at him even after the attacker had clearly broken off the attack and left the shop and that's why he came back and murdered the one on the floor.

Incidents like this are exactly why this subforum of TFL exists. It's here so we can discuss and decide the legal and proper course of action and so that we can learn from the mistakes and bad decisions of others. As well as from what's done right and from the right decisions made by others.
Quote:
Speeding is illegal. Jaywalking is illegal. Littering is illegal. I bet you have been guilty of these things from time to time, and I also bet you are not what most would call a "criminal scumbag."
The law and the courts and society draw a clear line between misdemeanors and felonies for a VERY good reason. Trying to pretend that line doesn't exist is disengenuous and basing an argument on that pretense is silly. It's ridiculous to pretend that speeding and murder are equivalent in any reasonable sense.
Quote:
First of all, there's no such thing as a non-biased human being.
This is what's called a non sequitur. It doesn't refute anything I claimed nor does it support anything you've claimed.

Of course humans are biased. What I said was that it's not necessary to have biased jurors to be exonerated. You implied that I would be happy to have you sitting on a jury in my self-defense case. I don't need that kind of support from a juror nor do I want anyone else to benefit from having a juror who won't convict for murder even when the evidence warrants it. I'll be more than satisfied to have one that decides the case on its own merits.
Quote:
That guy died on someone else's property, threatening someone else's life, it was his decision.
No, this is absolutely false.

He died on someone else's property while lying helpless on the floor, it was Ersland's decision to murder him.
Quote:
The fight was over, but Ersland didn't necessarily know that.
Ersland CLEARLY knew it. That's why he lied about what he did and that's why he showed absolutely no signs in the video that he was concerned about any threat from the man on the floor.
Quote:
In a case I recall reading on this board, a cop got into a gunfight with a BG. After said BG fell in front of him, Officer Jared Reston pulled him in close put his pistol to his head and shot him 3 times.
This is a VERY badly flawed description of what happened. The officer had been severely wounded to the point that he could not stand and the two were grappling when the shots were fired. The fight was still VERY much in progress at that point.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n56222291/

This all happened in just a very few seconds. Reston is pinned in place by his injured body; his ambusher moving swiftly to his right, both men shooting at each other the whole time. The attacker reaches a point directly above the cop when Reston fires another aimed shot and suddenly the assailant pitches forward and falls, landing hard with full body weight on top of Reston.
...
Grabbing the attacker with his right hand to hold him in place, Reston brings his pistol up with his left hand, presses it firmly against the man's head, and pulls the trigger three times as fast as he can: POW! POW! POW! He feels the man's body go limp.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 07:20 PM   #224
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
OuTcAsT
Senior Member

Join Date: January 8, 2006
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 986
Quote:
He lost self control.
DING DING ! We have a winner !

the loss of "self control" lead him to commit a cold blooded murder, the jury was right on !
__________________
WITHOUT Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech. Silence Dogood

Does not morality imply the last clear chance? - WildAlaska -
The question in my mind is not whether he "lost control" or not, we know when you get an adrenaline rush you are in an altered mental state period. The question in my mind, is what caused him to lose control as you state? The answer is easy, the gun pointed in his face with threats to his life and to the two employees with him. Looking at that perspective, are you so cool headed that you would not "lose control" with a gun pointed at your head and that you could stop the hormonal fight or flight response and be a cool hand Luke in that situation.

Sorry, I have had two episodes in my life where I "lost control" from life threatening situations. The first a dog, the second a car accident. I would not want to make serious rational decisions in the immediate seconds after I was in both of those situations. Having that understanding personally, I give this man the benefit of bad judgement in 20-20 hindsight.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old July 16, 2011, 07:27 PM   #225
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,409
Quote:
I have had two episodes in my life where I "lost control" from life threatening situations. The first a dog, the second a car accident. I would not want to make serious rational decisions in the immediate seconds after I was in both of those situations.
And yet in neither case did you commit a felony while under stress.

Stress certainly affects how we think, but it doesn't give us the right to commit murder and it certainly doesn't drive us to commit murder.

Again, the point of this portion of TFL is to think through real life scenarios so we can form ideas of how we would react and how we WON'T react BEFORE the stress sets in.

I'm NOT saying that stress makes it difficult or impossible to act lawfully or that stress is what caused Ersland to do what he did, but it certainly can't hurt to have a lawful strategy in place before the fact rather than winging it.

And more to the point it will certainly help to PRE-REJECT illegal strategies so that they don't even come to mind when stress comes to visit.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.20468 seconds with 8 queries