That's why we have CHL here in TX, and this right here is why I think more people should exercise their 2nd amendment right. The question is - would it be a justified shooting? It seems to me that once that crow bar is swinging around my driver's window, I can, and should, be in fear for my life, so expiring that dude should be within the law. Of course much of it will depend on the prosecutor and the jury anyways...MustGoFastR said:
I'm sure insurnace woudl cover you.No, none would shoot him for damaging goods (although I would really like to). Now, imagine for a minute that that first blow to the driver's window shattered it, and the next swing would go straight to your head, crashing your skull. Would that be worth shooting him for? Or if you had your baby in the back seat, and once that rear window shattered (cutting your child in the process), the next swing would hit him. Would that be worth shooting the lunatic for? My answer is - you bet!contaygious said:LOL I don't care if you are in texas, shooting someone for damging your private goods should not be justified under the law IMO.
Maybe you can get a reduced sentence for being scared, but cmon now
Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Guns are tools, and it's up to tools operator to decide how to use it. It's the same as saying cars kill people. No, it's bad (drunk) drivers that kill people. You're not afraid of cars, are you? Why? Because you know how to use cars in responsible manner, and how to be safe doing it. Same applies to firearms. Firearms in right hands save more innocent lives than firearms in wrong hands kill; you just don't hear anything about it because news like this don't sell newspapers.contaygious said:
