Re: Limo Dave part II :

jobe wrote:

> There you go again, over simplifying things. It is never that
> simple.

Why not? Dave shot the guy (as far as I know that isn't even in dispute) and now he's in jail. Seems simple enough.

> For example, If David were attempting to stop a robbery,
> sexual assault or defending him self from any number of crimes.

Doesn't sound like any of that applies. Even the self-defense argument seems a bit wanting when he made the choice to hang out with those people. And why was he carrying a loaded gun in the first place?

> Shooting some one is some times necessary.

Staying out of situations where you might need to shoot someone is much better.

> He could have accidentally shot him.

Snort!!!

Yeah, right. He accidentally pointed a loaded weapon (with the safety off) at the guy and accidentally pulled the trigger.

> So every angle to this story is very relevant in order to
> determine if any punishment is deserved or not.

Sure, and every angle says he should be punished from what I can see.


> Of course, this whole story reeks with stupidity.

Or drug use.

> 1 ) they drove to the village drunk, certainly a crime.

But not one they are being charged with.

> 4 ) they were mixing alcohol and guns.

Or maybe something else as well?

> If being stupid were a crime they both would be in jail :-)

One is messed up from being shot and the other is in jail.