Not sure who else should have been armed in order to prevent this situation
What an odd thing to say.
Both the OP title and OP take on this are ridiculous.
Of course, the robbery victim was not a “good guy.”
His actions were clearly reckless. He had initially been charged with aggravated assault with serious bodily injury, which likely will be upgraded to voluntary manslaughter. He will face up to 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine and as a felon will be properly and forever debarred from ever possessing a weapon.
Firing after the suspect was well away and when he could not even discern which vehicle the initial robbery suspect was in was utter recklessness. He is as much if not MORE a bad guy than the initial robbery suspect.
This is really a sad story.
The picture and story should be moved to the “thug” thread.
This woman in Texas apparently knew who the culprits were.
Bad decision and he missed. He is responsible.
…and there’s no question about it. He believed they entered a car, was wrong and just shot into it, hitting this little girl. It’s the father’s actions I don’t understand? I would have understood had he run the thug over who shot his baby girl? In fact, I’d have applauded him.
Does that bring the little girl back? This is what happens when you want everyone playing good guy with a gun in the street.
This is what happens, when so many children being raised into adulthood, without both parents lovingly guiding them into adulthood, preparing them for the heavy responsibilities of life. Some of these ill raised people hang out at ATMs and attempt to rob others, making them have to defend themselves.
OP was already taken to task for calling this guy the “good guy”.
So it’s rather stupid to repeat it afterward.
Yet you did.
No, it doesn’t bring the dead back. Does $73M dollars? Life in prison? The death penalty?
What “brings back” the other 500 victims of murder in that same city in 2021?
He screwed up. One. Out of 500. It’s a messy world, not your Utopia. He had a right to carry it and defend himself. He had a responsibility to make good decisions and not miss. He failed. And now he’ll pay for it.
It’s like anything else. Everyone has a car, right? We expect them to be responsible, not drink and drive, not go 100 in a 25 mile an hour zone, but when they do and someone dies as a result, we don’t advocate for no one owning cars.
No it’s not, not when you understand where they’re are coming from. They want no one to be allowed to carry. They’ll use any excuse or example toward that end. No matter how asinine.
I don’t want “everyone playing good guy with a gun in the street.” I don’t want everyone carrying. I don’t want you within 5 miles of any kind of arm, for example.
I also don’t want everyone voting. Or driving.
What I want has nothing to do with other citizens exercising their rights or privileges. When they do, sometimes the outcomes are bad.
The question is, what do you want?
Why is that?..Ever see me handle a weapon?
What I want is not people taking the law into their own hands out on the street.
People are going to have to as the soft on crime stance only protects the criminals.
Jesus, I thought it was a stray, this guy intentionally fired into the wrong car, that’s murder.