Quote:
Originally Posted by eyecu2
I think that if you were a footlocker employee and someone broke in to steal, you'd be justified to shoot them if you were in fear of harm. But I'd also say that they instruck employees to not get physical with thieves just like corporate owned stores let that occur. They don't want shootouts at stores over a pair of shoes or a Slurpee. But in the case of Babbitt, I imagine she was acting in such a way that it was seen as threatening. Don't want to get shot? Don't stand in front of a gun. Don't be in a place that has armed guards and locked doors, and then wonder how the fuck did that happen!!?? The same way Rittenhouse was able to defend himself, that guard felt threats to himself or others, and acted. He was found not guilty of any crimes by a judge.
Moral of the story-Break-in and think you are gonna be by sheer numbers bullet-proof & find out what might happen. Probably not a good idea.
|
thats not a very smart comparision considering rittenhouse was chased, and one man had a length of chain and threatened to kill him and another had a gun.........
what did she have?a trump hat?
