Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="soberups" data-source="post: 1229468" data-attributes="member: 14668">According to the original story, the gunman had a store employee down on her knees with his gun pointed at her head. To me, that action shows a very clear intent to discharge the weapon, making the use of lethal force entirely justified. I will take it one further; the GS screwed up royally and endangered his own life when he gave up the element of surprise by warning the gunman not to move. A round to the back of the head is the only warning the gunman should have ever gotten, and if that seems unfair then perhaps the gunman should have reconsidered his actions in the first place.</blockquote>