No one's life is worth a car.

Looks like Walker thought it was, though.

Maybe something about the teen's behavior made the defender think that he was about to get shot anyway, so he had to fight or die.
Lots of maybes and mights. What we do know is that he was threatened with deadly force and fought back, successfully.

If there is a way to hand over the car, and get away safely, I'm all for that. So in that respect I agree.

However if somebody is pointing a gun at you, the best thing to do is to take control of the situation, which I would argue the shooter did. I think being in control is much safer than just handing the keys and hoping you don't get shot.

A gun can be lethal in the hands of a 13 year old or 30 year old, so I see nothing wrong with firing in self defense, so I would completely agree that the shooting was justifiable. The goal is to shoot to stop the threat, and hopefully nobody dies, but at least the person getting car jacked wasn't hurt.

and throw every penny you have, and every penny your ever going to make on one roll of the dice?

NO, you wouldn't do that.

But you will sit there and preach to others that they should do that with their lives.

One MUST assume the worst case scenario in the situation, worst case being you give up the "car" or whatever and are still shot and killed.

It is not about the "money", it is about protecting your life given the circumstances you are faced with.

Only an idiot would assume that an armed individual "only" wants to take your possessions.

Breathe, man, breathe....

Trayvon neither hurt nor threatened nobody.

This kid chose to rob using a gun (see link), and when you do that you bring the consequences on yourself.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/17997141/13-year-old-suspect-killed-during-robbery

Yours is the only post I see mentioning the unrelated Martin case.
Am I missing something?

You must be reading some other article from what the OP posted. Try again.

Please post the proof of that.

Then contact the prosecutor, cause she would love to talk to you.

Did you have an opinion on the ruling?

It serves as a reminder to the anti-gunners that guns do get used in self-defense. In this case the attack happened outside the home, in a gated community.

Tit for tat posting of stories of justified v. unjustified shootings just clutters up the board. At least provide some personal commentary that will provoke some discussion, please. My only reaction to your posting was "So what?"

He did post a secondary link which is a hell of a lot more than what SecularMotion or jpak do when they cross-post an article here. OP even made an additional post in the very thread they started instead of posting an article and not even standing up to discuss it.

Are you referring to this thread? http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=44544

If so that was a policy piece, not a news story. It invites discussion on its own merits. The additional source the OP linked to just gave some additional details. If the OP wanted to discuss guns, youth, and gang violence the opportunity was there, but the OP just seemed to want to provide additional evidence that the victim was a thug, and therefore deserved what he got. (Which I regret, but don't dispute.)

If not, go ahead and provide a link so that I may follow your argument.

on either side of the issue. They are about real people navigating the realities of life in the real world.

There is too much emphasis on pushing some policy or another for its own sake without consideration how people are actually expected to deal with it after its put into place. We shouldn't advocate for policies, we should advocate for people.

Every OP started in this group by that particular poster has been exactly the same, copy-paste-no original thought. I don't need to provide links in this case, all you have to do is look down the list of topics made so far this month.

It happened in a gated community. The anti's love to ask us if the crime rate in our communities is so bad that we need to carry guns. There is no such thing as a totally safe community.

He was only 13. It was illegal for him to have a gun. But the fact that it was against the law didn't stop him because he had already decided to break a stronger law. A ban on handguns would have disarmed only the citizen.

I don't do pure tit for tat. If I did that I would post a lot more self-defense shootings than I do. I will admit that I didn't make a comment, largely because it isn't needed. The regulars on both sides already know them. However in future thread I will make a comment.

It's a shame that someone so young had to be so dumb but that's the way it goes sometimes. No one to blame but himself.

...deselected.

It would seem that we have bigger problem in this country than people carrying concealed weapons.

a 13 year old ended up possessing an illegal handgun. I would like to see how this handgun went from legal to illegal. Was it easily stolen, purchased by someone in a private sale or bought by a straw purchase?

While I can't fault the shooter, I can still find the loss of a human life a sad event, not to be cheered. I would not doubt that the shooter will find this hard to live with for a long time. As a society we would be well served to find ways to keep handguns out of the hands of those that should not legally have them, while protecting and screening those that legally can.

The police just don't have the time to go down that rabbit hole.

A kid died as the result of him choosing a life of crime. Problem is, there were probably plenty of other people who assisted him in getting on that career path. They get a free pass and the 13 year old doesn't get to be 14. Everyone will gather around the grave and declare he was "such a good boy" and others will mourn the loss of a fallen comrade, then they'll get back into the business of whatever business they're into. Maybe they'll make up t-shirts or buttons to remember him for a few weeks. Maybe not. And the kid will still be dead.

The gun isn't the problem. It's much bigger than that.

What mentoring/parenting or lack of made a kid want to do this, firearm or not. I've read stories of kids this age gang raping their peers and in other cases ganging up on a peer and beating them, sometimes killing them. And then they post the videos on the Internet.

like a gang initiation.

is to help people not be criminals.

Public schools should teach kids the dangers of being violent criminals.

If you are talking about the news item itself, then I don't see any racism.

ruin a good thread by dragging Fox news propaganda into it. Do you spend a lot of time at Fox Hoyt...?

Once you pull a gun on somebody during the commission of a felony you should have no expectations of safety.