Started by gussy, February 14, 2013, 09:44:27 PM
Quote from: "Jmpty"http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0074.htmHere are some different statistics.
Quote from: "commonsense822"I think this guy honestly could have gotten away with it with a plea of temporary insanity if he hadn't disposed of the gun. They tested him for GSR so it is going to show that he either fired a gun or not recently, even though the case could be made that he fired a gun recently but it wasn't the one that shot the driver. The neighbors said they heard gunshots minutes after the accident and his house is only 50 yards away, that's half a football field. And the amount of time is definitely appropriate for a window of temporary insanity. But he threw away the gun, which shows the he was able to tell right from wrong enough to dispose of the murder weapon. If they find the gun he's fucked. If not he's got a chance.As far as justifiable murder, it's hard to say. I don't believe that citizens should be bypassing the justice system for revenge. But if he actually had a moment of temporary insanity via shock from a traumatic event then I might be inclined to let him go. Considering it looks like he killed the guy, and that he tossed the gun afterwards, promotes the possibility that he took revenge, not a psychotic break. So, not justifiable, but I might consider a reduced sentence. My ruling.
Quote from: "Poison Tree"If the guy had just whipped out a gun and shot, then I could see temporary insanity. But walking home, arming yourself, going back, then shooting a guy? That's starting to sound long enough to be per-meditated. I can't say what I would have done in his place (It is not a situation I can honestly place myself in), but as a nation of law and order he needs to be tried and "I would have wanted revenge, too" cannot be a sufficient defense.
Quote from: "Jutter"[...]but would a gun owner add revenge to that list during a debate on gun-controll?
Quote from: "Jutter"So there's the drunk driving part.Then there's the temporary insanity or not part.The vindictive vigilante part.Other's have tackled those aspects already.Maybe this should tie in with the gun-controll discussion as well. Acceptable uses of a gun would be self-defense, hunting, target shooting... but would a gun owner add revenge to that list during a debate on gun-controll?