[KJS]

[ QUOTE ]
Howard Treesong -- I didn't want to quote your long post but your first post is by far the best in this thread. It seems the most rational and well thought of any that I read. And I would like to think our jury system would act similarly.

Some of the posts here actually scare me. "He shouldn't have gone out there", "possessions aren't worth life", "He's guilty as hell, open and shut case", etc. But what you forget is that HUMAN NATURE plays a huge role here.

I actually had a similar situation to this when I was a young girl. My mother and I saw two robbers (we are white and so were the robbers although I think that is somewhat irrelevant) leaving our neighbor's house in broad daylight. My mom called the police and then we both went on the front porch and started yelling at them, etc. Big difference is that we didn't have a weapon and were totally unprepared had they done anything to us. NOW I can see that was VERY STUPID but it was just a gut reaction and not rational or thought out at all.

To think that someone could go to prison for this is scary as hell to me. This man didn't wake up that morning with the intent to kill two black men. He was given a set of circumstances and he acted. Was it the wrong -- probably. Would you, I or anyone else do what he did --- probably not. That's just my point ---- each one of us can THINK we know what we would do but you don't know until it happens to you and each person would do it a little differently. Should he be robbed of his freedom for his actions that day ---- I don't think so.

Great topic though --- I enjoyed reading about it and the discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good post. I think it is worth mentioning, however, that the state does not think death is a justifiable punishment for stealing from someone's property. This guy did. So he and the state have to know decide how to mediate the fact that he acted as jury and executioner instead of allowing the state apparatus deal with these men, as the operator was advocating.

I am not a lawyer but it is my belief that the laws that govern behavior such as citizens shooting other citizens exist to create a deterrent from citizens punishing people in lieu of the state doing so. Otherwise, this kind of force would be acceptable in many circumstances. And the state cannot tolerate that. So even if he did act out of human nature, it has to be a natural reaction that the state feels is OK.

I think it will be interesting to follow.

KJS