What's true is that someone broke into his home and he shot them.

The rest is editorial bullsheet ... the evil gypsies, the ignorant and lazy cops, the "bind panic," the corrupt justice system, the clueless parole board.

Get a friggen grip people! I can't believe you lap this crap up!

i cant believe you care this much about an internet message board

hahahahaha

I have to agree with you on this one, it's pathetic :)

Is he in prison for shooting said criminals?

Is the one surviving criminal our of jail now?

Somehow I think this "editorial" might ring more truth than you want it to.

I have no more reason to think its false than I do its true. I took it for what it was a news story on a series of events surrounding this guy.

I figured it to be true because I can remember a shop owner in Miami that went to jail for booby trapping his shop with electricity after too many break ins and the police doing nothing.

He electrocuted the theif to death and went to jail for manslaughter.

These stories are all over the place. Therefore I had no reason to not believe this one. I lapped it up.

I guess Rodeo left with his tail betwix his legs!

Typical lib.

As a lawyer you should know that what the evidence shows and what the jury decides are not necessarily linked. Witness OJ.

Come on, you are becoming pretty comical in your zeal to defend all things legal...it's like if someone posted about a surgeon cutting off the wrong leg during a surgery and I started spouting off about how you guys "obviously don't know the whole story"...

:rolleyes:

The crooks were libs, the cops were libs, the judge was a lib, the jury was unanimously lib, the appellate court was lib, and the parole board is lib and stupid. And of course the media is lib and society is goiing to hell!

Waaaaaaa!!!!

What a bunch of crybabies :(

No. It's not.

it's like a peer review board examined the procedure in detail and found nothing was done wrong, but I decided it was a big lib conspiracy because I read a story on the internet!

Waaaaa! Its all the libs fault!!!

You must have a persecution complex or something, Rodeo.

The words "lib", "liberal", "left", "leftie", "pinko", "commie", "Democrat" or "wacko" do not appear once in the article in question....

It was artfully crafted.:D

Interesting stat:

Number of times the word "Lib" or "liberal" or "left" have been used in this thread:

Original Article: 0
Legion: 1
Nathans_Dad: 1 (in reference to Rodeo)
Kach_22i: 1 (in reference to himself)
Dottore: 2 (left, followed by the word right; liberal, in reference to himself)
Noah: 3
daepp: 1 (in reference to Rodeo)


Rodeo: 10 (more than all the others put together)...

Who's whining about libs again? (whoops, make my column a 2 now...)

So a peer review board has conducted a detailed examination of all the evidence, hears from ALL sides, hears from everyone involved and from the best experts in the field, and finds nothing wrong with the way the procedure was handled.

But I read a story on the internet that talks about how this poor man had six children, how the doc drove to the hospital in his brand new mustang, cackling about how he was going to get to the golf course by 11 am whether he had to cut the guy's leg off or not, and within 10 minutes I'm justified in concluding that everyone ACTUALLY INVOLVED IN THE CASE got it all wrong?

Waaaaa!!

Actually, both conservatives and liberals of decades past would not recognize those who carry those labels today. They would shake their heads in disbelief.

Things have changed, and not for the better.

Anyone who is very active in the shooting sports, or supports gun ownership in our country, has followed this story since it first broke. It is, unfortunately, a true story.

This man had been burglarized repeatedly. He had called the police in the past and had gotten no help. He finally shot a couple of burglars. He went to jail with a stiffer sentance than the surviving burglar. Martin was denied an early release because a judge was affraid he may harm another burglar in a similar situation. Most of us see something fundementally wrong with that. Most of us would feel entirely justified in killing any intruder into our homes.

It is a sad fact of modern life that there are those in our society that don't feel that way. In San Fransisco, a cop is killed by felon released into society by a failed criminal justice system and the outcry is that the cop was chasing him at all. In England, a home owner that had been burglarized on multiple occasions kills an intruder into his home, and the criminal justice system comes down harder on him than the criminals. How did the morons that think any of this is o.k. ever get a voice? How did the law, obstensibly written to protect the people from the criminal element, ever get perveted to the point where it now protects the criminal element from the people?

Rodeo, you really need to step away from the keyboard on this one. You're coming across as an illiterate sob-sister.

It didn't.

The law allows the use of appropriate and reasonable force to defend personal safety and personal property. It always has and I suspect it always will.

I'm sorry that the jury didn't see the case the way you or the author of the hack article saw it. If the man used reasonable force against the burglar, he would have been acquitted.

Apparently he did not, according to the people that actually heard the evidence (I know, details, details ....).

Sometimes the actual use of "labels" is unnecessary. Meanings can be implied. Perhaps it is relevant, in such cases, to point this out to the person doing the implying.

Because I refuse to denounce the police, the judge, the jury, the prosecutor, the defense lawyer, the appellate panel, and the parole board, based upon my reading of one poorly-written, melodramatic article on the internet?

Because I didn't conclude after 90 seconds of study that those that spent thousands of hours on this matter are all a bunch of idiots who couldn't find their asses with both hands?

Sometimes juries are wrong. More often than not, they reach the correct conclusion.

Have some faith in the system and stop whining, it's not becoming :)

Everyone is a freakin' expert on every other field of endeavour except their own!!

Doesn't matter if it is the law, teaching, or any other profession.

And here's the kicker ... with a case like O.J., where I agree the jury got it wrong, there is no possibility of appeal. Not guilty, and he walks out of the courtroom, forever, no strings attached.

With a guilty verdict, the trial judge could have overturned the jury. The appellate panel could have overturned the jury. The senior appellate panel could have overturned the jury. Finally, the Parole Board could have let him go at the earliest opportunity, but did just the opposite.

According to the brain trust here, every one of these people and institutions is a blithering liberal fool that loves burglars and hates ordinary citizens.

Right :rolleyes: