TexasCHLforum.com

jocat54 wrote:

Cobra Medic wrote:it's moral for American citizens to hunt down and kill violent gang members. It's right for those guys in NM and AZ to ambush drug runners coming in from Mexico. It's good for a parent to go after a pedophile who molested her kid

Sorry, not understanding what you are saying (red highlight)--I hope.

Probably the Arizona Minutemen and similar groups.

bronco78 wrote:I'ts a single standard, has not changed.. If you are an enemy combatant, to which this dude was, your fair game. The only thing that still applies is, we will attempt to not kill others not so declared when we end your life.
Don't like that reality? don't do things that get on on the need to die list.

According to that single standard, Jerome Ersland should not have been prosecuted. Maybe he should even have gotten a medal instead. When Antwun Parker chose to rob the pharmacy, he became fair game. Following the "only thing that still applies" the DV pharmacist attempted (succeeded) to not harm innocents when he ended the robber's life. If violent criminals don't like that, they shouldn't do things that get them on the need to die list.

I like this single standard!

MasterOfNone wrote:By your reasoning, just about every bomb, rocket, or missile we have ever fired at a hostile enemy was unjustified. Every action that was ever taken that was not immediate defense was wrong. That would mean that everything we have ever done on foreign soil was wrong.

I'm not so sure. His reasoning seems to be, in logical terms: A → B

It's possible that he believes what you assert above. However, it's also possible that he believes the missile attack was justified and that similar actions against criminals domestically are also justified.