Originally Posted by JayStubbs
I will say that if Oklahoma has a law that makes anyone involved in an armed robbery in which someone was killed, eligible to be tried for first degree murder, than it might be possible for these kids would be tried as adults, even if they never fired a shot. Regardless, SeaRay has a good point.
But you are correct about my main point. The owner clearly saw that this was a teenage kid, and shot him five times in cold blood. That is more heinous than shooting someone who was in their 20's or older, imo.
If someone came into your place of employment, pointed a gun at you AND said that if you did not comply with their demands, that you would be killed...you wouldn't eliminate that threat with deadly force?
The kid that attempted to rob that store, though young, still made that decision to commit a felony. I don't know that the pharmacist needed to shoot the kid over and over, but if he felt threatened, then he acted in self defense. If that kid had gotten his hands on all of those pharmaceutical products, he could have sold them on the streets and those who purchased the illegal substances from him could have killed several more people. Who is to say that if the kid gets away with all those drugs that the person he sells them to doesn't get behind the wheel of a car under the influence of said substances and cause an accident, killing themselves or others?