Dateline is doing a story on the "Fish" shooting right now.
I still can't believe Fish was convicted. I hope he wins his appeal.
The things that struck me about the Dateline story:
1. The focus on hollowpoint bullets. I think gun enthusiasts need to realize that non-gunnies go off of what they see on TV. When the latest has a crime drama has an actor saying something like "Hollowpoints are only used to kill, that's why criminals carry them" they think anyone who carries them real life is up to something bad. Any of our arguments about protecting bystanders from an overpenetrating bullet will be lost on them. Talking about increased lethality of hollowpoints will only make you look worse in a non-gunny's eyes.
2. As a reverse of #1, nothing was said about him carrying a 10MM. I would have thought that the prosecutor would have brought that up. I missed the first 5 or 10 minutes of the show, maybe it was in there.
3. The issue the jury made of a 45 minutes difference in times he gave in an interview. That seems relatively minor to me. The same jurors then said that they would have thought Fish was lying if he told the exact same story every time.
4. Lack of remorse on Fish's part. He didn't come across as the most empathetic guy. I wouldn't have used that in any argument to convict thought. This is part of Fish's character, yet the interviewed jurors kept talking about how the issue was actions, not character. I guess the lesson learned is to cry and act deranged after a shooting.
5. What was it, 10 character witnesses against the deceased? Wow.
6. The "he should have shot to wound" nonsense. Same as #1.
This case has made me seriously evaluate my mindset on concealed carry and self defense. If a guy like Fish could be convicted of murder 2 under those circumstances anyone could. I'm now going to only defend myself and my family. Any other self defense scenarios like someone else being kidnapped, or threatened aren't worth the risk. I know the law has been changed, but it's just not worth it.