Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Buy and Sell Signals, and Other Market Perspectives -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SGJ who wrote (162567)	10/28/2021 10:07:22 AM
From: Sdgla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 221983

Usually it’s a viewpoint shot for the script. The cinematographer paid the price for the low budget flick. Guess who decided to not have a prop master or a weapons specialist on the set. Hint : 1st name starts with alec last name starts with baldwin. The industry promotes gun violence & death. Always has always will cuz it sells.

To: SGJ who wrote (162567)	10/28/2021 10:39:50 AM
From: GROUND ZERO™	Respond to of 221983

I wouldn't be surprised if the two of them had an argument earlier... Here's PROOF it was intentional negligence, and this makes it at least negligent homicide... My question to the jury is: if he really thought the firearm was not loaded (without checking for himself), would he be willing to point the gun to his head and pull the trigger??? Of course not!!! I bet his answer would be no, he would want to check and double check before doing such a thing, BUT to point the deadly weapon at another individual, then pull back the hammer on that single action Colt .45, and then pull the trigger is very clearly intentional, I would call it first degree murder... If this were said to any jury, I believe the jury would have to agree... It's a very simple case of murder... If he walks, then you know money passed hands... GZ