A letter writer feels that shooting a person for stealing a case of beer is justified. The theft of beer is a misdemeanor, whereas the shooting of a person is a felony. If the thief died, the shooter could be charged with second-degree murder.
Was it necessary to shoot the person in the first place? The thief was not armed and was running away, and therefore shot in the back with the round going through his neck — no threat to the store owner. Lucky for both that the shooter is a bad shot.
Is a case of beer worth spending the rest of your life in jail? This isn't the old days of Dodge City where justice was handed out at the end of a rope. The store owner could have just as easily followed the thief. How far can you run carrying a case of beer? A 911 call on a cellphone would have brought the Lodi Police Department on scene in a heart beat, especially if a gun is mentioned.
America, along with Lodi, has some questionable citizens. And I am hardly a bleeding heart.
I don't believe a ride to the ER and a bandage will cost the taxpayers that much. Besides, he has more to worry about — being AWOL for starters and ending-up serving time in the brig, along with answering to the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice for you civilians).