As far as the gun control issue, the NRA has pushed for enforcement of existing gun laws...which afaik from reading the story, hasn't been done in this case. The man showed up with a gun in hand to confront someone who he says molested him. That is a separate case entirely, and should have been run through the legal system to prove it one way or the other, as far as the legal system is concerned. Then punish accordingly, if proof is forthcoming to a conviction. Very hard to prove molestation claims..one person's word against the other most of the time, unless there are witnesses or other victims come forth to testify. Seems like it would be a long, nasty court hearing, with the victim ultimately losing for lack of convicting proof, i.e. the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. There is also the possibility the shooter was simply lying about the molestation part, to justify an attack on the priest for other reasons.
If the man was molested, then it's to his credit he didn't kill the priest. He did take the law into his own hands however, and that was wrong too.
There was a case years ago, where a man killed his 15 year old son's karate instructor, who had molested his son. The actual shooting was shown on TV, as the father stepped out from behind some lockers at an airport as the defendant was being escorted by police for transport. Some of you may remember seeing this on one of those Court TV shows, as the father stepped out with a .38 revolver and shot the molestor in the head from behind at point blank range, killing him as he was being escorted by two police detectives. The molestor had a smug grin on his face as he looked at the camera...and never knew what hit him. It was similar to when Jack Ruby killed Oswald, in that it was captured on film. I never heard what happened to the father as a result. He probably got some prison time, but don't know how severe. Certainly the circumstances would seem to justify the father's actions. If I was on the jury, I would not have pushed for any prison time, as I would feel the man was justified in the shooting. The damage done to a molestation victim lasts their entire lifetime, sometimes causing extreme psychological damage.
The real truth is, we don't know the circumstances just by reading the paper or watching the news. You would have to be on the jury to hear all the evidence. In the case of the priest, it would be understandable why the shooter confronted him, if indeed the priest did molest him. Could be the priest had a reputation for molesting alter boys, and that may be why the jury was sympathetic toward the shooter. I'm also of a mind that the community where this happened, should handle it as they see fit.
What do I think? Imo, the boy was lucky he didn't kill anyone. He should have to face the music for his assault on the priest. Whether that means jail time or strictly supervised probation for breaking gun laws. Like I said, we don't know the entire circumstances, and it would be a tough call for an uninformed outsider. Either way, it is vigilantism, and it is said, he who lives by the gun, dies by the gun. In that respect, I hope the shooter has a sense that justice has been served. He does need some supervision and guidance in his life, and should not get away with a pat on the back for doing a good job. He did wrong, and needs to know it. It is a job for strong and respected community leaders to handle.
Les
