On November 24, 2010, 28-year-old Thomas Baker of Florida went out for a jog, carrying cash and armed with a handgun. He was assaulted by 18-year-old Carlos Mustelier. Baker responded by drawing his handgun and shooting Mustelier eight times.
Go and read the post, then come back here.
Now, you'll notice the majority of the post gives us a fairly decent narrative of the incident and the resulting judgment.
Here's where it gets interesting.
The NRA couldn’t be happier with the results, calling its law "common-sense."Then in the next paragraph we get
The family and friends who loved Carlos Mustelier feel differentlyWait a minute.
Granted Mustelier's family and friends lost him to the shooting, but let's not forget what we were told earlier:
18-year-old Carlos Mustelier and his 16-year-old friend saw Baker as they headed to a Beverage King in the neighborhood. Mustelier told his friend he was going to rob Baker. After leaving the store, which was closed, they saw Baker passing them again. "I'm going to bam him. I'm gonna knock him out," Mustelier announced.Mustelier planned to rob Thomas Baker.
Then we get
No one should paint Carlos Mustelier as a hero in this incident—-he was wrong to confront and attack Baker that night.Okay. That's true, given what we've read so far.
But here's where it gets interesting:
On the flip side, Baker is no hero either. It’s hard to pinpoint the definition of "Looking for Trouble," but leaving one’s house after midnight with $950 in cash and a loaded handgun must be close.See what's going on here? Notice the sly, subtle switch-up?
Let me translate: "Carlos Mustelier was wrong to confront and attack Baker. But if you leave your house after midnight armed and carrying a lot of money? Why, you're a bad guy, you're up to no good, and you're planning to randomly kill someone. (wink-wink, nudge-nudge)"
Notice how they conveniently forget that Mustelier attacked Baker with the intention to robbing him.
According to CSGV, we should be on Mustelier's side because he was shot with a gun.
In other words, we should be on the side of someone intent on breaking the law.
To that I say: No.