> But if a mob of people were
> throwing rocks at me I would have no
> compunctions about shooting them.
in what context? this is kind of disingenuous as a hypothetical and brings to mind some of the discussion of israeli politics and repression that have had the attention of this list recently.
questions begged by yor hypothetical: why do you have a gun? why do yor opponents not? what is the significance of the disparity in how you are all armed (or not armed)? why are they throwing rocks? why are they throwing them *at you*? why are you there in the first place? who really is threatening whom? how could rock-throwing be avoided? how could the guards be avoided? what are all the things you can do besides shooting at people?
> Backing the car over the victim supports
> the presumption that the shooting itself
> was uncalled for, and in any case it
> was gratuitious & vicious.
this is much more to the point. the phrase that comes to mind is, "out of control."
>The politics
> of this are not as clear-cut as some
> people seem to think.
>
the politics of police/military shooting rock-throwing civilians dead *is* pretty clear cut, in my opinion.