I, on the other hand, have a “sweet, gentle Lab” who won’t even let people into our house without growling and snarling. So I guess you never can tell with dogs!

BTW, cute girl. Maybe Mike can talk her into a porn scene and than she can parlay that into a career.

Quoted from AP

“Our initial review of the case doesn’t indicate she violated the law in any way,” Assistant District Attorney James Walters told The Oklahoman newspaper.

However, prosecutors have charged his alleged accomplice, 29-year-old Dustin Louis Stewart, with first-degree murder. According to authorities, Stewart was with Martin but ran away from McKinley’s home after hearing the gunshots.

“When you’re engaged in a crime such as first-degree burglary and a death results from the events of that crime, you’re subject to prosecution for it,” Walters said.

On capitol punishment, I have to add an observation. I, too, have been VERY pro capitol punishment for many years in the past. My feelings haven’t changed because of the justice/revenge issue. I still feel that scumbags who are truly guilty of heinous crimes should be removed from existence… by whatever means necessary, whether by the family/friends of the victims, or the state. I believe that if my loved ones are victimized to great enough extent, I have the right to hunt down the perpetrator and exact justice, or vengeance, whichever you wish to call it. And I would exercise that “right” regardless of legal consequence.

Here’s the problem with state sanctioned capitol punishment. We have reduced our justice system to an amoeba (“no brain, no heart” … I borrowed that phrase from a very good atty friend of mine). Most prosecutors have only one purpose in life, GET CONVICTIONS. They never want to lose, and their egos (not to mention their political ambitions) will not allow them to admit they’re wrong. In most cases (large and small), they will only dismiss charges when they see there’s no chance of winning. With this in mind, the trial process comes down to who can produce the best “show” in front of a jury. It no longer requires hard evidence or eye witnesses. A person who should be considered innocent until “PROVEN” guilty can be convicted simply on the “opinion” of the jurers, who the state will spend unlimited resources convincing. And remember… the accused most often has limited or NO choices in the resources to PROVE THEIR INNOCENCE (just think about that phrase for a minute… “prove your innocence”, how wrong is that?).

So yes, definitely, hell yes, Sarah did the right thing in the situation. Having the guns in the house, the skill to use them, and the presence of mind to make the the most important decision of WHEN to use them, shows that she took RESPONSIBILITY as the ultimate first line of protection for herself and her family. I wish this young lady the best.