Point taken, and I admit to not responding in the best head space aided by drinks with friends. I just think anyone willing to shoot at another person that isn’t 100% in blatant self defense doesn’t deserve to have a discussion “well it’s not as bad if they planned it” talk.
Not to beat this drum forever, but this has been bothering me. The headline in the OP article refers to it as a (and I quote) "drive by shooting."
@worm0082 rightly pointed out that the article made it sound more like a road rage incident, based on his understanding of how the terms "drive-by shooting" and "road rage" are generally applied (an understanding I share. Your mileage may vary).
At no point was anyone in this thread defending either type of crime in general, nor Shawn Kemp specifically. There's no "doesn't deserve" component to ANY of this, except that which you introduced.
However, since you then DID introduce it, the inevitable legal ramifications conversation began, a conversation that not only never would have happened: "Um do you want us to debate what's better? " had you not posted, but one that - again - never featured a single post defending the behavior.
So while I appreciate the step-back, I still think you're missing the point on how much you derailed this thread, in the process nearly stopping all of the great jokes from being posted. And THAT would have really sucked.