Started By
Message

re: So the employee that shot the robber is in custody

Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:04 pm to
Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
27007 posts
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:04 pm to
quote:

Further, and this is the point i tried to make with hypotheticals earlier, how far does your logic extend? If the taking of a $10,000 piece of jewelry justifies execution, does a $2,000 laptop? A $300 watch? A $50 video game? A $1 chocolate bar? If there is a specific value that justifies killing, does that value change compared to the net worth of the victim? Is the shooting only justified if there some damage to a case, but just grabbing something and running away would not justify shooting?


For me, it is the attempt at forceful theft - breaking into a jewelry counter, that elevates this to a violent event. If there was jewelry on the counter and the guy grabbed it and ran, that is shoplifting. But the brazen act of physically breaking into storage compartments in the midst of customers and employees is different. At that point it is a robbery.
Posted by Jack Bauers HnK
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
5732 posts
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:21 pm to
quote:

For me, it is the attempt at forceful theft - breaking into a jewelry counter, that elevates this to a violent event. If there was jewelry on the counter and the guy grabbed it and ran, that is shoplifting. But the brazen act of physically breaking into storage compartments in the midst of customers and employees is different. At that point it is a robbery.


See, that’s a reasonable, articulable position. We could discuss what rises to the level of a “forceful theft”. That’s actually an interesting phrase to use because it creates a sort of third category that doesn’t exist in Louisiana law, which is where i live. There is “theft”, the taking of something of value with the intent to permanently deprive, and there is “robbery” the taking of something of value from the person of another or that is in the immediate control of another by use of force or intimidation. There is no third category of a theft by force of something that is not in the immediate control of someone. At best, the damage to the case would simply be a criminal damage to property charge added to the theft charge.

I would still argue, even with some damage occurring in the process of stealing something, since that something wasn’t in the immediate vicinity or control of another person, it doesn’t rise to the level of a “robbery” or justify the killing of the thief, morally or legally.
Posted by Padme
Member since Dec 2020
6263 posts
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:54 pm to
quote:

For me, it is the attempt at forceful theft - breaking into a jewelry counter, that elevates this to a violent event. If there was jewelry on the counter and the guy grabbed it and ran, that is shoplifting. But the brazen act of physically breaking into storage compartments in the midst of customers and employees is different. At that point it is a robbery.



Yup; no one can read minds, no one can project ultimate motives. So why should the robber, who out of the blue is smashing property in a peaceful environment, Why does he get the benefit of the doubt? If he initiated a violent act, seems to me it’s reasonable to see him as a threat to life around him. Why should the owner wait until some sort of confirmation is in place. Life or death happens in seconds, sometimes.
This post was edited on 2/26/24 at 5:57 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram