- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So the employee that shot the robber is in custody
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:14 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:14 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
quote:
Can we not agree that there is a difference between the mere taking of something of value and an actual, articulable threat of death or great bodily harm and that deadly force is reasonable to prevent one but not the other?
No.
When a person decides to take things from an innocent person, anything and everything that happens to the thief is fair game.
The Law may disagree, but thieves are the scum of the Earth and deserve no sympathy when killed in the course of their crimes.
1
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:16 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
Thank God you're not in charge b/c there would be nothing good left in this country.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:17 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
Absolutely. But sometimes it's OK to kill a thief.
Your post said it was never right to kill a thief.
That was incorrect.
No big deal.
Your post said it was never right to kill a thief.
That was incorrect.
No big deal.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:21 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
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 on 2/26/24 at 5:23 pm to oogabooga68
quote:
When a person decides to take things from an innocent person, anything and everything that happens to the thief is fair game.
The Law may disagree, but thieves are the scum of the Earth and deserve no sympathy when killed in the course of their crimes.
Perhaps. Does your position change with the relative value of the things taken? Do kids stealing candy bars deserve death? If not, where is the line for you?
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:24 pm to roadGator
quote:
Absolutely. But sometimes it's OK to kill a thief.
Your post said it was never right to kill a thief.
That was incorrect.
No big deal.
Same question i asked above. If it’s sometimes okay to kill a thief, but not others, where is the line?
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:24 pm to Padme
Should not have even fought it. Being killed trying to save your property is just a part of reparations. Us whiteys just have to deal with it.
This post was edited on 2/26/24 at 5:25 pm
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:24 pm to Padme
quote:
thugs are stealing your car; you walk out with a nine and unload.
You can't do that in Louisiana.
BLM/Antifa is beating your car windows out while you're in it?
Blast away.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:29 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
frick that. Try to rob someone, you deserve to get shot.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 5:54 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
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
Posted on 2/26/24 at 6:06 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
The line is all over the place. Are you in my house unarmed and just stealing shite and I come down stairs?
You dead.
Are you stealing a fishing pole from a neighbors yard? You aren’t dead.
Lots of things to consider of course.
You dead.
Are you stealing a fishing pole from a neighbors yard? You aren’t dead.
Lots of things to consider of course.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 6:30 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
quote:
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.
It was locked in a cabinet and located within a few feet of customers and employees.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 7:10 pm to BBONDS25
Is there an IRS reg that I’m missing here?
Posted on 2/26/24 at 9:50 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
quote:
Same question i asked above. If it’s sometimes okay to kill a thief, but not others, where is the line?
Which state? List the state law elements and the elements of an affirmative defense. Apply the facts. I’m not saying you are wrong. I’m saying your feelings don’t matter.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 9:52 pm to cwill
quote:
Is there an IRS reg that I’m missing here?
Nope. Just saying you shouldn’t be giving legal advice. Do you disagree? I’ve been a prosecutor and I wouldn’t dare give legal advice to “fire away”. Just looking out for you, bud.
This post was edited on 2/26/24 at 9:55 pm
Posted on 2/26/24 at 9:56 pm to Padme
Bet Christine voted for Biden. Now they are crying for police help.
If you want to defund the police, do not call them if you have a emergency.
If you want to defund the police, do not call them if you have a emergency.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 10:43 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
Ya frick all that. I can think of plenty scenarios where it’s justified in both ways.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 6:26 am to Padme
quote:
Hypothetical: thugs are stealing your car; you walk out with a nine and unload. Who goes to jail?
Unless you live in Texas you both are.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 6:29 am to Padme
quote:
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.
That would definitely be my argument as his defense attorney. Hopefully the guy gets a sympathetic jury.
Bottom line, though, in most situations you don't get to use deadly force unless someone is being directly threatened with physical harm. That's just the way it is.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News