- 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
1
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:36 am to High C
quote:
So now crimes only apply to certain people.
“Some animals are more equal than others”
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:36 am to RLDSC FAN
They really need to consider if the person that was robbed had insurance or not..................... 
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:38 am to RLDSC FAN
As I raised in another thread... So? Who cares. How in the world does a municipal edict of a city you can't stand affect anyone on a Louisiana/Texas board? Why the constant reverse melt whip here on the OT 
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:39 am to Klark Kent
Not so much support as much understand where the thought is here:
Still, the right way to go about this is the city/county/whatever supplying these greatly needed items to the lesser fortunate people in these times, not just letting them steal it without consequences. Government sponsored food/clothing/necessities drives take a lot more effort than not doing something so I guess they take the easy route.
quote:
1. Was this theft offense substantially motivated by the state of emergency, or simply a theft offense which occurred contemporaneous to the declared state of emergency?
a. Factors to consider in making this determination:
i. Was the target business open or closed to the public during the
state of emergency?
ii. What was the manner and means by which the suspect gained
entry to the target business?
iii. What was the nature/quantity/value of the goods targeted?
iv. Was the theft was committed for financial gain or personal need?
v. Is there an articulable reason why another statute wouldn’t
adequately address the particular incident?
Still, the right way to go about this is the city/county/whatever supplying these greatly needed items to the lesser fortunate people in these times, not just letting them steal it without consequences. Government sponsored food/clothing/necessities drives take a lot more effort than not doing something so I guess they take the easy route.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:40 am to Neilfish
quote:
Guess that 85” TV is now needed
It may just be me, but I don't think theft of an 85" TV will be handwaived by this.
Like most things ridiculed on here, there's plenty to make fun of here just based on the facts. No need to make stuff up.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:40 am to RLDSC FAN
You really can't make up this stuff. It's just insane that this is happening.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:41 am to RLDSC FAN
fricking clown world
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:44 am to TH03
And what about the business owner? Take it up with their insurance or just eat it?
Also. Maybe maybe I could find an ounce of sympathy if I saw them running out of Kroger with a gallon of milk, bread, and peanut butter. But we know that’s not what they are looting is it?
Also. Maybe maybe I could find an ounce of sympathy if I saw them running out of Kroger with a gallon of milk, bread, and peanut butter. But we know that’s not what they are looting is it?
This post was edited on 9/2/20 at 11:48 am
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:47 am to jlovel7
quote:
Is that the law? I don’t like DAs and judges legislating from the courtroom no matter where they fall. Their job is to prosecute and judge by the letter of the law.
It’s representatives jobs to write the laws. Come on people.
Then you are contrary to a founding father’s intents for checks and balances.
Legislative branch can write the law, but the executive branch decides if they will enforce it.
DAs are the executive’s representative in front of the judicial branch.
You can disagree with the move, and you can mock the absurd basis, but don’t act like they are undermining the intended structure of government.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:49 am to Klark Kent
quote:
And what about the business owner? Take it up with their insurance or just eat it?
I said I understood the thought behind it, not that I supported it.
The thought is to help those who can't survive on their own during covid. The right way to do it is to provide for them, not allow them to take from others.
quote:
Also. Maybe maybe I could find an ounce of sympathy if I saw them running out of Kroger with a gallon of milk, bread, and peanut butter. But we know that’s not what they are looting is it?
Again, I highly doubt this will apply to looting TVs and shite. It's clearly defined as necessities. It's still the wrong way to do it, but it's not legalizing the theft of whatever they want to steal.
This post was edited on 9/2/20 at 11:51 am
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:49 am to RLDSC FAN
Only in California..... what a POS state.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:50 am to dukke v
Nice jinx. Certainly compared with Louisiana,the bastion of success.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:53 am to TH03
I know. I’m being contrarian to your contrarian posts.
That’s not my downvote FWIW
You know who else is struggling to survive on their own? Small business owners who due to government mandate haven’t been able to open their doors in 6 months, have had to board up their store fronts hoping to not get looted, and now are seeing evidence of their Democrat overlords sneaking in visits to their favorite establishments and not following their own mandates (see Pelosi and her hair salon visit)
Now those responsible for looting their stores....won’t be prosecuted. Yay California!
That’s not my downvote FWIW
You know who else is struggling to survive on their own? Small business owners who due to government mandate haven’t been able to open their doors in 6 months, have had to board up their store fronts hoping to not get looted, and now are seeing evidence of their Democrat overlords sneaking in visits to their favorite establishments and not following their own mandates (see Pelosi and her hair salon visit)
Now those responsible for looting their stores....won’t be prosecuted. Yay California!
This post was edited on 9/2/20 at 11:54 am
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:54 am to RLDSC FAN
i needs a new big screen and some new jordans
Posted on 9/2/20 at 11:58 am to northshorebamaman
I guess the business owners' needs don't matter.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 12:00 pm to Klark Kent
quote:
You know who else is struggling to survive on their own? Small business owners who due to government mandate haven’t been able to open their doors in 6 months
Just curious. What blame do you place on Pence and his Covid committee on this?
Posted on 9/2/20 at 12:08 pm to RLDSC FAN
I'm gonna rob a bank in CA because I "need" a million dollars.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 12:11 pm to RLDSC FAN
Looting is essentially robbery/burglary.
I will assume the DA will be ok if someone needs her car to get somewhere, she'd be ok with someone taking it.
Further, I assume she's also down with letting her bed go, because people have to sleep.
I will assume the DA will be ok if someone needs her car to get somewhere, she'd be ok with someone taking it.
Further, I assume she's also down with letting her bed go, because people have to sleep.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 12:12 pm to RLDSC FAN
Screw the business owner. If you "need" it you can take it now
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News