- 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: Thoughts on this/chasing down thief and killing him
Posted on 3/10/24 at 12:51 pm to Longhorn Actual
Posted on 3/10/24 at 12:51 pm to Longhorn Actual
I read the law in your post. I don’t know that it’s going to totally shield someone whose car was stolen, got in a different vehicle, and shot at the stolen vehicle on the road.
I’m glad the thief is dead.
I’m glad the thief is dead.
2
Posted on 3/10/24 at 12:52 pm to idlewatcher
Did he shoot him because he stole the car, or while trying to get the car back?
Posted on 3/10/24 at 12:54 pm to idlewatcher
Great that he recovers his vehicle and takes out the perp in the process, but now he's left with a vehicle with bullet holes and blood in it.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 12:54 pm to idlewatcher
I know it’s cool to be on the internet and say this is acceptabe, but in no way is it ok to chase someone down and open fire into the vehicle in any sort of decent society.
Bunch of TD Hardos advocating for chasing someone down and mudering them for theft. I hope you try this and get shot.
Bunch of TD Hardos advocating for chasing someone down and mudering them for theft. I hope you try this and get shot.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 12:58 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
I read the law in your post. I don’t know that it’s going to totally shield someone whose car was stolen, got in a different vehicle, and shot at the stolen vehicle on the road.
Then your comprehension needs work.
It is not up for debate. It's very clearly written into the law and I even highlighted the relevant elements.
It's not written as "may", "sometimes", etc.
quote:
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property
"Is justified." It's stipulated as justified unless the elements are disproven.
quote:
to prevent the other's imminent commission of ... theft during the nighttime
Check
quote:
to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing ... theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property
Check
quote:
he reasonably believes that the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means
Check
quote:
]he reasonably believes that the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury
Check
100% justified.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 12:59 pm to Indefatigable
This is one of those situations where a little bit of embellishment goes a long way:
"After the thief stole my car he started driving dangerously towards other cars and buildings. I was afraid he would hurt someone in addition to getting away, so I took steps to deal with the threat."
"After the thief stole my car he started driving dangerously towards other cars and buildings. I was afraid he would hurt someone in addition to getting away, so I took steps to deal with the threat."
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:04 pm to Longhorn Actual
I disagree. Legally, he's fricked and will go to prison.
I'm not mourning the death of a thief.
I'm not mourning the death of a thief.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:05 pm to Longhorn Actual
quote:
to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing
I think you’ll find that the district attorney’s office and you have different interpretations of what “immediately” means in this context. I’d bet the case law supports their interpretation. This thief had left the property already.
quote:
he reasonably believes that the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means
By the time someone has secured your vehicle and driven away, I’m guessing the legal position on what is reasonable = call the police.
And we’re just talking criminal here. On the civil side, shooting at a moving vehicle from a moving vehicle is hardly ever going to hit the reasonableness bar.
Again, I’m all for thieves being shot. This guy probably went a bridge too far.
This post was edited on 3/10/24 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:06 pm to rundmcrun
quote:
This is one of those situations where a little bit of embellishment goes a long way:
"After the thief stole my car he started driving dangerously towards other cars and buildings. I was afraid he would hurt someone in addition to getting away, so I took steps to deal with the threat."
Quite the opposite, actually. Read the law I posted. It is cut and dry. Nothing more needs to be added. "Embellishing", especially saying something like what you've posted, is the worst thing you can do.
"He was in the commission of theft of my property at nighttime and was immediately fleeing with my property. There was no other way to recover my property and using force less than deadly force would have placed me at risk of serious bodily injury or death to myself. I have nothing else to add."
Any other statements would be limited to establishing that your belief was "reasonable." Not your actions. Your belief.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:06 pm to BayouBlitz
quote:
I disagree. Legally, he's fricked and will go to prison.
Ban bet?
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:08 pm to idlewatcher
Hero.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:08 pm to Longhorn Actual
quote:
Ban bet?
Illegal on TD.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:09 pm to BayouBlitz
quote:
Illegal on TD.
We’ll call it a migrant bet then.
Kosher?
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:09 pm to idlewatcher
Love that he did that but he’s an idiot for shooting at someone who wasn’t trying to kill him.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:10 pm to Longhorn Actual
It's reasonable to believe the car thief pointed a weapon or what looked like a weapon. Even if he did not have one it's reasonable to believe he did. Case closed.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:10 pm to Longhorn Actual
You're talking about a state that convicted a guy of murder who was in his vehicle, surrounded by an angry mob blocking the roadway with one of the mob pointing an AR at him.
Careful with speaking in absolutes in regards to the law.
Careful with speaking in absolutes in regards to the law.
This post was edited on 3/10/24 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:10 pm to ninthward
quote:
It's reasonable to believe the car thief pointed a weapon or what looked like a weapon. Even if he did not have one it's reasonable to believe he did. Case closed.
Maybe, but it seems like the guy talked to the cops without talking to a lawyer first who would have put these things into play.
Hence case not being closed.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:15 pm to Indefatigable
Let's see how this plays out.
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:17 pm to idlewatcher
What other crimes would it be justifiable to hunt down the perpetrator and kill him?
Posted on 3/10/24 at 1:22 pm to F1y0n7h3W4LL
quote:
What other crimes would it be justifiable to hunt down the perpetrator and kill him?
If a kid or person was in a car seat in the stolen car when it was taken perhaps.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News