Man convicted of shooting car prowler

imported post

FunkTrooper wrote:

I feel our justice system has a double standard because when police commit similar acts they get paid leave and then come back to there job.

Click to expand...

I never heard of a cop shooting a man in the back of the head when he ran off with a stereo. And if you can find any such incident I would bet serious money he did not get to go back to his job.

The fact that you just said you were willing to shoot someone over a computer says a lot about you as an individual. I don't care if the person is a career criminal or a junky or what have you, but if all they are doing is commiting a property crime that had 0 risk to anyones health, I don't see how you could say that person deserves to die for it.

So apparently in your opinion human life has a value of a couple hundred bucks.

imported post

FunkTrooper wrote:

I feel our justice system has a double standard because when police commit similar acts they get paid leave and then come back to there job.

Click to expand...

Uh....

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20091105/NEWS01/911059978

imported post

David.Car wrote:

FunkTrooper wrote:

I feel our justice system has a double standard because when police commit similar acts they get paid leave and then come back to there job.

Click to expand...

I never heard of a cop shooting a man in the back of the head when he ran off with a stereo. And if you can find any such incident I would bet serious money he did not get to go back to his job.

The fact that you just said you were willing to shoot someone over a computer says a lot about you as an individual. I don't care if the person is a career criminal or a junky or what have you, but if all they are doing is commiting a property crime that had 0 risk to anyones health, I don't see how you could say that person deserves to die for it.

So apparently in your opinion human life has a value of a couple hundred bucks.

Click to expand...

If that human is a criminal who makes a living off of stealing other people's hard earned possessions, yes, it's worth absolutely nothing to me. It's very simple.....don't steal from people and you won't get shot. Why do you want to make excuses for criminals and validate their crimes?

imported post

compmanio365 wrote:

David.Car wrote:

FunkTrooper wrote:

I feel our justice system has a double standard because when police commit similar acts they get paid leave and then come back to there job.

Click to expand...

I never heard of a cop shooting a man in the back of the head when he ran off with a stereo. And if you can find any such incident I would bet serious money he did not get to go back to his job.

The fact that you just said you were willing to shoot someone over a computer says a lot about you as an individual. I don't care if the person is a career criminal or a junky or what have you, but if all they are doing is commiting a property crime that had 0 risk to anyones health, I don't see how you could say that person deserves to die for it.

So apparently in your opinion human life has a value of a couple hundred bucks.

Click to expand...

If that human is a criminal who makes a living off of stealing other people's hard earned possessions, yes, it's worth absolutely nothing to me. It's very simple.....don't steal from people and you won't get shot. Why do you want to make excuses for criminals and validate their crimes?

Click to expand...

There is a whole whole world between validating crime and validating killing a man over a radio.

I had no problem with the individual getting a gun. I have no problem with him showing the gun to try and scare the crooks off. If one of the theifs then acted like he was pulling out a gun or something, then fine, again no problem. But to bring out the rifle, then shoot them in the back as they run away, over a radio?

I can't believe anyone thinks that is a good shoot.

Hell might as well shoot anyone that keys your car, knocks over your mail box, eggs and tps your house. Considering all of those can cause damage equal to or more then a $100 car stereo.

Edit: As to any of you that say you are willing to pull a gun and shoot a person over a car radio (or your computer) I want nothing to do with you individuals. Your lack of value for any sort of human life, whether a criminals or not, is something I have an issue with. I pray that none of your kids get caught up in vandalism as a youth and get shot for it because "they are criminals" and deserve it for causing a hundred bucks of damage to someones property.

imported post

Look, it's not about shooting someone over a computer if someone were to steal it I would lose my well being and could possibly end up homeless. I do value human life even those of criminals but I cannot abide someone who seeks to ruin my own life. I won't argue with your straw man other than to say I hope if I had children that they would never try to take someones well being from them because desperate men in desperate places do desperate things.

imported post

its a misdemoenoer (sic) until he steals the car and kills someone with it now its (sic) a danger to society

Click to expand...

Sounds exactly like the arguments the antis use against us owning guns, except for the spelling and grammar issues . . . .

imported post

FunkTrooper wrote:

Look, it's not about shooting someone over a computer if someone were to steal it I would lose my well being and could possibly end up homeless. I do value human life even those of criminals but I cannot abide someone who seeks to ruin my own life. I won't argue with your straw man other than to say I hope if I had children that they would never try to take someones well being from them because desperate men in desperate places do desperate things.

Click to expand...

Yes because in the instance of the story the mans car radio is his means of making a living.

It is called insurance, you should probably look into some. If someone steals your computer, insurance makes it so you can buy another. It is fairly damn cheap too, I am insured for $25,000 in property loss for less then100 bucks a YEAR.

As for your "well being" being directly correlated with a single computer... You might want to think about having a back up copy of you files.

And stealing a computer, even if it is the way you make your living is not someone seeking out to destroy your life, and does not = shooting said person.

imported post

Yes, I should go buy insurance at MY cost so the poor criminal can continue his profitable business of stealing MY things without risk of becoming dead for his crimes. Give me a break.

If enough criminals lost their lives because they got shot while trying to steal other peoples' things, word would get around it's not really a good idea to go around trying to steal peoples' things. But the mentality you espouse is the prevalent one, so crime is a booming business and people defending their hard earned property are put in jail while the thug gets to walk a free man.....it's a sick world we live in folks.

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

imported post

compmanio365 wrote:

Yes, I should go buy insurance at MY cost so the poor criminal can continue his profitable business of stealing MY things without risk of becoming dead for his crimes. Give me a break.

If enough criminals lost their lives because they got shot while trying to steal other peoples' things, word would get around it's not really a good idea to go around trying to steal peoples' things. But the mentality you espouse is the prevalent one, so crime is a booming business and people defending their hard earned property are put in jail while the thug gets to walk a free man.....it's a sick world we live in folks.

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

Click to expand...

Well you should have insurance that covers your home from fire, flood, trees, theft, blah blah blah. Didn't your parents ever try and teach you some responsibility?

Yeah, killing every thief would probably drop thefts dramatically. But do you want to be the country that does that? Do you want to be like middle eastern countries from hundreds of years ago? Kill people with a rock for stealing bread?

If you can honestly sit their and seriously think for a moment that you would have 0 problems killing somone for taking a radio while they pose no health threat to you or anyone else while doing it, then you sir have some serious issues and you are the perfect excuse to the Antis on taking away firearms.

I carry to protect human health. I carry to protect the life of myself and my loved ones. I do NOT carry to stop people from stealing a easily replaceable peice of property.

imported post

Yes, I should go buy insurance at MY cost

Click to expand...

Or don't, just don't go around killing people for property crimes.

Only a person with a severely skewed morality could defend the idea that someone should be killed for stealing a stereo.

I won't go so far as to say you shouldn't be allowed to own a gun. I will say you should be watched and steered clear of because you exhibit a penchant for ignoring the rules of the civil society and may be unstable.

imported post

I could not agree more with Dean and David. Very well said guys.

imported post

David.Car wrote:

FunkTrooper wrote:

I feel our justice system has a double standard because when police commit similar acts they get paid leave and then come back to there job.

Click to expand...

I never heard of a cop shooting a man in the back of the head when he ran off with a stereo. And if you can find any such incident I would bet serious money he did not get to go back to his job.

Click to expand...

How about shooting an unarmed man and being cleared and back on the street the next day?

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-...lved-in-two-shooting-deaths-in-four-days.html

Or how about this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/officer-shot-unarmed-suspect-1312861.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/police-officer-cleared-of-murder-1235948.html


Officers get a ton more leeway in this stuff than the average citizen. There's a lot more where officers are tried and acquitted. Almost every case involving an officer involves their paid administrative leave, followed by acquittal (if charges are even filed).

imported post

From the guys own testimony, he shouldn't have shot the dude. He made a bad call.

But it is one less asshole off the streets.

There is a definate double standard for police officers. That's why we need less of them.

imported post

David.Car wrote:

FunkTrooper wrote:

Look, it's not about shooting someone over a computer if someone were to steal it I would lose my well being and could possibly end up homeless. I do value human life even those of criminals but I cannot abide someone who seeks to ruin my own life. I won't argue with your straw man other than to say I hope if I had children that they would never try to take someones well being from them because desperate men in desperate places do desperate things.

Click to expand...

Yes because in the instance of the story the mans car radio is his means of making a living.

It is called insurance, you should probably look into some. If someone steals your computer, insurance makes it so you can buy another. It is fairly damn cheap too, I am insured for $25,000 in property loss for less then100 bucks a YEAR.

As for your "well being" being directly correlated with a single computer... You might want to think about having a back up copy of you files.

And stealing a computer, even if it is the way you make your living is not someone seeking out to destroy your life, and does not = shooting said person.

Click to expand...

Well David you are very right, and I do keep backups of all my files and just because of talking about this I now have a program that will track my PC if it is ever stolen. However if someone is stealing something of mine and trying to run away with it I will do everything in my power to pursue them, but after hearing your argument I would not use lethal force unless it was neccessary to defend my own life.

We in America (are supposed) to have a right to our property and we should be able to defend our property against those who would do harm. I do believe in using defensive force to protect your property and that force needs to be appropriate. It is your property and it is your responsibility to protect it (not police), so I see no problem pursuing a guy and demanding your property be returned.

imported post

This is precisely why I have my gun. You may never need to pull the trigger. A pistol aimed at someone is gonna make them obedient. We also have several cans of mace positioned strategically throughout the house.

My wife asked me if she should shoot someone in the house, I told her "no, detain them unless they do something stupid, then empty the clip!" I know there's a whole lot of responsibility attached to detaining someone, but the judge would rather see a live burglary suspect than a dead one and a live murderer. Plus, even a pocket knife in their pocket makes it "armed (insert crime here)."


I personally, would defend my home and my family. But, I hope I never have to.

imported post

A pistol aimed at someone is gonna make them obedient

Click to expand...

It's also deadly force, which you may or may not have the justification to use.

Plus, even a pocket knife in their pocket makes it "armed (insert crime here)."

Click to expand...

Defend this statement.

imported post

For those of you that have never worked in the legal field, there is a principle of law called the "Clear and Present Danger Doctrine". Essentially what it says...in laymans terms, you can use only the amount of force necessary to neutralize the threat, BUT there must be a clear and present danger at the time the force is used. If the aggressor is moving AWAY from you, there is NO threat, therefore the use of force is NOT authorized.

imported post

A guy i know (not particularly a friend) was thrown in jail for armed robbery because he broke into a house while the family was home. Never even seen anyone til the cops found him in the bushes a couple houses down, they found on him their Ipod and his pocket knife. He did 9 months for armed robbery.

imported post

Trigger Dr wrote:

For those of you that have never worked in the legal field, there is a principle of law called the "Clear and Present Danger Doctrine". Essentially what it says...in laymans terms, you can use only the amount of force necessary to neutralize the threat, BUT there must be a clear and present danger at the time the force is used. If the aggressor is moving AWAY from you, there is NO threat, therefore the use of force is NOT authorized.

Click to expand...

Sure.....and in WA that's the case, and the law that I would obey. Do I think we should have a law like in TX though, saying I can defend my property with deadly force? Absolutely. It's a big difference between what I think should be and what is. I'm not going to get myself thrown in jail by shooting a guy running away from me.....unless I'm in TX. Or if a similar law is passed in WA/nationally. Then it's open season, and IMO, rightly so. I don't value a criminal's life whatsoever. They gave up their right to life and liberty the moment they chose to infringe upon my rights.......this talk of "You give the antis ammo" is BS and a strawman.

You don't have to agree, and you don't have to react the same way. But the ONLY reason you should be up in arms about that attitude regarding criminals is if you are a criminal or have close relations with someone who is. If that is the case, the problem is not with me, but with yourself. Society should not coddle criminals, should not protect them. Innocent until proven guilty, absolutely. But when the criminal is absolutely guilty, the rights are gone. Death by firing squad and be done with it. If I catch the criminal in the act and am 100% sure this person is or just finished committing a crime against me or my family, and they do not stop when commanded, even if they are running away with my property, then I believe I should use whatever force necessary to apprehend that person and retrieve my property/stop an attack.

Disagree away, but I have not heard a rational point made yet as to why I am wrong, only strawmen being thrown around like crazy. Come up with a logical, real life point and not just a comment about how scared of the anti-gun movement you are so I should just tone it down, and I might consider the fact that I'm wrong in my thought on this. Otherwise, it's just same old BS rhetoric I've come to expect on people who think we should coddle the criminal element in this country.

imported post

deanf wrote:

Yes, I should go buy insurance at MY cost

Click to expand...

Or don't, just don't go around killing people for property crimes.

Only a person with a severely skewed morality could defend the idea that someone should be killed for stealing a stereo.

I won't go so far as to say you shouldn't be allowed to own a gun. I will say you should be watched and steered clear of because you exhibit a penchant for ignoring the rules of the civil society and may be unstable.

Click to expand...

Funny, because I've never seen you at an OCDO meet. You seem to be pretty good at judging people without ever meeting them in person or having a discussion. So steer clear of me......no skin off of my nose. Don't steal from me or commit crimes against my person or those I care about and you will have nothing to worry about.