Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37

Thread: Aldi's robbery--- does Aldi's have any liability?

  1. #1
    Regular Member skorittnig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Neenah, WI
    Posts
    89

    Aldi's robbery--- does Aldi's have any liability?

    It is my understanding that Aldi's is a posted " no CCW zone". Does anyone know if they are liable for anything resulting from the attempted robbery?
    skorittnig

    "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared."
    Niccolo Machiavelli

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322
    Everyone has liability, whether it is posted or not. However, if posted, they lose immunity.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  3. #3
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Don't know about their liability.

    I do know that a concealed carry permit is for the carrier's self defense.

    It does not equip an individual to be a vigilante in a grocery store holdup.
    Proud Veteran ~ U.S. Army / Army Reserve

    Mississippi State Guard ~ Honorably Retired


  4. #4
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    well,,,....!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    Don't know about their liability.

    I do know that a concealed carry permit is for the carrier's self defense.

    It does not equip an individual to be a vigilante in a grocery store holdup.
    A Concealed Carry Permit has absolutly NOTHING to do with how you put your gun to use...
    Our Right to self Defense is Unailable,,,

    the good guy "Hero" used his Right to Defense of Himself, his Family and Others, as they were ALL clearly threatened
    with imminant death or seious bodily harm!

    P.S. I find it hard to believe that after months of you slinking back to the Polite and Friendly arms
    of Torustotters.net, you would come back here to a site that stresses lawfull self defense
    and accuse a Brave and Rightious law abiding family man of being a VIGILANTE!!!
    Last edited by 1245A Defender; 02-06-2012 at 07:55 AM.
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  5. #5
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    Don't know about their liability.

    I do know that a concealed carry permit is for the carrier's self defense.

    It does not equip an individual to be a vigilante in a grocery store holdup.
    There was no vigilante in the case at hand, simply the lawful use of deadly force to defend life.
    Apparently you do not know what you believe that you know. Here in WI you may defend the life of others as well as your own.
    According to WI law you are privileged to use deadly force in the defense of another so long as that other person is privileged to use it themselves. While deadly force may not be used to defend property, having a shotgun pointed at you in a threatening manner is an imminent danger to your life. Deadly force may be used to defend against such said imminent danger.
    The applicable Chapter (943.48) is actually titled "Self Defense and Defense of Others".
    939.48(4) A person is privileged to defend a 3rd person from real or apparent unlawful interference by another under the same conditions and by the same means as those under and by which the person is privileged to defend himself or herself from real or apparent unlawful interference, provided that the person reasonably believes that the facts are such that the 3rd person would be privileged to act in self-defense and that the person's intervention is necessary for the protection of the 3rd person.
    Last edited by Interceptor_Knight; 02-06-2012 at 05:27 AM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    northern wis
    Posts
    3,201
    I could see where he would have to pay for the windows he shot out.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran rcawdor57's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,643
    Aldi's should give him a one year shopping spree card. If I had been in the store unarmed and there was a good guy (or gal) there with a gun I would hope he or she would have used it to stop the imminent threat of death by the criminals.
    “The Constitution shall never be construed... to prevent the People of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” -- Samuel Adams

    “Today, we need a nation of Minutemen. Citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.”

    —John F. Kennedy

  8. #8
    Regular Member markush's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kenosha
    Posts
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by Firearms Iinstuctor View Post
    I could see where he would have to pay for the windows he shot out.
    He wouldn't have had to shoot had the BG not been waving his shotgun. The BG was the instigator in this situation, make him pay for it!

  9. #9
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    Don't know about their liability.

    I do know that a concealed carry permit is for the carrier's self defense.

    It does not equip an individual to be a vigilante in a grocery store holdup.
    Wisconsin's license is affirmation of our willingness to allow our government to regulate our constitutional right. Our right of self defense is granted by God. Using your statement if your wife or neighbor was getting mugged you would not be able to use your firearm to defend them, only yourself.


    Your statement as to vigilantism is an affront to anyone who believes in the 2nd amendment and the sanctity of human life.
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    286

    Angry

    Ok, I'm going to be the "Devils Advocate" here.

    Since Aldi's is posted, can the bad guy sue Aldi's for letting him get injured in their store?

    I know, this is a really dumb question.

    Just a question on the Libility issue.

    Just wondering if there's a lawyer out there thinking along those lines.

    I wouldn't be surprised.

    JJC

  11. #11
    Regular Member xc9subcompact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Secure Undisclosed
    Posts
    106
    Yes, he can sue. Anyone can sue. Reality is he needs to either find a lawyer willing to take his case on contingency or he needs to foot the bill for the lawyer.
    And if this was England, He might win. Here he would likely lose. Hence the reason a lawyer would be descouraged from taking the case on contingency. Odds are he is broke, he was probably robbing the store to get money for drugs.
    Last edited by xc9subcompact; 02-06-2012 at 10:55 AM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post


    P.S. I find it hard to believe that after months of you slinking back to the Polite and Friendly arms
    of Torustotters.net, you would come back here to a site that stresses lawfull self defense
    and accuse a Brave and Rightious law abiding family man of being a VIGILANTE!!!
    "Slinking back...?"
    Proud Veteran ~ U.S. Army / Army Reserve

    Mississippi State Guard ~ Honorably Retired


  13. #13
    Regular Member metalman383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eau Claire WI, ,
    Posts
    283
    Walking in with a shotgun to rob the store, took away any rights he had to not get shot!

  14. #14
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by protias View Post
    Everyone has liability, whether it is posted or not. However, if posted, they lose immunity.

    Please provide the verbiage for the statute, code, or case law precedent upon which you base this assertion.

    Otherwise, I call "shenanigans" on this statement.

    I AGREE with it in theory, but I have yet to find ANY jurisdiction that has a statute (or any case law where a court ruled in a manner) to hold private property owners liable for injury or damage due the being posted against self-defense.
    Last edited by Dreamer; 02-06-2012 at 01:59 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    Please provide the verbiage for the statute, code, or case law precedent upon which you base this assertion.

    Otherwise, I call "shenanigans" on this statement.

    I AGREE with it in theory, but I have yet to find ANY jurisdiction that has a statute (or any case law where a court ruled in a manner) to hold private property owners liable for injury or damage due the being posted against self-defense.
    175.60(21)(b): A person that does not prohibit an individual from carrying a concealed weapon on property that the person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from its decision.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  16. #16
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320
    Quote Originally Posted by protias View Post
    175.60(21)(b): A person that does not prohibit an individual from carrying a concealed weapon on property that the person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from its decision.

    I am curious about this clause. There was a heated debate posted here some time ago about this. It states immunity for those that choose NOT to post or prohibit but doesn't necessarily indicate they have any additional liabilities if they do post. One would ASSUME that if they are granted immunity if they don't post that means with post there is liability to be immune from but it really doesn't state such.
    Last edited by bigdaddy1; 02-06-2012 at 03:04 PM.
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdaddy1 View Post
    I am curious about this clause. There was a heated debate posted here some time ago about this. It states immunity for those that choose NOT to post or prohibit but doesn't necessarily indicate they have any additional liabilities if they do post. One would ASSUME that if they are granted immunity if they don't post that means with post there is liability to be immune from but it really doesn't state such.
    Right, and there isn't a limit for businesses, but there is for government bodies.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  18. #18
    Regular Member skorittnig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Neenah, WI
    Posts
    89
    I started this thread with the hope that (because of Aldi's anti-gun policy) Aldi's would somehow be liable for physical/emotional damages, and make other business reconsider their stance.

    Any hope here???
    skorittnig

    "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared."
    Niccolo Machiavelli

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322
    Quote Originally Posted by skorittnig View Post
    I started this thread with the hope that (because of Aldi's anti-gun policy) Aldi's would somehow be liable for physical/emotional damages, and make other business reconsider their stance.

    Any hope here???
    Depends on if they get sued or not.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    221
    I would be in fear for my life as soon as those thugs came in the door pointing their firearms everywhere. If someone is pointing the weapon at people you must assume they are ready to use it and if they are some lowlife your only one sneeze, slip, cough, or accidental discharge away from being shot. You or them?

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by metalman383 View Post
    Walking in with a shotgun to rob the store, took away any rights he had to not get shot!
    +1 this

  22. #22
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by metalman383 View Post
    Walking in with a shotgun to rob the store, took away any rights he had to not get shot!
    +1

    I wish there was a LIKE button.

  23. #23
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by skorittnig View Post
    It is my understanding that Aldi's is a posted " no CCW zone". Does anyone know if they are liable for anything resulting from the attempted robbery?

    I suppose any of the customers could sue, claiming that they suffered emotional trama, because Aldi's actions (posting signs) created an environment attractive to criminals. But regrettalbly, I think such a lawsuit would be found to be frivilous.

    I think for any lawsuit to have any weight, a person would have to claim and show proof they suffered or were injured, BECAUSE Aldi's prohibited them from lawfully carrying a handgun.

  24. #24
    Regular Member davegran's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by BROKENSPROKET View Post
    ....

    I think for any lawsuit to have any weight, a person would have to claim and show proof they suffered....
    Well, Mr.Al-Mujaahid suffered a loss of lead....
    Dave
    45ACP-For when you care enough to send the very best-
    Fight for "Stand Your Ground " legislation!

    WI DA Gerald R. Fox:
    "These so-called 'public safety' laws only put decent law-abiding citizens at a dangerous disadvantage when it comes to their personal safety, and I for one am glad that this decades-long era of defective thinking on gun issues is over..."

    Remember: Don't make old People mad. We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by protias View Post
    175.60(21)(b): A person that does not prohibit an individual from carrying a concealed weapon on property that the person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from its decision.

    Here's the problem with this statute.

    If a business IS posted, and someone gets injured or killed by someone with a gun (which would be possessed illegally--in teh form of a "tresspassing" violation), then there is simply NO court that would hold the business liable for the criminal act of a criminal, who was acting in direct violation of the property owners expressed wishes, and outside of their control.

    This is a "feel good" law. It does nothing to force liability on to property owners that post--it ONLY protects people who ALLOW carry from liability in an accident or event invilving legal and lawful carry.

    A third party cannot be held liable for the criminal actions of another party that violate their property owner rights and policies.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •