This really, REALLY has me pissed off! (Kershaw Co.) - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: This really, REALLY has me pissed off! (Kershaw Co.)

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,833
    Quote Originally Posted by nca_mm View Post
    Agree with everything you just said. I just have no tolerance for folks trying to take what is another man's. These thieves know that if they just run, nothing will happen b/c of the "in the back" stuff you said. This is why I'd just like to know what a man can do to stop these types in the act. Certainly can rely on police to catch 'em.
    Get in shape and chase 'em down if'n it's that important to you. "Chasing" them down with bullets to their backs is going to be a much less tolerable net loss to you than just getting over it if'n you're not up to the task of going hands on with 'em, at least in the vast majority of jurisdictions that I've ever heard of or read anything about.

    A general rule that should never get you in trouble that you can't get out of relatively easily is, rely on your guns when a "reasonable person" would agree that you faced a genuine threat when you drew (and/or fired) your weapon, and rely on your physical, mental and verbal skills to resolve all other conflicts with other human beings.

    This ain't rocket surgery. There are jurisdictions where the general rule above may also apply to fleeing felons, but unless you know both the letter and intent of such exceptions to the general rule, you're playing with fire if you open fire at someone running away from you, especially if that person is unarmed, and even more especially if you succeeded in scaring them off before they even stole anything and you shot someone in the back who didn't even have any of your property in their possession. Another general rule is that if you're legitimately threatened, don't hesitate to use your gun, but if you're just pissed off because some 17 year old might get away with petty larceny, don't even allow yourself the temptation of reaching for your gun. They might indeed get away with the larceny, but you'll get away without having to answer to cops, a judge or a jury if you just control your anger over them getting away with larceny.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  2.   
  3. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    SC Lowcountry
    Posts
    1,550
    There is no property that I own that is worth taking someone's life to protect.

    If your property is valuable, set up the best security that you can, always use it, and make sure you have adequate insurance.

  4. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The first state to secede!!!!
    Posts
    325
    I digress. Hope it never happens to me. Just have less than zero respect for thieves. If I ever catch one in the act, I don't plan to use lethal force unless one has a gun or knife, but I will make sure they have an ER trip.

  5. #14
    "He [Methe] did everything right until he pulled the trigger on that boy who was running away from him,"
    The use of deadly force is NOT permitted in most states to protect property. It's a pretty simple concept. We own and carry guns to protect ourselves, and others, not to protect "stuff", that's what insurance is for.
    “Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
    But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” ― Steven Weinberg

  6. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by nca_mm View Post

    What can a citizen do to stop these people in their tracks?!
    You can't kill them!
    “Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
    But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” ― Steven Weinberg

  7. In the old west, horse theft and cattle rustling were hanging offenses. Men gave up horses when the automobile came along. With the change in locomotion the laws changed and car thieves couldn't be hung. Now I will say that I can relate to wanting to shoot the perp but can I legally? NO! Even certain felonies do not rise to the level where lethal force can be used. I agree with you that to let a POS steal what you've worked hard for pisses you off! It does me also. I'd like to shoot a drug-addled member of my family that has stolen things from me for ten plus long years. But I haven't yet because I don't want to go to jail!

  8. For y'alls information, the grand Jury has refused to indict the person charged with the shooting. He's free to walk.

    Kershaw grand jury refuses to indict homeowner who shot, killed 17-year-old would-be thief | The State
    Proud Member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiricy

  9. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by Waffles View Post
    For y'alls information, the grand Jury has refused to indict the person charged with the shooting. He's free to walk.

    Kershaw grand jury refuses to indict homeowner who shot, killed 17-year-old would-be thief | The State
    That's rather odd. I wonder if certain evidence wasn't presented to the public that was presented to the grand jury that would justify this decision. Based on the information in the news, I can see no reason not to indict the homeowner.

  10. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,833
    Quote Originally Posted by Waffles View Post
    For y'alls information, the grand Jury has refused to indict the person charged with the shooting. He's free to walk.

    Kershaw grand jury refuses to indict homeowner who shot, killed 17-year-old would-be thief | The State
    Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    That's rather odd. I wonder if certain evidence wasn't presented to the public that was presented to the grand jury that would justify this decision. Based on the information in the news, I can see no reason not to indict the homeowner.
    It's interesting the rationale the Sheriff (Matthews) used to express his disappointment in the refusal to indict. He said:

    A trial would have served to air all the evidence in the case, pro and con, so the public would have learned what went on and whether a shooting in which a life was taken was in fact justified, Matthews said.
    I agree wholeheartedly with him, but that's because I try as hard as I can to remain consistent in my arguments. I made the exact same argument advocating for the indictment of Darren Wilson, and I seriously doubt Matthews would've considered my identical argument(s) as being valid in the Michael Brown killing. Neither will the vast majority of folks who support the Grand Jury's refusal to indict in this case.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  11. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    It's interesting the rationale the Sheriff (Matthews) used to express his disappointment in the refusal to indict. He said:

    A trial would have served to air all the evidence in the case, pro and con, so the public would have learned what went on and whether a shooting in which a life was taken was in fact justified, Matthews said.
    I agree wholeheartedly with him, but that's because I try as hard as I can to remain consistent in my arguments. I made the exact same argument advocating for the indictment of Darren Wilson, and I seriously doubt Matthews would've considered my identical argument(s) as being valid in the Michael Brown killing. Neither will the vast majority of folks who support the Grand Jury's refusal to indict in this case.

    Blues
    I understand your sentiment, however, all evidence in the Michael Brown killing was released to the public. This case is, however, different from the Michael Brown killing as the evidence has not been properly released to the public.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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