140 posts in this topic

Bullish*t. This is why Michigan has a fleeing felon rule.

He may not have been an immediate threat to the jeweler but he was a threat to his NEXT victim. Criminals being creatures of need, opportunity & habit that next victim would likely have been soon. Probably that night before an investigation even got started. Better to stop him NOW than pray he didn't hurt / kill someone on the next try.

 

That's the law over there and that's fine. It isn't the law here. You may only shoot people in self defence here. I don't view "He might rob someone in the future" as reason enough to end their lives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullish*t. This is why Michigan has a fleeing felon rule.

 

This didn't happen in Michigan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course not, but it illustrates the lunacy of just letting the perp skate until the French cops get up to speed - assuming they do before someone innocent gets hurt or killed. This is where a proactive citizens arrest power is useful.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The robber was running away, and no longer a threat. The charges against the shop owner are justified.

 

 

this guy was running away.

post-96894-0-21957800-1379494885.jpg

 

 

certainly just because he's running away he poses no harm to any one...

 

 

post-96894-0-26087000-1379494924.jpg

 

... ohhh.. probably would have been better to shoot the thief... wouldn't it have? Now Uncle Ben is dead.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess there's two ways of looking at it. He was escaping.. the shop keeper didn't need to shoot the guy. As has been said, it wasn't in self defence. 

 

But on the other side of it.. he won't go burgling again! 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just leaving this here for all the people who think that taking justice in their own hands and killing people is always the right answer

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/10/us/drug-addict-makes-amends-to-interasian-market/index.html

 

Not every robber is bad to his core and deserves to die, some people just make horrible decisions in their lives or are going through very hard times and can't think clear. I don't want to live in a world where the only answer is killing criminals, where nobody ever gets a second chance. That's not a world worth living for in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just leaving this here for all the people who think that taking justice in their own hands and killing people is always the right answer

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/10/us/drug-addict-makes-amends-to-interasian-market/index.html

 

Not every robber is bad to his core and deserves to die, some people just make horrible decisions in their lives or are going through very hard times and can't think clear. I don't want to live in a world where the only answer is killing criminals, where nobody ever gets a second chance. That's not a world worth living for in my opinion.

 

maybe. but no one who shoots someone who threatens them, their family, or property should face charges. If i were in the jury i would find not guilty or i'd hang the jury.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three things about the background of the story and the 'outrage':

- There have been a series of high profile robberies, armed or not, in France, particularly in the south of France: a lot of jewellers are reportedly scared of organized mafias trying to steal jewelleries because they are easy to get money from. This is one case that hides a lot of problems with organized theft gangs/mafias

 

- Early 2014, there will be local elections to renew mayors so the French political circus is in full bloom right now. Especially, from the far right, who is trying to tie that theft on their usual 'protection of the thief and not the victim' and xenophobic/racist themes so this is rather inflated outrage.

 

- The definition of self-defense is rather strict in France: this will be the job of the judges to appreciate that. From previous cases, justice is usually understanding on such cases.

 

He may not have been an immediate threat to the jeweler but he was a threat to his NEXT victim. Criminals being creatures of need, opportunity & habit that next victim would likely have been soon. Probably that night before an investigation even got started. Better to stop him NOW than pray he didn't hurt / kill someone on the next try.

 

Police forces, judges work only on facts and events that occurred, not on speculations or what-ifs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullish*t. This is why Michigan has a fleeing felon rule.

He may not have been an immediate threat to the jeweler but he was a threat to his NEXT victim. Criminals being creatures of need, opportunity & habit that next victim would likely have been soon. Probably that night before an investigation even got started. Better to stop him NOW than pray he didn't hurt / kill someone on the next try.

What a ludicrous argument. You don't get to kill someone because you think they might be a threat later on. That's just a disgusting and way outdated view to hold.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is morally permissible to shoot a crook in the back as they're running away, then I think it is equally permissible to shoot them if they were just walking down the sidewalk. If you take away the necessity of imminent threat and replace it with "well, he or she might commit a crime at some point in the future", then maybe we should be arresting people for crimes that they may commit in the future.

You have a skewed view. When the crook is running away the crime is still taking place.

 

Nobody allows nor would ever think about arresting people for future crimes [except Minority Report].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a ludicrous argument. You don't get to kill someone because you think they might be a threat later on. That's just a disgusting and way outdated view to hold.

but there are similar laws in other states in the United States like mine.  I'm not saying that that gives you carte blanche to blast any felon you come across.  I think we can all agree that a forger is not the same violent threat to society as an armed robber.

 

The intent of the law is usually that someone is armed or they have done a crime so heinous that to allow them to escape would pose a greater danger to the public than doing nothing.  Obviously if you were to shot someone down under this aspect of the law at a minimum you'd definitely want to make sure he's armed with at least a gun IMO.  It doesn't happen to often here but we're just telling you that under the right circumstances it could happen and be legally justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I can see both sides. Hard place to be in. I am more sympathetic to the jeweler than to the thief, though.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liberalism at it's best, blame the victim 

 

Conservatism at it's best, kill first and ask questions later.

 

Bullish*t. This is why Michigan has a fleeing felon rule.

He may not have been an immediate threat to the jeweler but he was a threat to his NEXT victim. Criminals being creatures of need, opportunity & habit that next victim would likely have been soon. Probably that night before an investigation even got started. Better to stop him NOW than pray he didn't hurt / kill someone on the next try.

 

This happened in France, not gunmerica. The French have slightly more civilised attitudes to retributive violence than you guys.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this guy was running away.

attachicon.gifmichael-papajohn.jpg

 

 

certainly just because he's running away he poses no harm to any one...

 

 

attachicon.gifdyingdad2s.jpg

 

... ohhh.. probably would have been better to shoot the thief... wouldn't it have? Now Uncle Ben is dead.

 

But the sandman guy shot uncle ben!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Police forces, judges work only on facts and events that occurred, not on speculations or what-ifs.

What-ifs based on statistics are not irrelevant, and if France ignores that it's their bad. Too PC.

Also, in the US the police have no statutory or constitutional duty to protect the citizenry - only to solve and prosecute. This has been through the courts many times, and is that way to limit municipal liability. When they do it's optional, not mandatory. The US also differs in that 49 of the 50 states have statutory Citizens Arrest laws that allow aggressive action, and in some cases the use of deadly force. North Carolina still allows CA under Common Law as a "Detention."

Nail them going out the door or running through the parking lot in Michigan or several others? No problem.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are people bringing up US law into this?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so he was running away so we cant shoot??

what if he was running away after killing someone? does that make it ok?

either way he pulled a gun on someone, he got what he deserves,

if someone was to pull a gun or knife on me, one of us would end up injured i guarantee that.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess none of you have ever been in an armed robbery. Let me tell you its not great. They intimidate and threaten you, sometimes harm you and use abusive language and act like its their right to just go ahead and grab anything that you earned with your sweat and blood. Its a traumatic experience and once the adrenaline wears off you are left feeling enraged and wondering what you could have done to prevent it.

I haven't been involved in an armed robbery but I was assaulted at work and it was a similar situation - I was powerless to stand up to them (they were physically stronger and on drugs) and they proceeded to smash the place up. However, even if I had had a gun my response would not have been to shoot the perpetrator as they were fleeing. People have the right to defend themselves as is reasonable but not beyond that.

 

You often fantasize about blowing the ****ers head off if you only had a gun on you at the time. Calling the cops is more of a hassle than its worth because we all know there's zero chance of the culprit being caught afterwards. These scums don't hesitate hurting you the moment they smell foul of feel threatened. They deserve to die.

The idea that you consider calling the police "hassle" and that you think these people "deserve to die" speaks very poorly of you. What they deserve is to be arrested and tried for their crimes, not have some vigilante take the law into their own hands and shoot them dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so he was running away so we cant shoot??

what if he was running away after killing someone? does that make it ok?

That's right.

That doesn't matter. No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Detroit only arresting about 8-10% of murderers if I see a fleeing robber, rapist or killer someone's going to have a real bad day and it won't be me.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just leaving this here for all the people who think that taking justice in their own hands and killing people is always the right answer

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/10/us/drug-addict-makes-amends-to-interasian-market/index.html

 

Not every robber is bad to his core and deserves to die, some people just make horrible decisions in their lives or are going through very hard times and can't think clear. I don't want to live in a world where the only answer is killing criminals, where nobody ever gets a second chance. That's not a world worth living for in my opinion.

I get your point, and would go almost as far to agree with you, but the case you pointed out was the only one I know of, and the robber in that scenario must have been less abusive and more (for lack of a better word) 'reasonable' as he said money's replaceable and so on, not to mention the apology, so I guess he cleaned up his act, and got the help he needed (speculation on my part) but I still find myself more sympathetic to the jewellery store owner as he must have 'hit his silent alarm' or some other security system he should have protecting such a visible target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Detroit only arresting about 8-10% of murderers if I see a fleeing robber, rapist or killer someone's going to have a real bad day and it won't be me.

 

Might as well. If if you're in the wrong it sounds like you have a 90-92% chance of getting away with it :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Detroit only arresting about 8-10% of murderers if I see a fleeing robber, rapist or killer someone's going to have a real bad day and it won't be me.

 

I agree with you and would probably join in. Just remember this is France we are talking about and not America. They view things differently from us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Detroit only arresting about 8-10% of murderers if I see a fleeing robber, rapist or killer someone's going to have a real bad day and it won't be me.

 

Sounds like your own problem.  One which you don't get to extrapolate to the entire nation or world.  Don't pretend like the bubble that makes up Detroit and it's crime rates applies in very many other places.

 

Second of all, if you want to catch criminals, join the damn police.  It's not your job or right to make someone "have a bad day" based on your own judgement.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might as well. If if you're in the wrong it sounds like you have a 90-92% chance of getting away with it :p

Here it isn't wrong, it's 100% legal and nearly expected.

Example from this weeks news: guy is selling stuff from his house. Buyer gets aggressive and asks for jewelry. Homeowner says it's in the bedroom, leads him there, pulls a pistol out of hiding and shoots the perp several times. Perp is in intensive care.

No problem, and he's lauded by the news & cops for scoring one for the good guys.

Totally different cultures, this one being focused on the victims rights and less so on the criminals.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.