How is this robbery?

[Atheus]

who fvcking cares if they had a weapon or not?

The courts, for one.

You wouldn't care if you were on the jury?

 

[allisolm]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers
So you aren't suspicious of people being charged with bank robbery who have no deadly weapons with them. How many bank robbers rob banks without bringing weapons with them? I don't think very many would. What do you think?

I think a great many people rob banks without weapons. It happens all the time in Tallahassee which could have to do with the 10-20-LIFE sentences in Florida for certain crimes when a gun is used.

In the US in 2005 firearms were used in less than 25% of bank robberies and were not even threatened in 55% (out of 6,748 robberies).

2005 stats

 

[EMPshockwave82]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: BooGiMaN
first off i doubt the police will release the details of the note, since it might prove useful in their investigation...


as for explicit threat of force...the note could have said we have a gun and will kill you unless you had over the money....

The note could of said a lot of things. It's just a note. Notes don't kill people.

It's just a gun. Guns dont kill people when they sit on the table. It takes a person to load it and unless it is faulty, a person to pull the trigger.

Your logic is flawed.



:Lawnchair

 

[yowolabi]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: waggy
hmm looks like the only reason its not robbery is because it was a inside job. NOT because there was no weapon or such.

So you aren't suspicious of people being charged with bank robbery who have no deadly weapons with them. How many bank robbers rob banks without bringing weapons with them? I don't think very many would. What do you think?

who fvcking cares if they had a weapon or not?

say this was not a inside job. they go in and say give me the money please. it is still a robbery. NO matter if they have weapons or not.

You have to beleive that the person holding up the bank is armed every time. you really can't take the chance they arent.

So it's kind of like a 'pretend' bank robbery. That way nobody is in any real danger.

pretend bank robbery? yeah they should go to pretend court be sent to pretend prison.


amazing. just fvcking amazing.

You make a funny joke, but isn't it just pretending if you go rob a bank but bring no weapons
or any way of enforcing your demands?

You're still skipping over the point that tellers have to assume that you have a gun if you say you do.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Atheus

who fvcking cares if they had a weapon or not?

The courts, for one.

You wouldn't care if you were on the jury?

during court sure. but during the robbery? no.

 

[EMPshockwave82]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FoBoT
they took money that didn't belong to them


duh

It seems to me if their is no overt threat of harm to bank employees then the money was just given away.

:roll:


banks don't give away money

you are being obtuse

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

I don't care what you think.

And an asshole.

I'm an asshole because i don't care waht you think.OK

If you honestly didnt care what he thought you wouldnt have posted it on ATOT to ask. Once again. Flawed logic.

 

[EMPshockwave82]

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

since they were near the age of 16 and probably a first offender they probably plead down to lesser charges somehow. He must have been right about that

 

[yowolabi]

Originally posted by: EMPshockwave82

Originally posted by: allisolm
How is this robbery?
Topic Summary: news article...UPDATED....I .was right

LOL
I still haven't figured out what you were right about.

since they were near the age of 16 and probably a first offender they probably plead down to lesser charges somehow. He must have been right about that

Turns out they were 19. So that's not it.

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

You make a funny joke, but isn't it just pretending if you go rob a bank but bring no weapons
or any way of enforcing your demands?

If it wasn't an inside job, then they're enforcing their demands based on the note they hand to the teller. Why is that so hard to understand? The teller has no idea what they are capable of and doesn't want to chance it. I would say the note was the weapon in this case.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: mugs
news article...UPDATED....I .was right

You were right? The situation changed entirely because the teller was in on it.

You again, get lost. Get out of this IDIOT'S thread.

You forgot your apostrophe.

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Tobolo
Um Felony Theft = Robbery does it not?

You said the whole time that it wasn't "robbery" so how were you right?

Is shoplifting robbery? Car theft? robbery requires an explicit threat of force.

No, it doesn't.

Going back to the statute Mill posted:

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion, or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.

You don't have to explicitly threaten someone, you just have to cause them to be in fear of harm. You don't have to make an explicit or implied threat, the threat can be inferred by the person who is being robbed. Fear is a normal reaction to being given a note demanding money.

 

[SSSnail]

They will be all charged with bank robbery or conspiracy to bank robbery, and also felony theft. What's the argument again?

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: mugs
news article...UPDATED....I .was right

You were right? The situation changed entirely because the teller was in on it.

You again, get lost. Get out of this IDIOT'S thread.

You forgot your apostrophe.

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Tobolo
Um Felony Theft = Robbery does it not?

You said the whole time that it wasn't "robbery" so how were you right?

Is shoplifting robbery? Car theft? robbery requires an explicit threat of force.

No, it doesn't.

Going back to the statute Mill posted:

TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 8. OFFENSES INVOLVING THEFT
ARTICLE 2. ROBBERY

O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40 (2006)

§ 16-8-40. Robbery


(a) A person commits the offense of robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another:

(1) By use of force;

(2) By intimidation, by the use of threat or coercion, or by placing such person in fear of immediate serious bodily injury to himself or to another; or

(3) By sudden snatching.

(b) A person convicted of the offense of robbery shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code section, any person who commits the offense of robbery against a person who is 65 years of age or older shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.

You don't have to explicitly threaten someone, you just have to cause them to be in fear of harm. You don't have to make an explicit or implied threat, the threat can be inferred by the person who is being robbed. Fear is a normal reaction to being given a note demanding money.

I think the law sees' a note demanding money given to a bank teller as an 'implied' threat.
The implication being that some force will be used to enforce the demands of the note.
You follow?

 

[Born2bwire]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Tobolo
Um Felony Theft = Robbery does it not?

You said the whole time that it wasn't "robbery" so how were you right?

Is shoplifting robbery? Car theft? robbery requires an explicit threat of force.

No, it requires an IMPLIED threat of force.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: Fern

THis story begs the question of what would happen (legality -wise) if you handed the teller a note saying "please hand over the money"

it would still be theft, you can't take something that doesn't belong to you

If I go to a party and say "Can I get a beer", is it robbery unless I sign an explicit title of ownership transfer?

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: SSSnail
They will be all charged with bank robbery or conspiracy to bank robbery, and also felony theft. What's the argument again?

The OP contends that without a weapon, robbery wasn't committed. I contend the note was the weapon, and robbery was committed.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: EMPshockwave82

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FoBoT
they took money that didn't belong to them


duh

It seems to me if their is no overt threat of harm to bank employees then the money was just given away.

:roll:


banks don't give away money

you are being obtuse

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

I don't care what you think.

And an asshole.

I'm an asshole because i don't care waht you think.OK

If you honestly didnt care what he thought you wouldnt have posted it on ATOT to ask. Once again. Flawed logic.

Leave this thread.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

I think the law sees' a note demanding money given to a bank teller as an 'implied' threat.
The implication being that some force will be used to enforce the demands of the note.
You follow?

Ok... what you just said is the opposite of everything you've said in this thread. If there is an implied threat because the note demanded money, then it fits the definition of robbery. The facts changed because the teller was in on it. There was no threat if she knew the "robbers" weren't going to hurt her.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: Fern

THis story begs the question of what would happen (legality -wise) if you handed the teller a note saying "please hand over the money"

it would still be theft, you can't take something that doesn't belong to you

If I go to a party and say "Can I get a beer", is it robbery unless I sign an explicit title of ownership transfer?

there is a huge diffrence going to a party and getting a beer and going into a bank with a note saying "give me money" while wearing (granted a crappy) disguise.

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: Fern

THis story begs the question of what would happen (legality -wise) if you handed the teller a note saying "please hand over the money"

it would still be theft, you can't take something that doesn't belong to you

If I go to a party and say "Can I get a beer", is it robbery unless I sign an explicit title of ownership transfer?

Is my sarcasm meter broken? .

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: EMPshockwave82

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FoBoT
they took money that didn't belong to them


duh

It seems to me if their is no overt threat of harm to bank employees then the money was just given away.

:roll:


banks don't give away money

you are being obtuse

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

I don't care what you think.

And an asshole.

I'm an asshole because i don't care waht you think.OK

If you honestly didnt care what he thought you wouldnt have posted it on ATOT to ask. Once again. Flawed logic.

Leave this thread.

you keep asking that and nobody is listening. hopefully you get the idea you don't have a say who can post or not.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: KLin

Originally posted by: SSSnail
They will be all charged with bank robbery or conspiracy to bank robbery, and also felony theft. What's the argument again?

The OP contends that without a weapon, robbery wasn't committed. I contend the note was the weapon, and robbery was committed.

Exactly, that is how i see it.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: KLin

Originally posted by: SSSnail
They will be all charged with bank robbery or conspiracy to bank robbery, and also felony theft. What's the argument again?

The OP contends that without a weapon, robbery wasn't committed. I contend the note was the weapon, and robbery was committed.

Exactly, that is how i see it.

are you posting from a hospital? because you are fvcking nuts.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: EMPshockwave82

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FoBoT
they took money that didn't belong to them


duh

It seems to me if their is no overt threat of harm to bank employees then the money was just given away.

:roll:


banks don't give away money

you are being obtuse

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

I don't care what you think.

And an asshole.

I'm an asshole because i don't care waht you think.OK

If you honestly didnt care what he thought you wouldnt have posted it on ATOT to ask. Once again. Flawed logic.

Leave this thread.

you keep asking that and nobody is listening. hopefully you get the idea you don't have a say who can post or not.

Then stay.

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: KLin

Originally posted by: SSSnail
They will be all charged with bank robbery or conspiracy to bank robbery, and also felony theft. What's the argument again?

The OP contends that without a weapon, robbery wasn't committed. I contend the note was the weapon, and robbery was committed.

Exactly, that is how i see it.

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on whether a case of handing a note to a teller demanding cash is robbery or not.

/thread

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: KLin

Originally posted by: SSSnail
They will be all charged with bank robbery or conspiracy to bank robbery, and also felony theft. What's the argument again?

The OP contends that without a weapon, robbery wasn't committed. I contend the note was the weapon, and robbery was committed.

Exactly, that is how i see it.

are you posting from a hospital? because you are fvcking nuts.

No, i am not.