If you try and stop 2 illegals from stealing your property you go to jail

[Throckmorton]

The old guy should be treated leniently, but the idea of using lethal force to stop a theft is ridiculous and inherently unjust. How many of you have stolen music from the RIAA? Should they be able to shoot you in the face?

Self defense and property defense are two different things.

 

[nick1985]

The old guy should be treated leniently, but the idea of using lethal force to stop a theft is ridiculous and inherently unjust.

Lets say 2 men burst into someone's house and started taking his property. You are saying its not OK to shoot them?

 

[khon]

Lets say 2 men burst into someone's house and started taking his property. You are saying its not OK to shoot them?

If they're in your house its reasonable to think you're in danger, so go ahead and shoot them.

But if they're just grabbing something on your lawn/driveway and then running off, I don't think there's any way you can argue there's danger, and without that I can't see it being justified to use lethal force against them.

 

[bfdd]

The old guy should be treated leniently, but the idea of using lethal force to stop a theft is ridiculous and inherently unjust. How many of you have stolen music from the RIAA? Should they be able to shoot you in the face?

Self defense and property defense are two different things.

Your RIAA analogy sucks because they aren't catching you in the act.


Also, what if someone defines their self by their property(we do live in a rather materialistic society) would property defense then be self defense?

 

[Throckmorton]

Lets say 2 men burst into someone's house and started taking his property. You are saying its not OK to shoot them?

If 2 men burst into your house and start taking your property, I think it's pretty clear your life is in danger, so it would be OK to shoot them.

In this case the thieves were driving away when he shot them.

 

[Craig234]

Your right, Some trailers are MORE expensive the automobiles.

The world would have lost nothing if one of those thieves died.

Those illegal immigrant thieves are not as bad of people as you are. And they're bad.

Piece serves the propaganda line - get people to hate illegal immigrants and dehumanize them.

If this were a story about two citizens who were aggravated at an admitted illegal immigrant living near them and tried to steal his truck, and the illegal immigrant had shot at them driving away and hit one of them in the face, we'd be hearing how understandable what they did was, and how excessive his use of force was. I'm not sure we'd hear they were heroes, but I suspect we'd hear a lot about leniency for them and wanting to charge the illegal immigrant with attempted murder.

We haven't even had any news reports explaining both sides yet, just Fox 'stories to addict old white men with anger' network.

For what it's worth, it does sound like the shooter was charged excessively (perhaps in a tactic aimed at creating pressure for a plea).

It's the whole use of one incident to get people saying 'those damn illegal immigrants' increasing their anger at tens of millions that's the propaganda function.

That's how 'support for wars' is built - just keep repeating stories that build anger at a target, until people can't wait to hear we're going to war with them.

'They took babies out of incubators to steal the incubators!!!' No, the people who wanted the US to return them to power hired President George H. W. Bush's former chief of staff at an agency that coordinated putting the ambassador's daughter in front of Congress to lie to the American people for a propaganda campaign. Accountability for the lies to the American people: zero.

But it sells. The people who see this and get angry feel they got great news reporting as they get furious at all illegal immigrants again - fueling anti-incumbent emotion.

 

[Fenixgoon]

The old guy should be treated leniently, but the idea of using lethal force to stop a theft is ridiculous and inherently unjust. How many of you have stolen music from the RIAA? Should they be able to shoot you in the face?

Self defense and property defense are two different things.

part 1 - downloading music is not theft. it is copyright infringement. you are not depriving the RIAA/MPAA of any physical good when you download music or movies. they still have their music and movies.

two - what's wrong with the guy defending his property? it's not like you can instantly summon the police to defend it for you.

 

[Throckmorton]

part 1 - downloading music is not theft. it is copyright infringement. you are not depriving the RIAA/MPAA of any physical good when you download music or movies. they still have their music and movies.

Pirating music is a felony

two - what's wrong with the guy defending his property? it's not like you can instantly summon the police to defend it for you.

What's wrong is that it's illegal in Colorado to defend property with lethal force, just like stealing is illegal.

 

[bfdd]

part 1 - downloading music is not theft. it is copyright infringement. you are not depriving the RIAA/MPAA of any physical good when you download music or movies. they still have their music and movies.

two - what's wrong with the guy defending his property? it's not like you can instantly summon the police to defend it for you.

Nor can an 82 year old man be expected to chase after two guys 50+ years his junior.

 

[bfdd]

Pirating music is a felony



What's wrong is that it's illegal in Colorado to defend property with lethal force.

Copyright infringement is not theft. It is all fine and dandy that it's a felony, that doesn't make it theft.

 

[Throckmorton]

Copyright infringement is not theft. It is all fine and dandy that it's a felony, that doesn't make it theft.

Assuming it's not theft, it's still a felony. So why shouldn't the RIAA station an armed mercenary outside your house to shoot you when they catch you pirating their property?

 

[feralkid]

Charging the man with attempted murder is ridiculous, but I do think he should face some lesser charges, maybe reckless endangerment. He was afterall firing live rounds in the middle of a residential neighborhood, and he was doing it in a situation where noone was in danger.

I had no idea Peter Noone was in Colorado.

 

[waggy]

meh. i have no problem with the old man (or any) useing t he weapon to protect his property. he worked hard for it. if you want a trailer go fucking get a job and get one yourself.

don't want to get shot? don't fucking steal. seems easy.

 

[bfdd]

Assuming it's not theft, it's still a felony. So why shouldn't the RIAA station an armed mercenary outside your house to shoot you when they catch you pirating their property?

No there is no assuming. Copyright infringement is not theft so laws that allow for the protection of property from theft by use of lethal force would not protect you for killing someone over an idea. Here's some reading material.

http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/5002/theft.html

 

[khon]

meh. i have no problem with the old man (or any) useing t he weapon to protect his property. he worked hard for it. if you want a trailer go fucking get a job and get one yourself.

don't want to get shot? don't fucking steal. seems easy.

What if I happened to be walking down the street and got shot when this old guy started firing ?

 

[woolfe9999]

Lets say 2 men burst into someone's house and started taking his property. You are saying its not OK to shoot them?

Let's not trade in hypotheticals and instead discuss what the law actually is. The law, generally, is that you cannot use deadly force to protect property; you can only use it to prevent physical harm. However, there is an exception to that law when people have crossed the threshold of your domicile. And that answers your hypothetical. In this case, these men were not in his home. You might want the law to be different because you sympathize with the shooter here, but the law is what the law is.

And it has nothing to do with "liberals" and even less to do with illegal immigration. This is criminal jurisprudence that we imported from Britain back in colonial times. The law does not always protect the people we sympathize with most, because the law is a mechanical set of rules, not a vehicle to gratify our emotions or produce the most popular results.

Incidentally, I seriously doubt this man will serve much time here, and I also doubt that the thieves will not be prosecuted and, if appropriate, deported.

- wolf

 

[jackschmittusa]

Use of deadly force is severely restricted in every state I believe. Its use to prevent property theft is universally frowned upon, and it has been that way for some time. It is nothing new brought on by Obama or any "looney libruls".

The fact that the perps were illegal aliens has nothing to do with the charges filed against the old man. Why they were not charged immediately is beyond me, but even that is a local issue.

That said, I have always felt some ambivalence about how such things are handled. Many States have their laws set up so that prosecutors can intentionally overcharge for for a crime (since under such systems, you can be found guilty of "lessor, included offenses") to stack the deck and make a plea bargain seem the lesser of 2 evils for the accused, compared to going to trial and facing huge penalties.

While I wish people had more legal options to defend themselves against property crime, I'm old enough to know of people making stupid mistakes in using deadly force. And it's hard to properly compensate the dead for an "oops!".

I have thought for a long time that the improper use of deadly force in the case of property theft should be its own class of crime. Such a class would have the State admit up front that the act was "hot blooded", the result of provocation. Ordinary charges such as murder, attempted murder, etc. not only ignore this, but imply malice and put an additional burden of proof on the defendant to prove a state of mind. Possible penalties should reflect that there was some level of "mitigating circumstances" inherent in the act.

I hope the old man gets a very sympathetic jury and the prosecutor is not over-zealous.

 

[StageLeft]

Use of deadly force is severely restricted in every state I believe. Its use to prevent property theft is universally frowned upon, and it has been that way for some time. It is nothing new brought on by Obama or any "looney libruls".

The fact that the perps were illegal aliens has nothing to do with the charges filed against the old man. Why they were not charged immediately is beyond me, but even that is a local issue.

That said, I have always felt some ambivalence about how such things are handled. Many States have their laws set up so that prosecutors can intentionally overcharge for for a crime (since under such systems, you can be found guilty of "lessor, included offenses") to stack the deck and make a plea bargain seem the lesser of 2 evils for the accused, compared to going to trial and facing huge penalties.

While I wish people had more legal options to defend themselves against property crime, I'm old enough to know of people making stupid mistakes in using deadly force. And it's hard to properly compensate the dead for an "oops!".

I have thought for a long time that the improper use of deadly force in the case of property theft should be its own class of crime. Such a class would have the State admit up front that the act was "hot blooded", the result of provocation. Ordinary charges such as murder, attempted murder, etc. not only ignore this, but imply malice and put an additional burden of proof on the defendant to prove a state of mind. Possible penalties should reflect that there was some level of "mitigating circumstances" inherent in the act.

I hope the old man gets a very sympathetic jury and the prosecutor is not over-zealous.

win post

 

[waggy]

What if I happened to be walking down the street and got shot when this old guy started firing ?

and what if a chicken flew out the sky and stopped the bullets? what then huh?

 

[dahunan]

Since when does the theft of a piece of steel necessitate trying to kill someone?

If either thief admits this
Wallace did not want to talk on camera, but when we asked him if the two men threatened him he said, "They almost ran me over."

^^ then the old man can get probation or something

If someone steals a piece of steel from you then your life is not in danger. You do not have the right to put a bullet in their brain. EVER!

 

[feralkid]

and what if a chicken flew out the sky and stopped the bullets? what then huh?

Uh..............

Oh Never mind.

 

[Ronstang]

Since when does the theft of a piece of steel necessitate trying to kill someone?

If either thief admits this
Wallace did not want to talk on camera, but when we asked him if the two men threatened him he said, "They almost ran me over."

^^ then the old man can get probation or something

If someone steals a piece of steel from you then your life is not in danger. You do not have the right to put a bullet in their brain. EVER!

Hey, I live in Texas. I have a trailer on the back part of the property. Do you want to come and take it? In Texas not only do you NOT have the right to come on my property and take my trailer, or any of the pieces of steel and aluminum stacked next to the container nearby, but I DO have the right to put a bullet in your brain if you try. I would too if I was there at the time.

 

[dahunan]

There is one thing I would like to add

I think something can be done to look at these incidents as generational differences... Maybe 50 years ago his

phone didn't work
cops rode horses
pieces of steel were connected directly to your lifeblood etc

anyhow.. there are differences in how things were done and I bet his brain was wired from cultural norms that are at least 50 years old...

As much as a piece of me lusts for revenge etc... I must restrain myself and see reality ...Break into someones home to steal and they can shoot you to protect themselves... Steal from the grass or outside etc... just report it

 

[dahunan]

Hey, I live in Texas. I have a trailer on the back part of the property. Do you want to come and take it? In Texas not only do you NOT have the right to come on my property and take my trailer, or any of the pieces of steel and aluminum stacked next to the container nearby, but I DO have the right to put a bullet in your brain if you try. I would too if I was there at the time.

I am so proud of you... I really am.. you should feel like a bigger man than most all other men now..

/golfclap

 

[waggy]

Uh..............

Oh Never mind.

"whats if's" are fucking useless and contribute nothing to the argument.

if he kills a innocent? same t hing that if a police officer does. they should get involuntary manslaughter and go to jail. if you are going to fire know what the fuck you are firing at and behind it.