Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Suspect Shot After Fleeing Store

If the kid had been thinking he would have shot the chainsaw...

Ah, but what you describe is armed robbery, not simple theft.

Armed robbery can normally be met with force, even deadly force. Simple theft cannot. Sadly.

I think thieves ought to be shot, but I'm kind of tired of seeing people get ripped off. Sadly, it's NOT legal to shoot a thief. An armed robber? Oh yeah, defend yourself!

Guy

No doubt.

I don't see any legal or moral issues with that scenario....but then I thought Zimmerman was clearly self defense too, and look at all the crap he had to deal with.

In my opinion, the thief was "armed" with a chainsaw after he took it. Slide off that plastic bar sleeve and it's not something I'd want to be hit with, running or not.

Otherwise, the thief had it coming and it's too bad those two shots didn't ricochet around the interior of that car and kill all three of those criminals.

You won't get many arguments here, zapper. Even the bleeding hearts would seem to have trouble arguing with you if they were honest, not just trolls.

Can we get the old sane Steve back?

This one is disturbing.

Mike

Steve,

You are preaching the truth again. No question your scenario is a clear "SHOOT".

Hell, I always felt that even unarmed thieves should get a hand cut off if convicted. No doubt the world would be a better place

Dogzappper, I owned a Meat Packing plant in CA, and was robbed at gunpoint in the plant. They forced all the employ's into one of the coolers, and locked the door.

Thankfully, we kept ax's in each of the coolers for lock in purposes. so got out in short order. This was a strictly wholesale business and we only sold to restaurants & hotels, no walk-in's. The doors were locked at all times after the robbery, and all deliveries had to ring a buzzer and be video identified before entry.

Had I kept a weapon in the plant, I certainly would have used it!!!!!!!!!!

That being said, the next day I brought in a Rem 870 Police special, with a Chote tube fully loaded. It stayed in the office until I sold the business in 2006.

Never had a problem after the robbery.

Respects,
Richard

Steve, hopefully you are intelligent enough to realize that you are not shooting him because he wants your stuff but because he has a deadly weapon pointed at you and you are in fear of your life.
That's the way it is.

Armed robbery is not shoplifting.
Shooting people for attempting to take property is MORE morally wrong than stealing.
Anyone who thinks its their right to take someone's life over property of any sort is lower than the thief.

So what are we supposed to do when people start carrying off everything we own and have worked hard for, huddle in the corner, wait and hope the police can catch them and get our stuff back?


Around here with the rise in the Meth epidemic robbery, assault and the like have skyrocketed.

Between being so short handed with personnel and the criminal coddling lawyers and politicians law enforcement is really behind the 8 ball.

The only thing keeping the criminals somewhat in check is that they know there is a good chance they will be shot if they get caught by the home/business owners.

I guess commit murder and go to prison so you don't have any property.
Because if you used deadly force against a shoplifter that's shall be your fate.
We are a nation of laws. You want to return to the fkin stone age, move to Africa.

Or better yet devolve into a bunch of simpering idiots unwilling to do anything but wait for the government to save them.

Always better to be a sheeple than a people isn't it?

I'm not going to resort to deadly force in a situation that doesn't require deadly force.
Now if 3 individuals try to take something from me its a disparity of force issue and deadly force is allowed.
You seem to want to love in a world of absolute black and white.
Anyone not willing to kill a person for shoplifting is a coward?
Well that's what I am I guess.
I've HAD to use appropriate force before. I didn't like it and it was absolutely 100% justified.
You commandos who think that shooting someone makes you a man can have it. It is unpleasant business even when there's not any other choice in the world.
But, I doubt that can be grasped.
Your close enough to Spartanburg, let me know what county your in and I'll swing by and put some money on your canteen account at the prison when you dust off someone for stealing a red bull at the gas station...

You seem to think you are the only one that has had to use force before and in assuming that I have not or many of the others posting on this thread have not you are badly mistaken.

The use of force is a nasty, unpalatable business but sometimes necessary.

You also seem to want to marginalize the deterrent effect just the possibility of getting shot may have on the criminal element.

Shooting someone for stealing you possessions is not illegal in Texas. Property that one has worked, sweated and bled for should be protected. People act as if ones property is meaningless.

Deadly force generally is authorized in self-defense by a person who has a reasonable belief that is it necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury. Armed robbery is generally considered a serious crime where there is a high risk of death or great bodily injury. A victim who reasonably believes he is facing an armed, deadly threat has a right to defend himself using deadly force whether the reasonable belief is based upon seeing a shotgun pointed at his chest or a hand in a pocket with the index finger poking through the cloth, commonly referred to as an implied weapon.

“Upgrading” facts after the event to obtain some perceived advantage in explaining the deal is wrong and illegal regardless of the justifiability of the shooting. It doesn’t matter if the shooter replaces the shotgun with an RPG or the implied weapon with a real one. It also makes the person look like he had no confidence in his position, i.e., that he has guilty knowledge, and it makes him a liar. Once credibility is gone, how does one decipher what parts of the story are true and which are not, such as the original justification.

By the way, I see no reason why race had to get interjected into this. What relevance does it have? Would it have mattered in a self-defense analysis if a purple person had been pointing the shotgun?

Yep- God bless Texas. I felt if anyone who had worked at Enron had killed the thieving bastards that stole their retirement I would no bill them.

Anyone prefer having this rule of law? Famous English case.
Tony Martin story

I find his treatment and vilifying a hell of a lot less palatable than the shooting of the 'victims'.

The law is not the same in all states. Google Joe Horn. Hasbeen

Problem is that idiots have been coddled for too long. It is far too safe to be an idiot these days.

I lost literally all of our store's stock in one smash-and-grab. A couple of ILLEGAL ALIENS drove through our front window with a stolen car. Then, they took everything they could grab in the next five minutes.

The single Milwaukie Police Department patrol car had been called away on a false alarm, so the thieves had a little extra time.

When the MPD showed up, the thieves were long gone.

The loss was a little over $500,000. At that time, I had literally everything I owned wrapped up in stock, in preparation for Christmas. The insurance company weenied out and paid a pittance; maybe three grand.

One of the MPD officers remembered a license plate number of one of the very few cars that rolled through town that night. Two days later, they stopped the car; there were three ILLEGAL ALIENS on board and they had about fifty bucks with of our jewelry with them (we scratch marked gold items). They said they bought the rings from a friend.

The insane thing is that the car was still stolen and MPD didn't bust them with a stolen vehicle beef; oh hell no, just let them drive off scott-free.

The Clackamas County Grand Jury did not go after them because they skipped town. Hey, illegal is illegal.

Trust me, after your life savings goes down the drain a few times, feeding the habits of drug junkies and illegals, you get a bit hardened. It literally becomes a case of "me against them."

Happily, Karen and I had about seven consecutive years of small losses and we were able to retire from our store. Being able to walk away from literally fighting to keep the store open and to keep our life savings secure was wonderful.

I'm thinking that folks who work for others do not know what this is about. And folks who own stores ... well, the do.

By the way, I learned a lot about my suppliers after the half-mil loss. Some would not sell me anything because my business was literally gone and I could not tell them when I could pay. Others were absolutely golden (pun intended).

Those that helped us out when we needed help got our business from that day forward. And those that didn't ... I never gave them another dime of my biz.

Blessings,

Steve