1911Forum banner

Well this was a bunch of bad ideas rolled into one

16K views 215 replies 61 participants last post by  BHPower 
#1 ·
#138 ·
It seems that most people on here think it's better to not react to a crime and just let it go he's only stealing but what happens when he gets away with it cause no one had the balls to teach breaking the law is breaking the law and then he thinks I can get away with anything cause no one will do anything so he gets a gun and decided to rob a bank or your house. He doesn't want a witness so he shoots people. If you want to play the what if game play it all the way. Just let it go. Then ask the survivors of 9/11 and what they think about that attitude

Sent from my QMV7B using Tapatalk
 
#146 ·
I'm fine if they don't charge this guy. But dude... using a firearm to suppress a nonviolent robbery is just plain unnecessary. When I carry the only thing that is worth unholstering for would be to stop a murder, rape, armed robbery in progress (not afterward as the suspect egress), terrorist attack or other deadly situations. Some clothes? Why insert yourself in that? Sure it could be interpreted that the shooter was in a self defence situation but he placed himself there voluntarily an unnecessarily. A cell phone picture would have been a smarter thing to shoot.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
#147 ·
I would even be cautious using deadly force to stop a rape. In some places you might end up charged with a crime.
A man in Texas stopped a rape of his 5 year old daughter and unintentionally killed the pervert and it had to go to a grand jury to decide if he would be charged or not, and that was in Texas. Good luck in libtard areas.
 
#148 ·
Every deadly force incident goes to a grand jury in Texas, it's just the way things work. If it was referred to the grand jury, but without charges, then there's a good chance the DA didn't think he either didn't do anything worth pursuing or the DA figured he couldn't get a conviction on it anyway.
 
#150 ·
#153 ·
Yeah, but it's not their fault -- they're either Yankees or Yankee-sympathizers. We should pity the unfortunate circumstances of their births.

Bless their hearts...

:)
 
#152 ·
100% agree with those who say he shouldn’t have engaged. I wouldn’t have. I would have stayed in the yellow while taking the license plate down, maybe snapped some pictures of the perps, and reported it… if that. His decision to stand behind the car was ridiculous. If he assumed these people were dangerous enough to warrant pulling out his gun, then wouldn't it stand to reason that they would be willing to run him over?

Oh, and shooting at the tires was indeed dangerous and pointless. The last shot when the car was a good 30 yards away... what was he trying to hit? The tire? He's a more confident shot than me if he tries to hit a moving tire at 30 yards or so... shooting in the direction of a mall full of people.

I understand supporting a concerned citizen who wanted to do what was right, especially a concerned citizen who served 10 years honorably as a Marine. I think that counts for something, and I'm glad the cops didn't put him in handcuffs or arrest him. But that shouldn't cloud our assessment of his actions. His actions were stupid. Sure, his actions were legal. Dipping your balls in a vat of hydrofluoric acid is legal, too.

But all that said… if I had been standing behind the car (and that is purely hypothetical… because I would not have been standing behind the car like an idiot), the second she backed the car into me, she would have gotten a bullet through her skull.

If the cops find her, I hope she gets charged with attempted murder.

Oh, and finally… I think maybe I’ll move to Montana. :)
 
#157 ·
So for those are applauding this action, a simple question:

Do you believe that any disinterested third party should have the right to use violence to protect the property of another, and/or summarily execute a thief if they wish?
 
#160 ·
My question wasn't about what is "legal" or not, but whqt you believe to be "right"....

If you observe someone walking out of walmart with a stolen snickers bar, is it morally or ethiclly "right", proper or correct to shoot them on the spot...? Does the value of the property matter? What about the age, gender, or appearance of the thief?
 
#163 ·
If you observe someone walking out of walmart with a stolen snickers bar, is it morally or ethiclly "right", proper or correct to shoot them on the spot...?
justification for killing someone over petty theft ..... wow
Did you see the video? Nobody was shot on the spot. Nobody was killed over petty theft.

This sounds just like the libtards exaggerating what really happened so they can say it was bad. Why not stick to the facts here? No exaggeration, no drama, no artificial coloring.
 
#162 ·
I can't believe some of the stuff I just read on this thread ....

justification for killing someone over petty theft ..... wow

justification for firing shots in a public area in the direction of a mall exit over petty theft .... wow


FYI/ Horse thieves: the justification for putting said thieves to death was that theft of ones horse during this time(many years ago) in history was akin to a death sentence in parts of the area(s) called the west.

threatening the lives of people over the theft of slacks ....

real nice, Jesus is proud
 
#198 ·
Jesus flipped over tables and chased and beat people with a whip. Just sayin'
 
#172 ·
Wow. This discussion got awfully dramatic real fast...executions, killing people over candy bars, bullets bouncing all over crowded mall parking lots...

I will just chime in with a quick observation about bullets ricocheting off of tires. We used to shoot at tires which had targets mounted inside the "hole", rolling them off of tank dams and shooting the moving target as "running game" practice.

We shot them with handguns, rifles, and even double rifles in dangerous game calibers. At least hundreds of times, probably more. I have been hit with bounce-back bullets on at least a half-dozen occasions over the years. Even with the Nitro Express cartridges, the ricochet never tore my clothes or broke the skin. Don't even remember a bruise, but wouldn't swear there wasn't one. Of course we wore eye protection, but the danger wasn't worth quitting the practice over.

Guys, it's certainly none of my business (and I'm not trying to moderate, either), and I don't want any part of this argument going on here, but at the end of this discussion nobody involved is going to look too good. It's getting ridiculous. Think about starting this one over in a new thread, maybe.
 
#174 ·
I will just chime in with a quick observation about bullets ricocheting off of tires. We used to shoot at tires which had targets mounted inside the "hole", rolling them off of tank dams and shooting the moving target as "running game" practice.

We shot them with handguns, rifles, and even double rifles in dangerous game calibers. At least hundreds of times, probably more. I have been hit with bounce-back bullets on at least a half-dozen occasions over the years. Even with the Nitro Express cartridges, the ricochet never tore my clothes or broke the skin. Don't even remember a bruise, but wouldn't swear there wasn't one. Of course we wore eye protection, but the danger wasn't worth quitting the practice over.
Yes, I have experienced bullets bouncing off tires when they are not mounted and have no air pressure in them. The bullets do come back sometimes but pretty slowly like you said. The unmounted tires kind of act like little trampolines. But it is different when the tire has air pressure in it, like on a real vehicle. The filled tire doesn't "give" like an empty tire so the bullet penetrates. Here is a video of even a 22lr going through both sidewalls of a tire with air pressure in it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7tSOuqrWEk
 
#173 ·
I respectfully suggest that the moderator remove this post in its entirety. Not one of us was involved and it's universally understood that none of us would have done what this guy did. But if some want to logically try to defend the guy that's their right.

Ad hominem attacks in a group of gun aficionados worries me more than what one irresponsible user did in a parking lot.
 
#175 ·
I respectfully suggest that the moderator remove this post in its entirety. Not one of us was involved and it's universally understood that none of us would have done what this guy did. But if some want to logically try to defend the guy that's their right.

Ad hominem attacks in a group of gun aficionados worries me more than what one irresponsible user did in a parking lot.
I wasn't there. None of us were. Only he was. He was within state law and still has not been charged with anything. So I'll politely disagree with your bolded.

And if you notice I was the one who updated the 'man shoots diaper thief' with the link to charges being filed. Would I have interjected myself into either situation? Most LIKELY not. I have a family, young kids depending on me to continue to provide for them. So I'll probably pass.
But I don't like trying to draw a line or level of how much thievery is acceptable and how much is not. A snickers bar or a million dollar diamond, are both not the same act of stealing? People get shot and killed these days over things of zero value. I pity not thieves and wish more people would punish them severely. Maybe then they'd stop stealing what's not theirs?
 
#178 ·
I think the shots fired were in response to the attempted assault with a motor vehicle resulting in him fearing for his life. His answer to the petty theft was to try to block their vehicle from moving. Can't say I agree with his methods but I do think he was within his rights.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#183 ·
Why do you keep bringing up a candy bar? Nobody stole a candy bar. Are you trying to minimize the theft? A pile of clothes today can have quite a bit of value, easily the value of some handguns.

That is twisting words to use "execute" or "kill" to exaggerate the action and it is also twisting words to use "candy bar" to minimize the crime.

What the hell is wrong with just the truth?
 
#186 ·
Why do you keep bringing up a candy bar? Nobody stole a candy bar. Are you trying to minimize the theft? A pile of clothes today can have quite a bit of value, easily the value of some handguns.?
I'm not minimizing theft.
but stealing cloths doesn't rise to the level of justifiable homicide either..to me
my Members Only jacket or Poly Leisure suit can be replaced pretty easy.
a life can't

That is twisting words to use "execute" or "kill" to exaggerate the action and it is also twisting words to use "candy bar" to minimize the crime.
you can perceive that if you want.
But we are talking committing to an act of homicide, right?
The question as proposed is, what level of theft makes it justifiable homicide to you?

Candy bar ?
gas syphoned out of your car?
Designer clothes (at Walmart?):p
Your $1500 mountain bike?
Your $12K white Hayabusa ?


where is the level for you?


..L.T.A.
 
#189 ·
what "drama" ?
after a few pages on a particular subject, most everything has been said two or three times .
so they often spin off to related subjects

It's not "drama" to call the use of lethal force "homicide" or attempted homicide
You shoot a person and they die, that IS homicide by definition
Lethal force is called "lethal" for a reason..because the use of lethal force may very well result in a homicide

so back to the spin off question.
I'll "sanitize" the wording if it makes you feel better

what level of monetary value do you consider the use of lethal force justifiable?
a few have answered that ANY level of monetary value justifies it to "them"

do you want to share your position on that specific question?

..L.T.A.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top