Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by ncbullgator, Nov 9, 2013.
But you would be lying about having an open mind.
Oh, and give the rent-a-cops Wham-O slingshots.
Evidence be damned, huh?
They have pictures of their faces. Bringing these punks to justice shouldn't be that difficult. I imagine that you wouldn't mind having these kids blown away, LD. But it's not the way to go.
I read this board a ton more than I post. I don't take any of it very serious. What are we? IMO just a group of bored men (a few women, not shorting ya) sharing opinions. But damn man I'd really hope you wouldn't lie for the purpose of tilting a verdict. I mean c'mon, you don't find this to be a lil narcissistic?
If I was the owner of that business and this loss would be devastating I think firing off a few rounds might make a difference the next time-I would not shoot to kill but I would certainly shoot to send a message- as an owner I have to have the right to protect my business and my assets-now would I get arrested if I shot a few of these punks-probably-would I get convicted-only if the jury was full of chompy bleeding hearts
now would I really shoot an unarmed robber-only if I felt my life was threatened, but I would definitely shoot into the air to get their attention and try and make them think I would shoot them- but I do so enjoy how you libs think the level of crime these punks enter into is a lower level than a business owner trying to protect their livelihood
Shooting people should be last option not first. And your gun handling sounds pretty irresponsible. I was taught you pull a gun only if you plan to use it and you shoot to kill. I know I would take my chances with a group of idiots with arm fulls of shirts over some yahoo blasting warning shots all over the place.
Sent from my mind using ESP
Indeed. Hope it's not a fed up "white racist" that blows half of them away.
No, I would not. BUT, if they have so little regard for my teaching, then, while I would hate to have it happen, I would not blame the shooter for it. They would have deserved what happened for 1, committing a crime and 2, completely ignoring everything I taught them about the law and respect for others.
Apparently, you have little regard for the property of others. These "flash gangs" can completely ruin a mom and pop store and cause them to go bankrupt. That hurts that family even more than just the initial crime.
You seem to have the liberal mentality that it is society that has caused these idiots to commit this crime and we should not be allowed to defend our property against them with deadly force.
In another post, you stated (or someone did) that it is a wild west mentality. It is a shame that mentailty is not part of the laws governing this country anymore. There was a lot less crime back then and people were not afraid to defend themselves or their property with deadly force. It was perfectly acceptable to put a bullet between the eyes of an idiot who stole something from me back then. Adn, it should STILL be perfectly acceptable for me to do it now. It's just that the damn liberals "feel" that it is wrong to do so, and they care more about "feelings" than they do the rule of law.
Don't you know, these people (shoplifters) are victims. They can't be held responsible for these actions. . . . . (Chompy, River, etc. can fill in the rest)
As for the seemingly logical solutions for the store owners (posts, turnstiles, locking doors), my guess is fire code issues would prevent or severely hinder any attempts to control flow out of the building. Puts the shop owner in a bit of a pickle, don't ya think?
Shows you care more about your political views than you do about the evidence and justice. You would be the definition of an unsuitable juror.
And the community organizers wonder why no one will open stores in certain neighborhoods.
I could be wrong but video showed the perps trying to take the merchandise out of the entrance doors. Put the "flow constraints" at the points of access ... and have less restrictive constraints at exits ... the traffic flow through which can be similarly restricted by "cashier stations", service counters, cart corrals (if utilized), and cart barriers. Also, access and egress limiters can be built with "breakaway" features for an emergency situation and properly trained store personnel would know how to activate such.
All of these measures are for the safety of both customers and store personnel and generally not viewed as a negative for the shopper ... as most intelligent people understand the the issue of retail theft and the adverse consequences thereof.
I don't disagree. I just know, from experience, that fire codes can be a bitch. May be easier to just secure the racks to the floor in some way.
What a bizarre post. I'm not sure anyone here has claimed that thieves are not responsible for their actions. I know I never have.
The only time I've talked about victimization is criticizing conservatives' constant complaints here about unfair everything is to them.
It probably would. Earlier in the thread, someone suggested stationary racks versus mobile racks. But, I know it's useful to have "traffic flow controls" to deter "cart crashers" if your retail operation utilizes carts.
I think he's being facetious ..... that some attribute such abhorrent behavior by the "socially and economically disadvantaged American" to their environment and want to given them a relative pass as regards criminal prosecution and restitution.
Sorry for lumping you in with Chompy. My mistake.
I was and he/she is playing games. I seriously doubt river was that shocked by the response or that it was that "bizarre." Just trying to slam me. In fairness, probably deserved it for putting names (sans Chompy, he deserves everything he gets) in there.