Shoot to kill

[PegLeg45]

Weren't horse thieves hung?

Probably not very many......most were just telling tall tales.   

[kmitch200]

I don't think anyone here has said anything about taking actions outside the law, in response to theft or burglary. In Arizona you are NOT allowed to use deadly force to protect personal property. That in itself doesn't mean one should sit idly by and allow one's property to be stolen.

Remember the title of this thread?  It's "Shoot to kill".....over property theft.

The last time I caught someone stealing from me, one thief had their head rammed into a wooden fence with a tackle that would have made Dick Butkus proud. The other was knocked on his azz sporting a cheek that was puffing up to twice its normal size.
(I missed his nose - bad punch)  Swollen Face helped Fence Greeter hobble down the street that night while I followed looking through optics to know where they came from.
My job at the time was hauling kegs of beer around by hand and they didn't stand a chance.

Those actions put *me* in the role of the aggressor due to rage. Even though I was the one getting ripped off.
They ran, I ran after...they should have run faster.
Had one of them been armed and shot or stabbed me for knocking their heads loose, would I be better off? What if I had killed one of them, would I be better off then?
Years and 8 bone/joint surgeries later, what options do I have now? I can yell, threaten (still legal here) and call 911.

[billt]

Remember the title of this thread?  It's "Shoot to kill".....over property theft.

Correct. But it doesn't mean to go about it void of any and all legal common sense. If you live in Texas where lethal force is allowed to protect personal property, then yes, fire at will. As they say on the "Legal Zoom" commercial, "You've got the law on your side".

For everyone else, you can and should use armed confrontation to stop the theft. If the thief chooses to escalate the confrontation, you're then prepared and legal to go to guns. It doesn't take a Harvard law professor to figure this out. Why would anyone in their right mind confront a thief in the process of stealing, unarmed? If the thief lives or dies, then depends on what little brains he has, and is willing to use.

[MikeBjerum]

some asshat just stole my car out of my driveway.  I hate thieves more than anything else.

Billt,

This is the opening comment by TAB after he titled this thread Shoot to kill.  No other qualification other than the impression that this car thief should be shot dead.  That is the premise I respond to, and I understand kmitch200 to be on a similar page (he can correct me if I am off base).

TAB has shown himself to be a hot head who spews this type of threat, and that is what I was warning him about when others began attacking me.  I see nothing in his description of the crime that rises to the level of great bodily harm or loss of life, and those are two major items in both legal and moral decisions to use deadly force.

[Timothy]

TAB has shown himself to be a hot head who spews this type of threat, and that is what I was warning him about when others began attacking me.  I see nothing in his description of the crime that rises to the level of great bodily harm or loss of life, and those are two major items in both legal and moral decisions to use deadly force.

Basically the point I was making when I said he had other issues besides the car.

I became a bit perturbed when we were accused of being "progressive, liberal, tolerant pussies that live in a cattle car"!

Makes me wonder why I keep hanging around this place.....seems we've lost some viewership in the last years....I wonder why?

I don't have any desire to kill someone who doesn't deserve to die, period. 

Stealing my property, since I don't own shit, don't care much about the shit I do own, put life on a level above all of that shit and my ability to stop someone bent on stealing my shit a moot point!  Like others, I'm a middle aged, out of shape, crippled asshat who couldn't stop a lazy snail on Quaaludes!

It's a sad day that this thread has dominated this forum lately, sad indeed...

L8tr...out!

[Sponsor]

[billt]

Talk is cheap. I doubt there is anyone on this forum who would kill anyone without cause or need. The general misconception that was given at the start in this thread is two fold. One, that someone would actually kill for no good reason, risking their own freedom as a direct result. And the other, that others would simply let anyone walk off with their property. I doubt either is accurate.

I can't speak for anyone else. What I would do is confront with a weapon, in an effort to stop the theft, and hold the individual for arrest by the police. If, in that confrontation, I was forced to defend my life because the thief put mine in direct danger, so be it. I have no problem with that.

If I did live in Texas, I suppose I could be convinced to shoot with a little less restraint. That's where I stand. What others would do in similar situations, I can't and won't answer for. For what it's worth I don't think we've lost viewership because of the content of threads such as this. It's normal for changeover as forums go on. Most of us have been here a long time. Longer than most. Others have come and gone in that time period. Such is life on the Internet.

[tombogan03884]

It isn't about what's legal, or anger issues, or a desire to kill some one. It is about what's right, and preventive measures.
As some one earlier pointed out, they used to hang horse thieves. They also used to hang thieves.
Back then you didn't need to lock your doors.
In this "kinder gentler" world not only do you need to lock your doors even when you are home, you can't even let your kid play in the yard with out constant supervision.
That is the result of not shooting thieves over "stuff".

[Timothy]

Yea, Tom...  I get all that but in 1860-1870 there were 32 million people in this country, 1900 about 75 mil.

Stealing a horse or important other belongings may have been a death sentence for farmers, ranchers, etc. in the southwest and other parts of the country.  They depended on these animals and other important goods for their livelihood as well as their life.  Hell, a Wyoming rancher in mid winter without an axe was a death sentence!

Today, we have 330 million people (give or take a few million illegals) in this country and some of them ain't so nice.  Break into my house, garage and confront me with the means to defend myself and someone's going home in a bag..

Steal my car from my driveway...I can still get to work cuz I gots two of 'em....

TAB could lose his livelihood without losing his life.  Big difference between 1870 and 2015...

[tombogan03884]

  Big difference between 1870 and 2015...

Yes, being a thieving POS is now acceptable .
And there are political advantages to crying victim.
In the early 1900's people took responsibility for themselves, now a days you can depend on La Raza, Al Sharpton, and Elizabeth Warren to look out for you.

[billt]

Yes, being a thieving POS is now acceptable .
And there are political advantages to crying victim.

  You can dump all of this under the heading of political correctness.