Lethal force to defend property? Watch

FriendlyPenguin
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
Edit: Sorry, wrong thread
0
reply
oldercon1953
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
You don't have the right to choke somebody but the owner should have the right to use the necessary force to restrain someone until police arrive.

I found the bit about how black women shoplifters should be respected a little funny
4
reply
Eunomia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
(Original post by oldercon1953)
You don't have the right to choke somebody but the owner should have the right to use the necessary force to restrain someone until police arrive.

I found the bit about how black women shoplifters should be respected a little funny
Where is the evidence that she shoplifted?
0
reply
oldercon1953
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
(Original post by WBZ144)
Where is the evidence that she shoplifted?
Your right. As long as she was still in the store there is no evidence of shoplifting. The suspect only has to say that her intention was to pay for the item. In Calif. if a suspect has left the store and caught with stolen goods and has no money on them they can be charged with commercial burglary since they had no money to pay for the items which means they entered the store with the intention of stealing the items.

I could have left the shoplifter out of the sentence and I still would have found it funny. Although the women who schooled the shop owner on cherishing black women didn't know if she had stolen anything or not so I assumed she was including women who shoplift in her admonition.
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
Workers should be able to use physical force to stop employers from stealing the produce of their labour.
0
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
(Original post by WBZ144)
Where is the evidence that she shoplifted?
The security alarm went off, generally a pretty good indication that something may not have been paid for.
0
reply
oldercon1953
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Workers should be able to use physical force to stop employers from stealing the produce of their labour.
In the business I'm visualizing, the owner/boss, bought the initial machinery with his own money, rented sufficient property and built it to suit his needs. sat everything up, getting the business ready to open, advertising and hiring initial crew who, statistically, are going to embezzel cash, steal whatever product he's making and in general not give a ****. On what world do the workers own the product of their labor? Unless they own the business, of course. There's a reason why worker owned business aren't flourishing. Owning the means of production is a pain in the ass.
0
reply
Eunomia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
(Original post by Willy Pete)
The security alarm went off, generally a pretty good indication that something may not have been paid for.
That happens all the time. Happened to me and other shoppers in quite a few places, all we do is stop and offer to let the shop employees check our bags, as this lady did (they often decline).

All of the video evidence points towards him being the aggressor. There is no evidence that she stole anything or that she hit him. However, there is evidence that he attacked and choked her.
0
reply
Eunomia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
(Original post by oldercon1953)
Your right. As long as she was still in the store there is no evidence of shoplifting. The suspect only has to say that her intention was to pay for the item. In Calif. if a suspect has left the store and caught with stolen goods and has no money on them they can be charged with commercial burglary since they had no money to pay for the items which means they entered the store with the intention of stealing the items.

I could have left the shoplifter out of the sentence and I still would have found it funny. Although the women who schooled the shop owner on cherishing black women didn't know if she had stolen anything or not so I assumed she was including women who shoplift in her admonition.
Oh wow, a woman was brutally attacked without any evidence of wrong-doing, yet your main gripe is that the attacker was told to respect Black women? That's telling :rolleyes:
0
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
Regardless of the (property) crime, assault is not justified. There would appear to be a case to answer.
0
reply
cbreef
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
Some seem to think it's justified to kill an attacker if they step foot on your property (looking at you America). It's ridiculous, unless they pose a credible threat to your safety, you can't justify lethal force.
0
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
(Original post by WBZ144)
That happens all the time. Happened to me and other shoppers in quite a few plces, all we do is stop and offer to let the shop employees check our bags, as this lady did (they often decline).

All of the video evidence points towards him being the aggressor. There is no evidence that she stole anything or that she hit him. However, there is evidence that he attacked and choked her.
Did you watch the video?

They found an item in her bag which she hadn't paid for and then she became aggressive once she was caught.

Or do you think the store owner just randomly attacks potential customers?
0
reply
Eunomia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
(Original post by Willy Pete)
Did you watch the video?

They found an item in her bag which she hadn't paid for and then she became aggressive once she was caught.

Or do you think the store owner just randomly attacks potential customers?
Yes, because video evidence suggests that he did.

That did not happen, unless you were watching a different video. Do you have the link?
0
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
(Original post by WBZ144)
Yes, because video evidence suggests that he did.

That did not happen, unless you were watching a different video. Do you have the link?
You will hear at 0:41 the question "Did she pay for it?" and then a second later she can be seen trying to leave the shop. That would leads me to believe that an item was found which supports the owner's account of the event.

0
reply
Eunomia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
(Original post by Willy Pete)
You will hear at 0:41 the question "Did she pay for it?" and then a second later she can be seen trying to leave the shop. That would leads me to believe that an item was found which supports the owner's account of the event.

"Did she pay for it" could well be a response to an unproven accusation. That's your evidence? Wow.

Unless the footage actually showed the eyelashes being taken from her bag or her stealing the eyelashes, there is no evidence that she did.
0
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by WBZ144)
"Did she pay for it" could well be a response to an unproven accusation. That's your evidence? Wow.

Unless the footage actually showed the eyelashes being taken from her bag or her stealing the eyelashes, there is no evidence that she did.
That and the account from the store owner. The evidence is that she was seen doing it.

Do you honestly believe that if something didn't happen on video then there is no evidence?
0
reply
Eunomia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 years ago
#17
(Original post by Willy Pete)
That and the account from the store owner. The evidence is that she was seen doing it.

Do you honestly believe that if something didn't happen on video then there is no evidence?
I believe in innocent until proven guilty. A video with the attacker saying "did she pay for it"? And his word that she did steal would not hold up in court, fortunately.
0
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
(Original post by WBZ144)
I believe in innocent until proven guilty. A video with the attacker saying "did she pay for it"? And his word that she did steal would not hold up in court, fortunately.
The attacker didn't say it, the other person said it. The same one that can be heard calling the police while the fighting occurs.

It is a good thing he has CCTV and 2 other witnesses then.

What is your experience of the US legal system in Illinois with regards to how they view evidence? Because you seem pretty sure of yourself.
0
reply
Eunomia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
(Original post by Willy Pete)
The attacker didn't say it, the other person said it. The same one that can be heard calling the police while the fighting occurs.

It is a good thing he has CCTV and 2 other witnesses then.

What is your experience of the US legal system in Illinois with regards to how they view evidence? Because you seem pretty sure of yourself.
The shop owner is the one who attacked her. So if the shop owner would say that she stole from him. Like I said, the question of "did she pay for it?" could be a mere response to a false accusation. Your evidence is very weak.

Are you suggesting that the standard of proof does not require that the offence had been committed "beyond reasonable doubt"?
0
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
(Original post by WBZ144)
The shop owner is the one who attacked her. So if the shop owner would say that she stole from him. Like I said, the question of "did she pay for it?" could be a mere response to a false accusation. Your evidence is very weak.

Are you suggesting that the standard of proof does not require that the offence had been committed "beyond reasonable doubt"?
Do you think the shop owner is racist?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (86)
68.8%
No I haven't decided yet (23)
18.4%
Yes but I might change my mind (16)
12.8%

Watched Threads

View All