What ever happened to shooting looters?

Withall the smash and grab robberies happening these days, whatever happened to shooting looters. I remember as a kid the news saying don’t loot the national guard is out patrolling after a disaster and will shoot looters at least to my thinking, these ppl doing smash and grab robbing fall into that category and need to be shot. I know some snowflake out there will say something along the lines of “a person’s life is more important than than things”. My reply is- I’m not the one lowering the value of my life to things. Why don’t all these broken-hearted liberals think about the effects this is having on ppl that these smash and grab robberies hurt? Prices go up, robbers feel more emboldened and the general safety of the public goes down.

I wish law makers would bring back the death penalty for the most heinous crimes and not let the criminal sit on death row until he dies of natural causes. Tens years should be plenty of time for appeals to occur and then the penalty should e imposed.

Just a frustrated citizen opining.

34 Likes

Article on the news last night about stores hiring “Retail Theft” police forces. They found out, the let them leave with the stuff to protect the employees policies aren’t really working.

10 Likes

As long as looters are only taking property and not threatening anyone with violence, it is a clear violation of law to shoot them. If an employee, owner, or customer shoots a looter without any evidence of direct threat of violence to people, the shooter will be charged for criminal act, at least assault and possibly attempted murder or manslaughter. The messy part of this situation is when it is a mob rather than only one or a few people looting the store. If the defender reasonably interprets the mob actions as a personal deadly threat based on disparity of force and actions or statements from members of the mob, then the defender may well have a legitimate defense of justifiable use of force.
I recommend taking Andrew Branca’s Law of Self Defense course and his supplemental Defense of Property course.

14 Likes

My great great uncle was in the National Guard at the time of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. He was indeed told to shoot looters. So whatever happened to shooting looters, you ask? It’s the same principle that we must abide by in self defense; the response must be proportionate to the threat. It’s not a snowflake thing at all.

For me, as I’m sure for many others, the frustration comes not when there isn’t a lethal penalty for looting, but when there are zero penalties. Outrageous policies like San Francisco’s no prosecution for thefts under $900 cause citizens to feel there is no law enforcement acting on their behalf, and lead to people wanting to take the law into their own hands.

19 Likes

That was, obviously, before the Kent State shootings, 52 years ago tomorrow.

4 Likes

I feel you!
image

5 Likes

That’s what I’m saying: the laws need to change. They do it because the crooks know they can get away with it without any repercussions. Crooks are arrested and released on bond within hours. Start making them pay a heavier penalty.

Under current law, I’m not advocating for anybody to do anything except to be an advocate to get the laws changed.

2 Likes

Unfortunately in many of the areas where these events are occurring it is not a crime. You can steal up to $1000 with no consequence. Unfortunately it has now become you can steal up to $1000 per person in the group with no consequence. Don’t worry, economics will prevail. Stores will close doors, move out of the area. Residents of those areas, hopefully after learning a lesson will move out to areas that they can actually shop in. I hold on to this since the alternative a total breakdown of civilized society is too frightening to imagine.

1 Like

Who said anything about a mob? Im talking about what you see on the nightly news. 10-15 ppl or less to grab everything they can hold, usually the most expensive stuff because they’ve cased the place beforehand and run out. We’re already seeing stores close because they can’t afford to stay in business because of theft.

When are we the law abiding ppl going to say enough? It takes hours if not days for the police to show up. Don’t take the law into your own hands because you could kill them. What about the slow death of the employees families because the bread earner can’t get as good a job,and has to work two jobs leaving his family unprotected

As a kid we used an outhouse and bathed in warmed up creek water on a wood burning stove. I don’t want to return to those days. Law abiding citizens have rights too and it’s about time the government recognized it.

As the law stands, don’t shoot unless threatened. I agree but wish it would change.

5 Likes

The only problem with that is that once everything closes, the thugs will move to better hunting grounds.

6 Likes

Someone always has to take a rhetorical question and chastise you for it. :upside_down_face:

6 Likes

If we are all going to agree what is the point of having replies.:slightly_smiling_face: I think guns should be used for saving lives not material items. Could someone shoot someone else for trying to feed their family. My2¢

4 Likes

Look up “rhetorical”. :roll_eyes:

1 Like

Too late

2 Likes

Maybe the point of having replies is to build consensus to create a movement to start to have/get change to happen. Will that consensus here make it happen? Who knows….

1 Like

rhetorical [ ri-tawr-i-kuhl, ri-tor-i-kuhl ]
adjective

  1. used for, belonging to, or concerned with mere style or effect.
  2. marked by or tending to use exaggerated language or bombast.
  3. of, relating to, or concerned with rhetoric, or the effective use of language.
1 Like
  1. a question asked in order to create a dramatic effect or to make a point rather than to get an answer.
4 Likes

Unfortunately, like in Omaha NE, the taxpayers will be saddled with the financial burden of “rebuilding” those areas of town with NO change in the mental vacancy of the police, politicians, racist “pastors” and the criminals.

Just a side note: when Target decided to close one of their stores out of one of the worst areas- the city sued them to prevent the closing-- the city lost and the taxpayers had to cover the legal costs.

3 Likes

I was trying to be positive, however there is truly no upside to what is happening.

4 Likes

I said something about mobs because that situation may well be a case when no person in the mob has a deadly weapon, but the overwhelming disparity of force caused by the mob may well be seen as reasonably justifying using deadly force (a gun) for self defense.

2 Likes