2 robbers shot by customer, shakes community

reply to post by rcanem
"The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress," was written by Robert A. Heinlein. So was the novel that they corrupted into "Starship Troopers." Shall we go on, Time for the Stars, Door Into Summer, Glory Road, Fear No Evil, The Cat That Walked Thorough Walls, etc.
Must not forget the Sutherland mischief called "The Puppet Masters." The title was R.A.H. long before the first movie by same name.

reply to post by iLemming


What is it about poor starving people, making it all right to commit crimes? No one starves in America. Just look at the obesity epidemic. We have multiple organizations that are set up to help. Where else are my tax dollars going? EBT cards are provided as freely as advice. I realize that on the coasts people are not very charitable, but in the middle of the nation we provide for the needy. We have churches and nonprofit organizations that really lend a helping hand. We hold dances and lotteries to raise money, we even open our hearts, homes and wallets for those in true need. We do not wait for the government to dispense only pennies of every dollar I am taxed. There is no need to STEAL FOOD. GET OFF YOUR SOAP BOX. Oh, wait, you are on welfare aren't you? That's why you are so touchy.

reply to post by thenaturalist


Coming from someone who does not have a clue. You watch to many hollywood movies. Get real.

reply to post by searching411
A quick lesson in starvation. Look up images of famine, especially children. Sure sign of starvation is a distended, expanded belly. Consumption of fillers and limited value foods produces similar physical changes.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


@#%# YOU

You are the problem with society through and through.


That is all I have to say to you.

reply to post by IvanAstikov

Nobody deserves to be shot for merely threatening to use violence. If the thieves have fled without using violence, it's not up to random passers-by to up the ante to a possible shoot out in a public place. Had any of his shots missed and hit a bystander, there'd be less dancing around and whoops of joy.

Peter Parker syndrome.

"What if I had stopped them? What if I had done things differently?"

If you can live with that, there's a strong possibility you'd be among the first dead in a zombie apocalypse. If not by your devices, then by mine.

Asktheanimals
A real man would only fire back once he saw the bullets coming at him!!

Also a real man would have made sure all bullets hit him (to protect any bystanders)

opethPA
Didn't see this but if it is already posted please delete.


In reading this story it seems 2 people tried to rob a store and a concerned citizen took matters into his own hands, "As the two masked robbers fled Krick's store with money, cigarettes, and lottery tickets, they were confronted by the man, whom police describe only as a concerned citizen in his 40s with a military background and a license to carry a concealed weapon. He ordered the bandits to stop. They pulled guns. He shot and killed both."

On one hand I applaud this citizen and hold true to my stance of people are accountable for their actions. If the robbers never ripped off the store then they would not have been shot.

On the other hand I have to think what if the cops did the exact same thing..if they shot and killed the robbers..The ATS segment that refuses to blame or hold criminals accountable would be in an uproar about the shoot first\ask questions later approach of the police.

Both scenarios are the same to me and again ultimately come back to if they didnt want to get shot then don't take part in armed robbery.

Of course their is a family member with the typical ,"he was a good kid, he didn't deserve this , he should have shot them in in the leg" That shows to me how naive people are when they make statements like that.


Here is the story for anyone wanting to read more...2 Robbers Killed by Citizen

Let's not muddy the waters here, buddy, and pretend that police do not murder people for no reason, which we have obviously seen time and time again. You sound like anybody complaining about cops hurting innocents and non-dangerous offenders who have surrendered are a bunch of headless, dumb idiots. Typical of some people.

The article says the crim pulled first? Then the cops did what we are told there job is: to protect. Now if the crims simply tried to run away and the cops blew them away dead, then yes, it's time for us to bitch about it. But for now, the cops didn't step over the line here.

bigman88
Let's not muddy the waters here, buddy, and pretend that police do not murder people for no reason, which we have obviously seen time and time again. You sound like anybody complaining about cops hurting innocents and non-dangerous offenders who have surrendered are a bunch of headless, dumb idiots. Typical of some people.

The article says the crim pulled first? Then the cops did what we are told there job is: to protect. Now if the crims simply tried to run away and the cops blew them away dead, then yes, it's time for us to bitch about it. But for now, the cops didn't step over the line here.

Did you actually read the article because it really doesnt seem like you did since the a citizen did the shooting.

The difference is that Cops would have shot first without ordering the two robbers to stop. That's the difference. Cops kill without giving suspects a chance to react, give up or put down their weapons.

reply to post by gamesmaster63


You make it sound like there's a standard scenario in which gun owners are attacked, and therefore there can only be one invariable choice. Considering how often a firearm is referred to as a tool, it's amazing how many users are averse to using it with any precision. Firing at a lumbering cardboard cut-out without any limbs certainly isn't going to help gun users to prepare for real life situations, that's for sure.

opethPA

bigman88
Let's not muddy the waters here, buddy, and pretend that police do not murder people for no reason, which we have obviously seen time and time again. You sound like anybody complaining about cops hurting innocents and non-dangerous offenders who have surrendered are a bunch of headless, dumb idiots. Typical of some people.

The article says the crim pulled first? Then the cops did what we are told there job is: to protect. Now if the crims simply tried to run away and the cops blew them away dead, then yes, it's time for us to bitch about it. But for now, the cops didn't step over the line here.

Did you actually read the article because it really doesnt seem like you did since the a citizen did the shooting.

I meant cops in a general sense, and not within the context of this situation.

I got carried away when i responded to your shocking and callous generalization of people complaining about the police and their abuse of citizens are wrong. Sorry about that.

And the fact that you didn't bother responding to that aspect of my post, i guess this is a sentiment that you will retain.

But yeah, my bad.

bigman88
I got carried away when i responded to your shocking and callous generalization of people complaining about the police and their abuse of citizens are wrong. Sorry about that.

And the fact that you didn't bother responding to that aspect of my post, i guess this is a sentiment that you will retain.

But yeah, my bad.

Shocking and callous? LOL that is funny.

The police abuse people all the time.. Not all the police and not all the time but like every single walk of life..citizen, military, medicine, IT, insert some other field..their are a$$hats that abuse whatever power they have.

Notice no where did I defend the police in my post..what I said was, "The ATS segment that refuses to blame or hold criminals accountable would be in an uproar about the shoot first\ask questions later approach of the police. "

Their are multiple threads here asking why the police didn't shoot to disarm or injure vs just shooting to kill. So I asked would the same people asking that be asking the same thing because a citizen did it.

iLemming

opethPA
I saw someone earlier try and insinuate that if they were stealing food that might have been ok..
That's pretty much BS.

So... If a starving, homeless Vietnam vet that's been living under a bridge because the invidiously apathetic and financial inequity corrupted American society has failed him nicks a loaf of bread bread from a street vendor, he should be shot dead??

if he used a gun and pulled it on someone, what do you think?

thenaturalist
If you have the time to pull out a gun to shoot the bad guys, then you have enough time to aim a bit lower and shoot their legs or arm to disarm them. legs and thighs are as big of a target on someone as the chest or a head which is a smaller target which seems popular by stupid armed men.

Is that so hard, why shoot to kill, it takes no more time either way.

yeah, i know, easy as pie.

just shoot them in the hand.

opethPA

bigman88
I got carried away when i responded to your shocking and callous generalization of people complaining about the police and their abuse of citizens are wrong. Sorry about that.

And the fact that you didn't bother responding to that aspect of my post, i guess this is a sentiment that you will retain.

But yeah, my bad.

Shocking and callous? LOL that is funny.

The police abuse people all the time.. Not all the police and not all the time but like every single walk of life..citizen, military, medicine, IT, insert some other field..their are a$$hats that abuse whatever power they have.

Notice no where did I defend the police in my post..what I said was, "The ATS segment that refuses to blame or hold criminals accountable would be in an uproar about the shoot first\ask questions later approach of the police. "

Their are multiple threads here asking why the police didn't shoot to disarm or injure vs just shooting to kill. So I asked would the same people asking that be asking the same thing because a citizen did it.

The people that ask such a question as this are to be ignored and disregarded. But i highly doubt the people ask why the cops didn't shoot to incapacitate or a small, silly little minority, if not just a few individuals here and there.

Nobody here outright defends crims when they truly deserved a cops for bullet through there dangerous, life endangering actions.

Sorry to seem hostile, it just seems that you assert that people's viewpoint will change about criminals drawing and aiming their guns first when it's cops. It is much more likely that even people who don't like cops will see that the bandits were asking for it.