[POLL] Burglar shot, killed by neighbors watching home

You have to consider the second part of my post. What if the burglar is armed? Is it worth your life to save property?

There is a reason why most police discourage people from confronting robbers themselves. It's not out of mercy for the criminals it's to keep people from possibly getting hurt or worse in the process.

 

And as a police officer do you think if you did a better job pissed off citizens wouldn't need to have to take law into their own hands?

 

that's fresh: it's now the police's fault that we have criminals

 

I don't think you understand his point.

It's not the cops that create criminals. It's bad police that create pissed off citizens.

 

Really you aren't troubled by a police officer telling people to take the law into their own hands?

I respect the police, have trained with many and know they have a difficult job but I find an officer encouraging civilians to put themselves at risk when that is his job a very bad sign.

 

The job of the police is not to protect your property during a robbery. It would nearly impossible for them to do that.

 

It's difficult yes but not impossible. When my house got robbed a few years ago the police did show up. Unfortunately too late not because they didn't respond fast enough but because my neighbor was late in calling them. In the Joe Horn case a plain clothed officer showed up on the scene as Joe Horn was shooting the burglars. In fact that officer feared that Joe Horn might shoot him.

Anyway the point is that primary purpose of the police is to protect the public. Criminals by nature are more dangerous than your average person which is why most police discourage people from taking the law into their own hands.

 

You aren't a real person. You are playing a character on the internet.

 

The law was posted earlier in this thread. I guess you're missing that. They had absolutely every right-as it was reported.

If he were promoting citizens taking out drug dealers, beating down drunk drivers with a base ball bat or things outside of the law, then sure, I'd agree with your point.

 

Yeah, in other countries where they actually try to do that rather treat people like animals it actually does work. It's amazing what happens when you give people drug counseling, teach them actual skills, educate them, and treat them like people. You think anything good comes from locking someone up in deplorable conditions? They become a bigger danger to society than when they were put there in the first place.

Somehow we as a society expect some kid who flunked out of high school, had no guidance his whole life, is into drugs to just somehow be this outstanding citizen. It doesn't work that way. As a society, if you want that kid to be something you have to invest in him.

 

We have an extremely good response time in the 'burbs. We don't take 4 hours to get to a burglary call. We get there immediately and handle business. We take pride in our response time.

I hope you're not accusing me of encouraging people to take the law into their own hands. If a citizen wants to foil a burglary, more power to him. When seconds count, the police are minutes away. If someone asks me what to do, I'll advise them to be a very good witness and even follow from a safe distance. That's the default answer. I'd hate for a good guy to get hurt because some low life thief. More times than not, we wind up catching the bad guys because of good witnesses. Good citizens and the police need to be able to work together to bring a bad guy to justice. Very RARELY does an officer get to witness an offense in his presence, but a lot of citizens do. Without witnesses there usually isn't much of a case.

But honestly, I'd rather come find a dead burglar than a home with the back door kicked in and property missing with no idea who did it.

 

I am guessing Anas acuta, FV Santiago, and estaban are the same person. Maybe its T_J posting. They have very similar posting style, and they really try to push the same agenda.

 

I understand there is no legal requirement to call 911 but I have to question the intent of civilians who are deliberately not alerting law enforcement of a crime in progress so that they can arm themselves and confront a suspected criminal.

Since these two folks absolutely had to strap up and go confront someone burglarizing an empty house they could have first spent 20 seconds to call 911 and say "My name is Joe Smith and I want to report a burglary in progress at 123 XYZ street. My wife and I live next door and are heading over there now to confront the suspect. We are both legally armed. Please relay that to the officers you dispatch." and hang up.

I'm sure these two will get off with no punishment but what they did was dangerous and wrong.

 

Probably because a dead body requires more paperwork than a burglary. Honestly I don't GAF what cops say. They aren't above the law.

 

Property > Life

It is sad that this is the mentality because our police system is solving on 1 out of every 5 property crimes
what a sad pathetic record

Any other job where you could be <20% successful and still have a job
people talk about the inefficiency of the Post Office but they deliver your isht more than 20% of the time. . . hell more than 50% of your time
more like high 80s

I don't think I own anything worth killing for .. . but i am not rich so . . .maybe there is some property worth killing for. . . .

Rocket River

 

I think the reason why most burglars don't get caught in the act or immediately after is because people don't see them and immediately contact the police. Most burglars don't have that happen to them. I think if someone sees a burglar in time to insert themselves into a situation, then that's in time to call the law. They could also not license plate numbers of any vehicles used in a get away or whatever. If the police have that much to go on the odds aren't on the burglars side.

I'm not saying a burglar is innocent or shouldn't face any punishment. Even though there is a risk to them that they might lose their lives, in my opinion it doesn't justify a citizen needlessly inserting themselves into a dangerous situation and taking somebody's life when there are other options.

 

One thing I realized in some of these replies is that for those who argue that the danger is heightened to the point of not taking the risk of interfering, then you can apply that rationale with the vigilantes and claim that they took matters into their own hands rather than waiting for that feeling and fear of "heightened danger" to visit their own homes.

 

Really? What leads are there to go on when someone kicks a door in and steals a TV, who they sell to their friend, when there's no witness or evidence? Even if they cut their finger on the window, the crime lab we use won't do DNA for property crimes anymore. How do you expect to clear more than 20% of burglaries, for example, with no leads, and a hundred other burglary cases on your desk? It isn't feasible.

However, even if 90% of burglaries were solved, the court system isn't going to do anything to them. I've seen a lot of chaps with burglary on their criminal history, often more than one.

 

That might make sense if there was a guarantee that the danger would come into their home.

But if nobody is home when burglars break in, there isn't really any danger to anyone unless the person inserts themselves into the situation. Most burglaries happen when folks aren't at home, so the only danger to people is when they voluntarily insert themselves into that danger.