Man shoots unarmed black juvenile stealing from car, no charges pending

Any tapeworm doesn't directly "hurt" their host. That doesn't mean the host isn't hurt as a result of having a parasite feeding off of it.

 

Yeah, I agree, the uber rich ruling class is a parasite on society and should be violently eliminated. They use their wealth to control the government, and to use that tool as a way of keeping economic power over people and of bleeding taxes out of the middle class in order to fund the state, which helps keep their businesses profitable by socializing externalities while allowing them to privatize the profits.

But what does that have to do with this 13 year old kid that was shot for non-violent theft?

 

So the 60 year old black man living in Ghetoville, St Louis, MO is now hobnobbing with JP Morgan and Cornelius Vanderbilt, eating canapés, and drinking martinis with monocle & top hat when he's not cruising around town in his hoopty?

 

Obviously not. I was just pointing out that you are more concerned with the "parasites" less fortunate than you that take very little from you as opposed to the parasites above you who extract massive amounts of wealth out of the non-rich through their control of the government and their control of land, natural resources and infrastructure.

 

Really?

Want to make a bet based on mentions of both classes of parasite in my posting history?

 

Hey, if I'm wrong I'm wrong. You would know what you are concerned with a lot better than I would.

I just get tired of the dehumanizing language used to describe certain groups -- especially minorities and young people from poor backgrounds. And typically such thinking seems to be something held by people who give the "parasites" above them a pass while obsessing over the "parasites" below them. And, in this way, they end up acting and voting against their own interests.

 

Like I said, the thief deserves to face the consequences. I just don't think those consequences should be death.

I'm talking about my own personal morality. I understand other people are free to have a different morality.

To me, killing someone is worse than taking material things from someone. That's based on the value I place on human life, any human life.

So to me a killer is worse than a thief. It is especially true if I would be the person with a gun. I know that if I kill a person my life is forever changed whether I was 'justified' or not. So I don't want to make that change to me as a person unless somebody is endangering a family member. That's the only time I think I would make that decision.

I get it, other people have a different morality. That's up to them, not to me.

 

I leave the line to the victim, and if it happened to me, I'd make that decision based on the individual case.

 

Doesn't matter if you are outnumbered. Doesn't matter if you think they have a gun. What matters if it was really self-defense or not. If the guys are breaking into your car to steal it, they are committing a crime called grand theft auto. And if you shoot them you are committing a criminal act as well on top of that - once that is actually far more severe under the law. If you shoot in self-defense, you better be able to show that it was infact self-defense.

You can not shoot someone for stealing from you. Not your phone charger from your car, not even your wallet. It's not my opinion, it's the law. You can use deadly force to defend your property - you can only use deadly force to defend oneself.

 

Oh...and boys will be boys.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...orida-inmate-awaiting-trial-article-1.1161131

Welcome to the pussification of America, where excuses are made for deviant behavior, where sticks and stones break bones, and words hurt just as much, and where the woman of the year has not been a woman for a year.

 

IDK if you're referring to the state this occurred in or in Texas. In Texas:

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/InternetForms/Forms/CHL-16.pdf

 

He's trying to argue an ought rather than an is. The law is clearly against him in multiple states, he's arguing that it shouldn't be that way. People should turn a blind eye to theft because in his mind, theft doesn't hurt anyone.

 

I am talking about a $9 charger being stolen in broad daylight from a car. In this case it was NY, but in Texas it still would be illegal by the law you quoted.

 

I never said theft doesn't hurt anyone. Please stop making things up.

 

That is 100% correct on the law, but this theft didn't happen in daylight.

 

But do you agree with the Texas law? Should someone be able to use deadly force in broad daylight or just at night?

I don't think deadly force is justified outside of life or death or life altering situations. Using a gun to stop someone from burning down your house - I can get that. Someone from stealing your kids tricycle? Not so much.

It's not that I think they should get away with it, it's that you can just take a picture and call 911. Citizens should not be vigilantes.

 

Well multiple states disagree with you. Probably best to make sure you seek out a state where you can't protect your property if it bothers you.

 

Honestly doesn't matter if I agree or disagree with it. Unless I'm doing something about it, it's just whining to me.

A house is a possession. Why draw the line at a house?

Under the law, citizens are not vigilantes. They are actively protecting what is theirs.
In that light of good citizens, citizens should not be stealing from others.

Take a picture? I don't really think that will do anything.
I apologize if I've offended in any way. I really am trying to not be confrontational or insulting.

 

Now there is something you don't see every day in the poo flinging room. Although I can't say I do this well it is still very much appreciated by me.

Now there is some good advice.

 

There's a lot of different views to be seen here. Once you sift through all the poo, people have reasons they feel the way they do. Thankfully, Some people are still open to discuss, even if they are set in their beliefs, and that's ok.