Lots of reasons to get shot, but this not one of them

[Topspinmo]

On news this morning, desperate thief's stealing Diapers from Walmart. Walmart employee chasing them out of the store, bystander jumps in and eventually shoots one of the suspects. Got ask is Diapers really worth it? If I worked at Walmart and someone said go after them, I say you go after them I don't get paid enough to get shot at or killed.

Ok, flame away and have your fun. :bowdown:

[stan the man]

Not worth a replay

[Daddymac]

Lesson here. Don't steal

[Taltarzac725]

On news this morning, desperate thief's stealing Diapers from Walmart. Walmart employee chasing them out of the store, bystander jumps in and eventually shoots one of the suspects. Got ask is Diapers really worth it? If I worked at Walmart and someone said go after them, I say you go after them I don't get paid enough to get shot at or killed.

Ok, flame away and have your fun. :bowdown:

Witness shoots diaper theft suspect at Florida Walmart, police... (http://www.ajc.com/news/national/witness-shoots-diaper-theft-suspect-florida-walmart-police-say/lj7VofbFS48NhMJkxzTXNN/)

Just wanted to put in a link.

[redwitch]

What a sad, ugly story. Sounds like the diaper thieves were truly bad guys considering the car involved was gotten in a carjacking incident. Even so, I have so many questions about the shooter. I can understand getting involved in an incident where someone is being harmed in a parking lot, but to help security chase down shoplifters? Sorry, I don't get that. Wish we had more facts. Things just don't add up.

[rivaridger1]

I have to admit I do not understand what the original poster's point might be. One off several thieves was shot and killed stealing store merchandise after an individual assisted a store employee in confronting them and felt threatened by their actions. A "THIEF was shot. And ????

[Taltarzac725]

What a sad, ugly story. Sounds like the diaper thieves were truly bad guys considering the car involved was gotten in a carjacking incident. Even so, I have so many questions about the shooter. I can understand getting involved in an incident where someone is being harmed in a parking lot, but to help security chase down shoplifters? Sorry, I don't get that. Wish we had more facts. Things just don't add up.

I got the same feeling too Redwitch. Maybe, there will be more facts in this matter. Why would four men need diapers so urgently? I am watching "The Ladykillers" which has two villains with Irritable Bowel Syndrome one of whom gets the runs at the most inopportune moments. Maybe, this was an IBS support group needing adult diapers? Just trying to put in a little humor.

[karostay]

:BigApplause:

[Bogie Shooter]

I would like to know more about this guy that whipped out his gun and started shooting.................

[BobnBev]

I would like to know more about this guy that whipped out his gun and started shooting.................

Have to wonder if it was George Zimmerman.:shrug:

[golfing eagles]

I'm very much a law and order guy, but shoplifting gets punished by restitution and probation or short county jail stay, not execution by bystander.

[Taltarzac725]

I'm very much a law and order guy, but shoplifting gets punished by restitution and probation or short county jail stay, not execution by bystander.

There might have been something else going on here?

[Bogie Shooter]

There might have been something else going on here?

Shooter has already said " he was reaching for something....I thought it was a gun".

[ejp52]

Once the bullet leaves the gun ,you own any results from said bullet.
Yes I support concealed carry,but,this seems on face value over reaction. Just my humble opinion.

[rivaridger1]

Exactly where is the line to be drawn ? What " Crime " deserves what reaction ? Remember we are addressing crime and deliberate conscious acts. Suppose an unarmed 250 pound man and walks up to 110 pound senior lady and say "Give me your purse ". Is it an over reaction if she is armed and shoots that individual ? He is unarmed and simply directed her to hand over her purse. What if you come home some night and burglars are carrying out your big screen and they ignore your direction to cease that activity ? Instead of your big screen, what if it is something you have worked hard all your life to obtain and it can not be replaced ? Please explain when any " criminal " appears to be " reaching for something " why you should not react accordingly. Please also explain why there is a difference in this circumstance between a shoplifter, mugger, rapist, arsonist, murderer, racketeer, etc. If the answer is, there should be no reaction to a " non-violent " crime, do not all " nonviolent crimes " have the potential to turn violent when the criminal is confronted ? Is the answer to never confront anyone committing a non-violent crime ? What a wonderful society we would enjoy in that event.

[Bogie Shooter]

Exactly where is the line to be drawn ? What " Crime " deserves what reaction ? Remember we are addressing crime and deliberate conscious acts. Suppose an unarmed 250 pound man and walks up to 110 pound senior lady and say "Give me your purse ". Is it an over reaction if she is armed and shoots that individual ? He is unarmed and simply directed her to hand over her purse. What if you come home some night and burglars are carrying out your big screen and they ignore your direction to cease that activity ? Instead of your big screen, what if it is something you have worked hard all your life to obtain and it can not be replaced ? Please explain when any " criminal " appears to be " reaching for something " why you should not react accordingly. Please also explain why there is a difference in this circumstance between a shoplifter, mugger, rapist, arsonist, murderer, racketeer, etc. If the answer is, there should be no reaction to a " non-violent " crime, do not all " nonviolent crimes " have the potential to turn violent when the criminal is confronted ? Is the answer to never confront anyone committing a non-violent crime ? What a wonderful society we would enjoy in that event.

.....confronted with a gun....

The shooter in this case over reacted.

[permanentvacation]

While we don't know all the details of this case, therefore it is difficult to pass judgement. However, imagine if after you purchase goods from a local Walmart and while walking to your car you are wrongly accused of shoplifting. Only to have a bystander acting as judge, jury, and executioner run up and shoot you in the name of do gooder justice. I'm thinking that would suck.

:cus:

[Barefoot]

Once the bullet leaves the gun ,you own any results from said bullet.
Yes I support concealed carry, but this seems on face value over reaction.


The shooter in this case over reacted.It seems like over reaction to me also.

[redwitch]

Exactly where is the line to be drawn ? What " Crime " deserves what reaction ? Remember we are addressing crime and deliberate conscious acts. Suppose an unarmed 250 pound man and walks up to 110 pound senior lady and say "Give me your purse ". Is it an over reaction if she is armed and shoots that individual ? He is unarmed and simply directed her to hand over her purse. What if you come home some night and burglars are carrying out your big screen and they ignore your direction to cease that activity ? Instead of your big screen, what if it is something you have worked hard all your life to obtain and it can not be replaced ? Please explain when any " criminal " appears to be " reaching for something " why you should not react accordingly. Please also explain why there is a difference in this circumstance between a shoplifter, mugger, rapist, arsonist, murderer, racketeer, etc. If the answer is, there should be no reaction to a " non-violent " crime, do not all " nonviolent crimes " have the potential to turn violent when the criminal is confronted ? Is the answer to never confront anyone committing a non-violent crime ? What a wonderful society we would enjoy in that event.

I can't imagine any piece of property being worth a human life -- my own, an innocent bystander or a bad guy. I wouldn't hesitate to protect another life, including a beloved pet but not property. Police always recommend giving a robber your wallet, keys, whatever property they may want. I've never heard of them recommending fighting, arguing or shooting someone while being robbed.

In this instance, so-called professionals (security guards) were handling the matter. The shooter was not an off-duty LEO but rather a civilian who decided to help out. A man was shot and killed. I've yet to hear whether the bad guy was in fact carrying, just that the shooter thought he might be reaching for a gun and that, so far, the shooter has not been charged with anything. It's possible the outcome could have been far more tragic had the civilian not interfered, but we'll never know. What we do know is a man was shot and killed for a bunch of diapers. Sorry, I don't see any excuse for this death. Diapers are not worth someone's life. Neither is your wallet, a television, your grandmother's heirloom brooch or any other piece of property.

[rivaridger1]

Pacifism in the face of crime. Worked great for the victims of the 9/11 airplane hijackings, did it not ? ( Excepting those brave individuals on the Pennsylvania flight who fought back but unfortunately died as well )

By the way a beloved pet is legally property.

[Bogie Shooter]

Not even close in comparison................

[dewilson58]

I carry, but I'm not going to run after someone stealing from Walmart............doesn't matter if it's diapers, jewelry, or a pizza. I'm not threaten, I'm letting the noise maker stay in my pocket.

Must be new math, it doesn't add up.

:shrug:

[rivaridger1]

Not even close in comparison................

Pacifism once learned is not easily or readily unlearned. If you are taught to be meek and not resist in the face of crime " as long as no one gets hurt ", you are simply not able to respond in a situation when it can not be determined whether or not the criminal means you or your loved ones harm.

The original post deals with an occurrence wherein sufficient facts are not available to make sweeping judgements. We are all making suppositions, applying them to this situation, and then rendering opinions dealing with the appropriateness of the actions of everyone involved to determine right and wrong. The facts will eventually speak for themselves. Until they do I'll withdraw my original commentary in defense of the shooter.

[golfing eagles]

Exactly where is the line to be drawn ? What " Crime " deserves what reaction ? Remember we are addressing crime and deliberate conscious acts. Suppose an unarmed 250 pound man and walks up to 110 pound senior lady and say "Give me your purse ". Is it an over reaction if she is armed and shoots that individual ? He is unarmed and simply directed her to hand over her purse. What if you come home some night and burglars are carrying out your big screen and they ignore your direction to cease that activity ? Instead of your big screen, what if it is something you have worked hard all your life to obtain and it can not be replaced ? Please explain when any " criminal " appears to be " reaching for something " why you should not react accordingly. Please also explain why there is a difference in this circumstance between a shoplifter, mugger, rapist, arsonist, murderer, racketeer, etc. If the answer is, there should be no reaction to a " non-violent " crime, do not all " nonviolent crimes " have the potential to turn violent when the criminal is confronted ? Is the answer to never confront anyone committing a non-violent crime ? What a wonderful society we would enjoy in that event.


Sorry, but I agree with those who view it as an over-reaction. A good yardstick might be this: Would a police officer shoot and kill a diaper thief??? Would a police officer shoot and kill your big screen TV thief???? I don't think so.

[rivaridger1]

But if the thief once confronted was reaching for a Gun ? Knife ? Crowbar ? Baseball bat ? Icepick ? We do not know the facts.

[redwitch]

But if the thief once confronted was reaching for a Gun ? Knife ? Crowbar ? Baseball bat ? Icepick ? We do not know the facts.

You're right, we don't know all the facts. We do know that the shooter was a bystander who decided to assist the Wal-Mart employee. The odds are that had he not got involved, there would have been no confrontation and no weapons fired. Wal-Mart employees are trained to go so far in apprehending a shoplifter. The normal course would have been to get the license plate number and give it to the police, not physically intercede in a three against one situation.

As I said previously, I'd have no qualms firing if a human were in danger. But I refuse to shoot someone for a non-living item. I'm glad you can justify putting a human life before a thing, I can't and won't.

[affald]

The guy should be given a metal and free shooting lessons. Four thugs all with extensive criminal records would/should all be dead.

[dewilson58]

Well, okay then.

[Barefoot]

Sorry, but I agree with those who view it as an over-reaction. A good yardstick might be this: Would a police officer shoot and kill a diaper thief??? Would a police officer shoot and kill your big screen TV thief???? I don't think so.

We do know that the shooter was a bystander who decided to assist the Wal-Mart employee. The odds are that had he not got involved, there would have been no confrontation and no weapons fired. Wal-Mart employees are trained to go so far in apprehending a shoplifter. The normal course would have been to get the license plate number and give it to the police, not physically intercede in a three against one situation.

Makes sense to me. :agree:

[affald]

The media will never openly release the facts that make the shooting more justified

[dillywho]

The media will never openly release the facts that make the shooting more justified

One media outlet stated that the guys were stealing the diapers and planning to sell them, not because of family need. This is probably what they have been doing with other items in other Walmart shoplifting cases.

[dewilson58]

The media will never openly release the facts that make the shooting more justified

It just Depends.

[affald]

The guy that died had a long criminal record, scum removed from society.

The 50 year old black shooter maybe can sense evil.

If he needs a gofundme donation, he can count my family and friends as contributers.

[rivaridger1]

You're right, we don't know all the facts. We do know that the shooter was a bystander who decided to assist the Wal-Mart employee. The odds are that had he not got involved, there would have been no confrontation and no weapons fired. Wal-Mart employees are trained to go so far in apprehending a shoplifter. The normal course would have been to get the license plate number and give it to the police, not physically intercede in a three against one situation.

As I said previously, I'd have no qualms firing if a human were in danger. But I refuse to shoot someone for a non-living item. I'm glad you can justify putting a human life before a thing, I can't and won't.

Depends on the " thing ". Tangible, or intangible ? If intangible " liberty, justice, and freedom " come to mind. Thugs knocking on the doors in totalitarian regimes in the middle of the night, as well. Heck, they probably are not even considered " criminals ". There is no tangible thing worth protecting ? How about safeguarding tangible property which if misused presents considerable risk to others. What if someone takes the life of a criminal stealing guns and ammunition which are ultimately destined for the " criminal " community. Let's say our diaper thief was instead loading into his car all the guns and ammo from Walmart's sporting goods department ? When it come to criminality do not the dominos seem to stand in a line ?

[golfing eagles]

The media will never openly release the facts that make the shooting more justified

and there are UFOs and alien bodies at area 51, and who shot JFK??????

[affald]

and there are UFOs and alien bodies at area 51, and who shot JFK??????
Your point?

[Sandtrap328]

The guy that died had a long criminal record, scum removed from society.

The 50 year old black shooter maybe can sense evil.

If he needs a gofundme donation, he can count my family and friends as contributers.

Be sure to post your receipt for your donation or some posters will call you a liar.

[Bogie Shooter]

The guy should be given a metal and free shooting lessons. Four thugs all with extensive criminal records would/should all be dead.

Was this given a lot of thought?

[Bogie Shooter]

The media will never openly release the facts that make the shooting more justified

Why?

[affald]

Be sure to post your receipt for your donation or some posters will call you a liar.
As long as it's ok with you if your families personal information were posted in this forum?

Please respond with a yes or no, thank you.

[Sandtrap328]

As long as it's ok with you if your families personal information were posted in this forum?

Please respond with a yes or no, thank you.

Mine was a tongue-in-cheek remark regarding some post in the Political Forum. A poster there made a facetious comment about sending in a donation for some cause. Another well-known poster berated him for days about lying since he would not post a receipt.

I meant no disrespect to you for my post. Accept my public apology, please.

[Boudicca]

Haven't read all the posts, but deceased thief was allegedly a gang member with outstanding felony warrants. Not "desperate " for diapers but instead a lucrative easy item to sell - a business which cost him his life