June 29, 2017

Pregnant Woman Uses Jeep to Run Down Man She Says Tried to Steal Her Purse; She's Been Charged With Assault
— Ace

I don't know what the law says about the use of force to stop a fleeing criminal, so I have no idea if this charge has any good foundation.

Assuming she's telling the truth, though: I approve, and no jury in the world will convict her.

A pregnant woman says she used her jeep to chase down and hit the person who tried to steal her purse in a Walmart parking lot.

A news crew from WLOS caught part of the incident on camera.

Witnesses told the station the man, identified as Robert Raines, was rummaging through the SUV before the incident.

So she got in her SUV, and... well, just watch the video below.


Evidence that this guy is guilty: He's not wearing a shirt. From my experience watching COPS, I know whenever you see a shirtless dude who's not on the beach, it's 99.9% likely he's a perpetrator.

H/t to @woodwhisperers/The Dude.

Posted by: Ace at 08:21 AM | Comments (653)
Post contains 220 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Crazy Times

Posted by: Mutt at June 29, 2017 08:22 AM (l1Qmx)

2 Video need Yakety Sax.

Posted by: butch at June 29, 2017 08:23 AM (0APJ3)

3 In Massachusetts, she'd be going away. In North Carolina, not so much.

Posted by: tu3031 at June 29, 2017 08:24 AM (qJhUV)

4 A pregnant woman says she used her jeep to chase down and hit the person who tried to steal her purse in a Walmart parking lot. Did they broadcast Benny Hill's "Yakety Sax" over the loudspeakers to make the chase more entertaining?

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:24 AM (DQ4Fv)

5 She will be charged, convicted meh, she should be. Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far.

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 08:24 AM (zZWkn)

6 Mika wasn't wearing a shirt on the LowIQ/Psycho show this morning. I assume she a perpetrator.

Posted by: Roy at June 29, 2017 08:25 AM (7n4KQ)

7 The cops had to charge her. From the video he posed no danger to her as he was running, and I assume he didn't actually get her stuff, so there's no legal ground for running him over. That said, I have no sympathy for the guy, and wouldn't be bothered if she was let off.

Posted by: Schaeffer at June 29, 2017 08:25 AM (uHhqZ)

8 How is his back not broken or at least fucked up after that?

Posted by: Widespread Pepe at June 29, 2017 08:25 AM (2qHjF)

9 Steering Wheels Up! Don't Drive!

Posted by: Roy at June 29, 2017 08:26 AM (7n4KQ)

10 BTW, that's an Explorer, not a Jeep.

Posted by: Schaeffer at June 29, 2017 08:26 AM (uHhqZ)

11 She's just doing what most shoppers do in a parking lot but this time she nailed someone.

Posted by: Auscolpyr at June 29, 2017 08:26 AM (pzA2L)

12 Literally a perfect scene from the Grand Theft Auto franchise.

Posted by: Widespread Pepe at June 29, 2017 08:26 AM (2qHjF)

13 Not a Jeep -- looks like an old Ford Explorer.

Posted by: harry paratestes at June 29, 2017 08:27 AM (fVxdm)

14 Jury nullification

Posted by: CSMBigBird at June 29, 2017 08:27 AM (jsWA8)

15 2 Video need Yakety Sax. Posted by: butch Did they broadcast Benny Hill's "Yakety Sax" over the loudspeakers to make the chase more entertaining? Posted by: zombie Curse you! (Shakes fist. Three big-boobed meter maids run by in the background.)

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:27 AM (DQ4Fv)

16 I wouldn't vote to convict her.

Posted by: CaliGirl at June 29, 2017 08:28 AM (Ri/rl)

17 I want on that jury.

Posted by: DintCNuttin at June 29, 2017 08:28 AM (Hi6cL)

18 No shirt,  no mercy.

Posted by: Dang at June 29, 2017 08:28 AM (8b+oT)

19 Looks like my Jeep. But I wasn't anywhere near there, I swear!

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at June 29, 2017 08:28 AM (s/EUv)

20 I can see going without pants, but no shirt? That's uncouth.

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 08:28 AM (u4vFl)

21 I've been to that Wal-Mart many times. One time saw two young women fighting in the parking lot.

Posted by: MAGA at June 29, 2017 08:29 AM (2ygcM)

22 Convict her - of being KICK-ASS and give her a reward!

Posted by: Dang at June 29, 2017 08:29 AM (8b+oT)

23 Oh, I thought it was a Jeep Liberty Watched it on a teeny-tiny window, never mind. It doesn't look like my Jeep then.

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at June 29, 2017 08:30 AM (s/EUv)

24 Yeah, that would be attempted vehicular hommicide in most places.

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 08:30 AM (u4vFl)

25 Wait -- did a comment just disappear? (Scratches bead in confusion.)

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:30 AM (DQ4Fv)

26 >>> (Shakes fist. Three big-boobed meter maids run by in the background.) Three boob meter maids? Total Recall.

Posted by: wooga, get your ass to Mars! at June 29, 2017 08:30 AM (asAON)

27 Not to mention that some crazy bitch flooring it across the Walmart parking lot could've killed an innocent person.

Posted by: mark1971 at June 29, 2017 08:30 AM (xPl2J)

28 He's going to remember that little incident. Pregnant women can be a bit loopy, if you know what I mean.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Trump the Covfefe brought to you by The Outrage Outlet Summer Spectacular! at June 29, 2017 08:30 AM (hLRSq)

29 I doubt a jury will convict her, the perp was white. If victims or near victims of crime fight back -and hard - then the incidence of this sort of thing will decrease dramatically.

Posted by: Bonecrusher at June 29, 2017 08:30 AM (uBQPh)

30 I get that society is sick of dirtbags but this is on video; she should be convicted. He was running away and she ran him down. Depends on the law says there. Not a very good day for either party.

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 08:31 AM (zZWkn)

31 It's not the law but in my view there is nothing worse less than the life of a thief. I'm looking at you, Michael Brown.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 08:31 AM (Nwg0u)

32 No shirt, no shoes -- no swerve, bitch!

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:31 AM (DQ4Fv)

33 Yeah, no. If I was on the jury, I would vote to convict her. Being pregnant doesn't enter into the discussion, as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: BurtTC at June 29, 2017 08:31 AM (TOk1P)

34 Freakin' Jeep drivers...

Posted by: BurtTC at June 29, 2017 08:31 AM (TOk1P)

35 You just know that this guy's name is Jimmy Ray, Johnny Ray, Jimmy Lee, Lee Jimmy, Jonny James or some variation. 




"Hey. Watch this."


Posted by: Mortimer - Finish Her! at June 29, 2017 08:31 AM (Uxokn)

36 Yeah, valid charge. He was fleeing, she was no longer in imminent danger, and she hit him pretty firmly. Unless the DA (or the victim) decides to drop the charges, she'll either plea out or get convicted. That video doesn't help her in the least. How much time will she get? probably not a lot. It is also possible that a jury was give her 6 thumbs up and decline to convict, but that's a stretch.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at June 29, 2017 08:31 AM (1hM1d)

37 Dude obviously never lived with a pregnant woman.

Posted by: Little Boomer at June 29, 2017 08:32 AM (6fu25)

38 She's guilty. I'd convict. Expect this to plea down, but she's wrong.

Posted by: Ignoramus at June 29, 2017 08:32 AM (+7/1f)

39 he needed running over just for not wearing a shirt at a fine, upstanding retailer like walmart. they have standards, you know. and, fuck that guy. give a shit meter broke again.

Posted by: chavez the hugo at June 29, 2017 08:32 AM (KP5rU)

40 Pregnant women are captive to their hormones. Poor man never had a chance.

Posted by: ALH at June 29, 2017 08:32 AM (uLuPn)

41 Bad boys bad boys, What'cha gonna do? What'cha gonna do When the preggers dame runs over you?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 29, 2017 08:32 AM (mbhDw)

42 In many ways, this is the story of Obama.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at June 29, 2017 08:32 AM (KUaJL)

43 She will be charged, convicted meh, she should be. Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far. Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (zZWkn) Not at all. The greatest mistake Western Civilization made was to dispense with John Locke's observation that property is at the root of freedom. A people who are secure in their property are free indeed. A people who are not secure in their property are not free, because they depend for any other "rights" they supposedly have on the largess of government, and victims of Leftist regimes from the Jacobins to Nicolas Maduro can tell you how that turns out. I certainly would agree that a society where pregnant women have to run down purse thieves is sub-optimal to say the least, but that's the result of our society in the 1960s deciding that the freedom to run around shirtless getting high and getting laid trumped any kind of law and order. There was a time where scum like this purse snatcher would be kept in their place with a minimum of force. That's all gone now, and we've returned to the Wild West.

Posted by: TheLowerDepths at June 29, 2017 08:32 AM (PMt8D)

44 hey zombie, how's your hot filipina friend dong ?

Posted by: astute dude at June 29, 2017 08:32 AM (BZtGk)

45 Bitch down-shifted me up.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 29, 2017 08:33 AM (mbhDw)

46 Well, he was shirtless. And if watching COPS taught me anything, it's that shirtless dudes are always guilty.

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at June 29, 2017 08:33 AM (s/EUv)

47 It's sad, but I would probably do the same. Just to stop him and get him arrested at the very least.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at June 29, 2017 08:33 AM (fceHP)

48 I'm sick of the state intervening and trying to decide what's "reasonable force." I have two words for someone who just committed a crime: "open season."

Posted by: RKae at June 29, 2017 08:34 AM (gQyp8)

49 He's going to remember that little incident. Pregnant women can be a bit loopy, if you know what I mean. Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Trump the Covfefe brought to you by The Outrage Outlet Summer Spectacular! at June 29, 2017 01:30 PM (hLRSq) That's her defense then. Temporary hysteria.

Posted by: BurtTC at June 29, 2017 08:34 AM (TOk1P)

50 I guess shirtless lives don't matter.

Posted by: Jayhawkfan63 at June 29, 2017 08:34 AM (cSc4o)

51 But if she livestreamed an abortion she'd be a hero on the left

Posted by: bknsty14 at June 29, 2017 08:34 AM (0gAY0)

52 Well if I was on the jury, I'd have to acquit. Don't rob people and you won't get hurt. Meanwhile, Reason has a fun video mocking Elizabeth Warren's (and that of other leftists) over the top rhetoric on health insurance https://www.facebook.com/Reason.Magazine/videos/10154847108494117/

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 08:34 AM (39g3+)

53 Wow. That is hardcore.

>>Pregnant women are captive to their hormones. Poor man never had a chance.

Yeah. Easy mark or hormone addled force of nature, you decide!!

Posted by: Lizzy [/i] at June 29, 2017 08:34 AM (NOIQH)

54 She'll get off on "Temporary Hormonal". don't mess with a woman and her baby

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at June 29, 2017 08:35 AM (fceHP)

55 "She ran me over with a JEEP, Mr. Lahey."

Posted by: Randy at June 29, 2017 08:35 AM (Uxokn)

56 'Runnin' Down a Dreamer' - Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers (2007)

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 08:35 AM (u4vFl)

57 >>Meanwhile, Reason has a fun video mocking Elizabeth Warren's (and that of other leftists) over the top rhetoric on health insurance


Remy Rocks! 

Posted by: Lizzy [/i] at June 29, 2017 08:35 AM (NOIQH)

58 U Toob has thousands of clips just like this.

Posted by: fluffy at June 29, 2017 08:35 AM (jw2Xw)

59 In related news -- I still have never been inside a Walmart. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a Walmart, even from the outside. I know they're a big thing in American culture, and according to what people say, Walmarts are "everywhere," I somehow have managed to conduct my life and never get within eyesight of one.

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:36 AM (DQ4Fv)

60 Not a Florida lawyer, but most states do not allow anybody to use deadly force to defend property, and running somebody over with a car (or trying to) is deadly force.

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at June 29, 2017 08:36 AM (nS5LK)

61 See you in Court. I think anytime the law wants to get stupid like this, ask for a jury. never cut a deal.

Posted by: Maritime at June 29, 2017 08:36 AM (IDhq0)

62 If I were the prosecutor, I'd charge her with driving at a speed in excess of what was reasonable. And nothing more.

Posted by: Furious George at June 29, 2017 08:36 AM (j+dfT)

63 58 U Toob has thousands of clips just like this. For watching thieving punks get what's coming to them, I love the Bait Bike channel. Especially when they rig the bike to break in half.

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (s/EUv)

64 Another reason not to go to Walmart

Posted by: NCKate at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (dGSft)

65 So, nood's not a thing anymore?

Posted by: SSBN 656 (G) at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (jjaLl)

66 zombie at June 29, 2017 01:27 PM (DQ4Fv) Ha-Ha!

Posted by: butch at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (0APJ3)

67 Well, he was shirtless. And if watching COPS taught me anything, it's that shirtless dudes are always guilty. Posted by: WhatWhatWhat?
-----
We used to watch COPS with our kids when they were little and one day in the car I joked that it was hot and I was going to take off my shirt while we drove around and they started crying.  They thought I would be pulled over by the police and get thrown to the ground and arrested.

Posted by: Dang at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (8b+oT)

68 >>I know they're a big thing in American culture, and according to what people say, Walmarts are "everywhere," I somehow have managed to conduct my life and never get within eyesight of one.


Eh, not unlike Kmarts back in the day.

Posted by: Lizzy [/i] at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (NOIQH)

69 Didn't watch ( I hate these vids ) but the lady is in the clear by me . The law, on the other capricious hand...

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (udajc)

70 Over 60 comments in and nothing about women drivers?

Posted by: Roy at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (7n4KQ)

71 44 hey zombie, how's your hot filipina friend dong ? Posted by: astute dude Well, she doesn't have a dong, but otherwise she's fine.

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:37 AM (DQ4Fv)

72 #67 They thought I would be pulled over by the police and get thrown to the ground and arrested. LOL that's so cute!

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at June 29, 2017 08:38 AM (s/EUv)

73 I agree no jury would ever convict her. my first instinct is the prosecutors are announcing that they are charging her because it's in the news cycle and that they will quietly drop at the charges later. this would simply be to discourage other people from running over people that deserve to be run over. what we really need is felony tort reform. by this I mean that no perpetrator of a felony would have any right to sue their victim. basically if you don't tie up a burglar in the basement like the movie Pulp Fiction, Society is just going to move on when a terrible thing happens to the felony suspect in the course of their crime. your response could potentially be a crime if it was completely disproportionate, but the suspect could never see you under any circumstances.

Posted by: Brian H at June 29, 2017 08:38 AM (7N26x)

74 If I were the prosecutor, I'd charge her with driving at a speed in excess of what was reasonable. And nothing more. Dismissed! That's an administrative charge, not a criminal charge. Simple traffic ticket.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 08:38 AM (pGfNT)

75 i disagree being pregnant isn't a license to kill people, even if they stole from you

Posted by: village idiot at June 29, 2017 08:38 AM (bf86X)

76 Not a Florida lawyer, but most states do not allow anybody to use deadly force to defend property, and running somebody over with a car (or trying to) is deadly force. Posted by: TrivialPursuer at June 29, 2017 01:36 PM (nS5LK) Looks like she was doing something north of 25 when she hit him, so yeah, I'd say deadly.

Posted by: BurtTC at June 29, 2017 08:39 AM (TOk1P)

77 In Bait Car, the car is used as the bait, not the perp.

Posted by: Roy at June 29, 2017 08:39 AM (7n4KQ)

78 I still have never been inside a Walmart. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a Walmart, even from the outside. Its just a store, people love to rip on it but its no different than any other mainstream big box store in terms of customers and layout. The stuff is generally cheaper, sometimes in quality but almost always in price.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 08:39 AM (39g3+)

79 If he didn't steal the purse! You must reimburse!

Posted by: John E. Cockring at June 29, 2017 08:39 AM (xAvrH)

80 Yeah, charge her with a felony then plead her down and slap her wrist --- with a hard ruler. Probation, community service, and take away her license for a year.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at June 29, 2017 08:40 AM (0jtPF)

81 If he had her purse, she was just trying to get it back. Even if she had to flatten her purse.

Posted by: mIKE at June 29, 2017 08:40 AM (swJ7s)

82 Over 60 comments in and nothing about women drivers? Posted by: Roy at June 29, 2017 01:37 PM (7n4KQ) I thought my "temporary hysteria" covered it. Perhaps too subtle.

Posted by: BurtTC at June 29, 2017 08:41 AM (TOk1P)

83 I know they're a big thing in American culture, and according to what people say, Walmarts are "everywhere," I somehow have managed to conduct my life and never get within eyesight of one. Posted by: zombie I've never been within eyesight of the freak shows that you post from time to time.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 29, 2017 08:41 AM (IqV8l)

84 If he's not wearing a shirt,  you're allowed to hurt!

Posted by: Dang at June 29, 2017 08:41 AM (8b+oT)

85 but most states do not allow anybody to use deadly force to defend property Plenty of states actually do; castle doctrine.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 08:41 AM (39g3+)

86 Posted by: TheLowerDepths at June 29, 2017 01:32 PM (PMt8D)

Intended to post a riposte, but this is far better than what I conceived.

Posted by: yaedon at June 29, 2017 08:41 AM (qdhQS)

87 Yikes. I feel sorry for all involved.

Posted by: JAS at June 29, 2017 08:41 AM (EX4Wr)

88 From a careful review of the video, it appears that the entire Duke lacrosse team was driving and clearly intended to kill not only Shirtless Guy but all Wal-Mart shoppers.

Posted by: Michael Nifong at June 29, 2017 08:41 AM (j+dfT)

89
49 He's going to remember that little incident. Pregnant women can be a bit loopy, if you know what I mean.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Trump the Covfefe brought to you by The Outrage Outlet Summer Spectacular! at June 29, 2017 01:30 PM (hLRSq)


That's her defense then.

Temporary hysteria.

Posted by: BurtTC at June 29, 2017 01:34 PM (TOk1P)












Gratifying to see that I've made a contribution with the "Temporary Insanity" defense.

Posted by: Zombie Daniel Sickles at June 29, 2017 08:41 AM (iFZVz)

90 We turn now to our legal expert, Lionel Hutz, for his expert opinion on this story.

Posted by: This...is CNN at June 29, 2017 08:42 AM (qJhUV)

91 Meh, charges shmarges,
It's just another data point on the public's "I'm madder than hell and I'm not gonna take it any longer!" scale.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 08:42 AM (MdC1o)

92 Is that her purse flying through the air at the end?

Posted by: TheGarbone at June 29, 2017 08:43 AM (7KFPB)

93 Dude looked pretty skinny for having a spare tire around his belly.

Posted by: Dang at June 29, 2017 08:43 AM (8b+oT)

94 Heh....I'm thinking back to King of the Hill and Bobby's self-defense training. 'I DONT KNOW YOU! THAT'S MY PURSE!'

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine. All Honor & Glory to Kekistan! at June 29, 2017 08:43 AM (TwwWO)

95 If she didn't tweet about it, she's OK.

Posted by: Meremortal, 49 at June 29, 2017 08:43 AM (3myMJ)

96 The article states that the thief was running away _with her purse in his possession_. The woman claims she pursued on foot initially, and then got in her car because she could not keep pace with him at 5 months pregnant. I think the fact that she was still trying to recover her property is important. He has her personal effects and that opens her up to all sorts of potential mischief.

Posted by: Svejk at June 29, 2017 08:43 AM (cYbai)

97 Its just a store, people love to rip on it but its no different than any other mainstream big box store in terms of customers and layout. The stuff is generally cheaper, sometimes in quality but almost always in price. Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 01:39 PM (39g3+) I tried to find a winter jacket for my son. In January, I believe. The fancier stores didn't have any. Walmart did. Nice, heavy, warm, cheap. Screw Target with a ball peen hammer. Sideways.

Posted by: BurtTC at June 29, 2017 08:43 AM (TOk1P)

98 It would be no different if she pulled a weapon and shot him while he was running away. The moral of the story is Play stupid games win stupid prizes. Preagers is no excuse. (maybe the gas pedal was stuck)

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 08:44 AM (zZWkn)

99 "Hold my beer baby's bottle... "

Posted by: Dang at June 29, 2017 08:44 AM (8b+oT)

100 There's no news like nood news.

Posted by: gNewt at June 29, 2017 08:44 AM (3wfnv)

101 Oklahoma put the pharmacist in prison for life for shooting an armed robber again that was down from his first shot minutes before, Convicted of first degree murder. Scares me from such a conservative state. Theoretically that could be me.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 08:44 AM (zO1cf)

102 This post is the post that America needs

Posted by: Gman at June 29, 2017 08:44 AM (VXoTW)

103 94 Heh....I'm thinking back to King of the Hill and Bobby's self-defense training. 'I DONT KNOW YOU! THAT'S MY PURSE!' Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine. All Honor & Glory to Kekistan! at June 29, 2017 01:43 PM (TwwWO) LOL! Classic!

Posted by: josephistan at June 29, 2017 08:45 AM (7HtZB)

104 If he had a dog and a cop saw the event, how many points would the cop get for running them both down?

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 08:45 AM (udajc)

105 >> (maybe the gas pedal was stuck) Driver Error!

Posted by: Audi at June 29, 2017 08:45 AM (u4vFl)

106 But did she say he had a bad facelift?

Posted by: josephistan at June 29, 2017 08:45 AM (7HtZB)

107 Plenty of states actually do; castle doctrine. I think Texas allows you to use force to defend someone else's property.

Posted by: Grump928(c) at June 29, 2017 08:46 AM (QQ+il)

108 70 Over 60 comments in and nothing about women drivers? Posted by: Roy at June 29, 2017 01:37 PM (7n4KQ) A woman and a truck driver get in an accident. Who's fault was it? Wrong. The truck driver. What was he doing driving in the kitchen?

Posted by: What's a Seawolf? at June 29, 2017 08:46 AM (72PAC)

109 In Texas it would never make it to a grand jury.

Posted by: gNewt at June 29, 2017 08:46 AM (3wfnv)

110 Death Race 3000 was not a documentary, people!

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:46 AM (DQ4Fv)

111 Dude needed to read "The female of the species" " but the she-bear thus accosted tends the peasant tooth and nail" Personally I say good for her. Our society would be a lot better off with some instant painful justice for the lowlife criminal element. He was jogging away in contempt because that is how he views his prey.......maybe next time not so much.

Posted by: Old Guy at June 29, 2017 08:46 AM (5qU9f)

112 Scene: North Carolina Courtroom on a hot summer day.  Fans overhead spinning slowly.  A hushed tone falls over the gallery.  A crow outside caws softly in the distance.

Jury Foreman (standing):  "Did she back up and hit him again Your Honor? 

Judge:  (wearing seersucker and looking up from his pulled pork sandwich) "No"

Foreman:  "Well, OK then." (sitting down)

*confers with other jurors*

Jury Foreman:  "Not Guilty"


Posted by: Publius Redux at June 29, 2017 08:46 AM (Fb9aZ)

113 Evidence that this guy is guilty: He's not wearing a shirt. From my experience watching COPS, I know whenever you see a shirtless dude who's not on the beach, it's 99.9% likely he's a perpetrator. Things I have learned from COPS. Everyone has a roommate. Everyone has a roommate who lets them wear their pants/use their backpack. Everyone's super generous roommate who lets them wear their pants/use their backpack is also a drug dealer who doesn't take particular care to pay attention to where s/he's stashing the drugs.

Posted by: alexthechick at June 29, 2017 08:46 AM (mf5HN)

114 >>Theoretically that could be me. It doesn't have to be... Spend more time at the range. Is what I'm trying to say.

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 08:46 AM (u4vFl)

115
IF this dude stole this woman's valuables: then she used reasonable means at her disposal to stop that fuckin' thief.

Had she used a firearm, I'd say the same thing.

However, in both cases (a moving vehicle and a firearm) the threshold must be high for her to use as a defense that she was recovering stolen valuables from a thief fleeing from the scene of his crime.

Assuming there is no question the dude was struck by her actions, it is incumbent upon her (her legal team) to produce proof that this man had both stolen from her and was in the process of flight. - That's if she want's to use that as a DEFENSE.
Otherwise she can simply insist that the state prove that she ran him down. (Which would seem to be a fairly slam dunk case.) 

Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 08:47 AM (Z2PYk)

116 Personally, I don't have a single issue with this lady. That is one perp that might hesitate to grab a door handle that doesn't belong to him tomorrow.

Vigilantism perhaps, but maybe, just maybe, it's time to stop being so "civilized" to those that aren't.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 08:47 AM (MdC1o)

117 She's a registered democrat, he's a Trumpie, she's been egged on to kill her enemies by Rachel Maddow, Brian Stelter, and Allison Camerata. Lock her up and take her baby from her. It's only fair.

Posted by: Les Kinetic at June 29, 2017 08:47 AM (U6f54)

118 Unless she was tripping on acid, he must be guilty. People don't act this way on a whim. It's not as if she has anything to gain if he weren't guilty.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at June 29, 2017 08:47 AM (xAvrH)

119 If only the woman were an approved minority so the MSM narrative could be sculpted to make her a protected victim and also immunize her from any nuisance police charges.

Posted by: Lower class person whose opinion must be guided at June 29, 2017 08:47 AM (oBuXO)

120 She should pay a civil fine of fifteen cents.

Posted by: navybrat at June 29, 2017 08:47 AM (w7KSn)

121 Gee, it's Death Race 2000, not 3000. How could I have misremembered this touchstone of Western culture?

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:47 AM (DQ4Fv)

122 Don't knock pregnancy hormones, it does make you loopy. When I was pregnant, I used to cry for just about everything - it was ridiculous. Someone says hi to me in the grocery store and I would cry...

Posted by: IC at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (a0IVu)

123 Deferred judgement if she has a clean record. Stay clean for 3 years and record is expunged.

Posted by: Meremortal, 49 at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (3myMJ)

124 107 Plenty of states actually do; castle doctrine. I think Texas allows you to use force to defend someone else's property. Posted by: Grump928(c) at June 29, 2017 01:46 PM (QQ+il) Pull up the 911 call of the Texas man who was describing two guys coming out of his neighbor's house with the neighbors belongings. Kind of hilarious .

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (zO1cf)

125 took me forever to find white boxer shorts. Target kept pushing the faggoty boxer briefs which look like they need a hole in the back, or else multicolored boxers that cost too much. finally found the shorts in Walmart. in sum , fuck off Target, for that, and for scaring the shit out of me when you disclosed the theft of credit cards a week after I shopped there.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (zUYFs)

126 Insomniac said this in the last post and it struck me as very insightful: "They drew first blood. Now they're getting a war they can't believe."

Posted by: Max Power at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (q177U)

127 The SUV should be charged though. Those things attack people right and left.

Posted by: Meremortal, 49 at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (3myMJ)

128 Posted by: TrivialPursuer at June 29, 2017 01:36 PM (nS5LK) Not according to City of Chicago Police Commissioner Eddie Johnson!

Posted by: The mainstream media can EABOD at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (CEU4j)

129 Yeah the guys, stole her purse, but that's gonna be a clear assault and battery. ( at least the battery unless he saw/ heard it coming) Self defense law is pretty clear that if you're not in immediate jeopardy, the attacker doesn't have the means to harm you, ( he's infront of the car) you're gonna go to jail and serve some time. Go to lawofselfdefense.com and read some of Andrew Brianca's info there. Car-gun-chair- fists doesn't matter if you don't have a ground for self defense - you don't get to just run people over.

Posted by: Janir at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (Lk5qN)

130 but most states do not allow anybody to use deadly force to defend property Plenty of states actually do; castle doctrine. Posted by: Christopher R Taylor _____ Regardless of what the law said, I would vote to acquit if I was on a jury, assuming her story checked out. People like this need to be hit by cars, had the police arrested him it would probably would have gotten him more federal aid. My guess is this clown has been in and out of the system for a while and it would just be a matter of time before he killed someone if he's stealing purses from pregnant women.

Posted by: Maritime at June 29, 2017 08:48 AM (IDhq0)

131 PR, you couldn't fit in a spittoon, banjo or porch dog?

Posted by: NCKate at June 29, 2017 08:49 AM (dGSft)

132 5 She will be charged, convicted meh, she should be. Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far. Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (zZWkn) I agree. From the looks of it, she's basically committing attempted murder.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 08:49 AM (hcyUh)

133 Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 01:46 PM (u4vFl) What if the last shot was just for good measure?

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 08:49 AM (zO1cf)

134 She should pay a civil fine of fifteen cents. Posted by: navybrat
-----
That's pretty harsh - she didn't kill him!

Posted by: Dang at June 29, 2017 08:49 AM (8b+oT)

135 Can we all at least concede that she was unclear on the concept of a "driving range"?

Posted by: Furious George at June 29, 2017 08:50 AM (j+dfT)

136 so.... when is Glenn Beck due, and who's the father of his child?

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 08:50 AM (zUYFs)

137 122. Yep. Preggers chicks are teh cray-cray, like all chicks & especially AtC.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine. All Honor & Glory to Kekistan! at June 29, 2017 08:50 AM (TwwWO)

138 Technically it's assault since she was no longer in danger. But I would take that case pro bono in two seconds.

Posted by: Marcus T at June 29, 2017 08:50 AM (Bdl0y)

139 They're 6 hours from Lejeune but I really want that to be a Marine Corps sticker on the rear glass. Locate, close with, and destroy!

Posted by: No shirt, no shoes, no sidewalk at June 29, 2017 08:50 AM (wx6iv)

140 It just dawned on me: "Hunger Games" is merely a remake of "Death Race 2000"! How can no one have noticed this before?

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 08:50 AM (DQ4Fv)

141 Over 60 comments in and nothing about women drivers? Posted by: Roy Are you shitting me? She took out the target. She should be flying an A-10. That is badass and dead accurate.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at June 29, 2017 08:51 AM (xAvrH)

142 Not wearing a shirt means he had no plan on going into the Walmart whose parking lot he was in. Since he wasn't directly menacing her, or her stuff, at that point it's not good that she ran him down. On the other hand, it definitely sounds like he was there to rob people and she might have ended up doing someone else a favor since he won't be able to for a while.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 08:51 AM (rp9xB)

143 5 She will be charged, convicted meh, she should be. Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far. Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (zZWkn) ------------ This is good to know. What kind of car do you drive? What's your home address?

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 08:51 AM (Fmupd)

144 Things I have learned from COPS. Everyone has a roommate. Everyone has a roommate who lets them wear their pants/use their backpack. Everyone's super generous roommate who lets them wear their pants/use their backpack is also a drug dealer who doesn't take particular care to pay attention to where s/he's stashing the drugs. Posted by: alexthechick at June 29, 2017 01:46 PM (mf5HN) I saw one episode where the cops caught a guy shooting up, and he said "I swear to God, officer, that's not my arm!"

Posted by: josephistan at June 29, 2017 08:52 AM (7HtZB)

145 Those SUV's are death machines. Her chances might be better if she ran him down in a Prius.

Posted by: tu3031 at June 29, 2017 08:52 AM (qJhUV)

146 My wife assaulted me when she was pregnant because I slurped my coffee too loud. Yeah I never mess with pregnant women. Ever. I guess he was going for suicide by pregnant women?

Posted by: Marcus T at June 29, 2017 08:52 AM (Bdl0y)

147 "Unhinged woman with no emotional control." uhm...

Posted by: Frank Lee, Major at June 29, 2017 08:52 AM (m9X4Y)

148 >>What if the last shot was just for good measure? Once the threat is neutralized, you are obliged to stop shooting. So. Shoot well.

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 08:52 AM (u4vFl)

149 I thought Hunger Games was a remake of Cinderella with the Huntsman from Snow White in the lead role,  as a chick.

Posted by: Dang at June 29, 2017 08:52 AM (8b+oT)

150 He had the purse, so he's fair game. Use of force appropriate to recover property. Deadly force? Wat's she going to do, wrestle him? Plus, it's not like she shot him, it was just a little love tap. I like her moxy but feel sorry for her husband.

Posted by: Xander Crews at June 29, 2017 08:52 AM (R2mTT)

151 Now, you see, if you stay the fuck out of other people's shit, stuff like this doesn't happen. I wouldn't vote to convict.

Posted by: Monty James at June 29, 2017 08:52 AM (gKOMX)

152 >>>>I don't know what the law says about the use of force to stop a fleeing criminal, so I have no idea if this charge has any good foundation.
.
.
.The use of a vehicle to run over someone constitutes deadly force at least in Texas.

And a guy just snatching a purse and running away most definitely does not  justify the use of deadly force. 

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 08:53 AM (0pcwX)

153 I was told by local cops that attacking a fleeing criminal - who I caught burglarizing my shop - and subsequently may or may not have struck with an entrenching shovel - that I could be charged with aggrivated assault.

Posted by: 13times at June 29, 2017 08:53 AM (WHVu+)

154 Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far. Posted by: USNtakim Bless you sir! I wish everyone felt that way.

Posted by: Lois Lerner at June 29, 2017 08:53 AM (xAvrH)

155 134. That's why she's being fined - depraved indifference, but leniency because preggers.

Posted by: Your Decidedly Devious Uncle Palpatine. All Honor & Glory to Kekistan! at June 29, 2017 08:53 AM (TwwWO)

156 Now, you see, if you stay the fuck out of other people's shit, stuff like this doesn't happen. I wouldn't vote to convict.

Posted by: Monty James at June 29, 2017 01:52 PM (gKOMX)

'Zackly.

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 08:54 AM (EgOr3)

157 Now, you see, if you stay the fuck out of other people's shit, stuff like this doesn't happen.


That belongs on a local billboard with his mugshot Monty James, just beautiful.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 08:54 AM (MdC1o)

158 Go to lawofselfdefense.com and read some of Andrew Brianca's info there. Car-gun-chair- fists doesn't matter if you don't have a ground for self defense - you don't get to just run people over. Posted by: Janir Go to MyBallOnYourFace.com in which I explain that thieves are not immune to a common sense of justice. Pick one: thieves or people not interested in thieving.

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 08:54 AM (udajc)

159 Did they broadcast Benny Hill's "Yakety Sax" over the loudspeakers to make the chase more entertaining? Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (DQ4Fv) Benny Hill was a truly funny guy, but Yakety Sax is by Boots Randolph, if I'm not mistaken.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at June 29, 2017 08:54 AM (XUcIQ)

160 Jeff Bridges: "I'm rooting for him (Trump) to do well by our country," he said. "I'm rooting for him as a human being to do the cool thing," Bridges said,... Whoreywood: You will never work in this town again!

Posted by: JAS at June 29, 2017 08:54 AM (EX4Wr)

161 Speaking of The Dude.  I saw over at WZ that The Dude abides Trump. 

Posted by: flounder, rebel, vulgarian, deplorable, winner at June 29, 2017 08:55 AM (tbOMB)

162 146 My wife assaulted me when she was pregnant because I slurped my coffee too loud. Posted by: Marcus T at June 29, 2017 01:52 PM (Bdl0y) --------------------------- Hmmmm. Yep. I gotta go with the wife on this one.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at June 29, 2017 08:55 AM (0jtPF)

163 How much time will she get? probably not a lot. It is also possible that a jury was give her 6 thumbs up and decline to convict, but that's a stretch. It only takes 1 juror to say that the guy had it coming to get a mistrial.

Posted by: GMan at June 29, 2017 08:55 AM (sxq57)

164 if I was on the jury I'd say it wasn't *deadly* force and vote to acquit. reckon my fellow jurors might agree. fifteen minute deliberation and then time for Haagen Dazs chocolate milkshakes.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 08:55 AM (zUYFs)

165 No shirt? No shoes? Must be a criminal!

Posted by: sans_sheriff at June 29, 2017 08:55 AM (SIVRK)

166 90 We turn now to our legal expert, Lionel Hutz, for his expert opinion on this story. Better than Chris Cuomo.

Posted by: wooga at June 29, 2017 08:55 AM (asAON)

167 hey, don't judge, you got me thinking about emo hormones.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 08:56 AM (zUYFs)

168 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/pregnant-woman-mows-purse-thief-suv-walmart-article-1.3287542 More details here. She's been charged with misdemeanor assault, and he's got a bunch of charges as well, since he clearly did damage her property. That all sounds about right.

Posted by: TheLowerDepths at June 29, 2017 08:56 AM (PMt8D)

169 fifteen minute deliberation and then time for Haagen Dazs chocolate milkshakes.

Right, because coming back in less than 5 makes it look too obvious.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 08:56 AM (MdC1o)

170 >>It only takes 1 juror to say that the guy had it coming to get a mistrial. Would that would be a miscarriage of justice?

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 08:57 AM (u4vFl)

171 148 >>What if the last shot was just for good measure? Once the threat is neutralized, you are obliged to stop shooting. So. Shoot well. Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 01:52 PM (u4vFl I was being sarcastic but the pharmacist claimed he didn't believe the threat was neutralized as he appeared to still be moving. Using reasonable person standard he probably didn't meet that burden but for me it should be reasonable person standard of someone ,who is not trained for it , in a armed robbery stress situation. That he got life is a travesty.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 08:57 AM (zO1cf)

172 Don't want to end up on the ground and bleeding, don't screw with other people's stuff. It's a fairly simple concept.

Posted by: Clay, unimpressed with your wokeness at June 29, 2017 08:57 AM (uh5kC)

173 I get that society is sick of dirtbags but this is on video; she should be convicted. He was running away and she ran him down. Depends on the law says there. Not a very good day for either party. Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 01:31 PM (zZWkn) He was in possession of her purse. Looks like a meth head to me.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at June 29, 2017 08:57 AM (XUcIQ)

174 Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far.

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (zZWkn)


I'm not bloodthirsty, but I do think you should be able to use deadly force to protect your property.  That property often took months or years of my life to acquire.  Unlike muggers and sneak-thieves, I work hard for what I have.  Absolutely I should be able to protect and keep it.

Posted by: kathysaysso at June 29, 2017 08:57 AM (vkS2Z)

175 Some much virtue!!!!

Posted by: nip at June 29, 2017 08:58 AM (VqJRJ)

176 In Soviet Florida, you bait car!

Posted by: Rusty Nail at June 29, 2017 08:58 AM (toi7g)

177 Did she actually run over him, or just bump him to knock him down?

Posted by: Toad-O at June 29, 2017 08:58 AM (cct0t)

178 Evidence that this guy is guilty: He's not wearing a shirt. From my experience watching COPS, I know whenever you see a shirtless dude who's not on the beach, it's 99.9% likely he's a perpetrator. I've said that. You'd think the cops would just roll up and bust every guy who's shirtless. Why waste time asking witnesses anything? You KNOW who the perp(s) is/are.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 08:58 AM (SRKgf)

179 Once the threat is neutralized, you are obliged to stop shooting.
So. Shoot well.
Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 01:52 PM (u4vFl
______


.45ACP, because ammo ain't cheap and shooting twice is just silly.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 08:58 AM (MdC1o)

180 Misdemeanor assault? Pffht. If she hasn't been convicted of similar things, she'll be fine, probably a deferred judgment. Next.

Posted by: Meremortal, 49 at June 29, 2017 08:59 AM (3myMJ)

181 Right, because coming back in less than 5 makes it look too obvious. Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 01:56 PM In this case, I wouldn't even leave the room. Right there in the jury box, not guilty. thirty seconds max start to finish.

Posted by: Frank Lee, Major at June 29, 2017 08:59 AM (m9X4Y)

182 He was in possession of her purse. Looks like a meth head to me. Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at June 29, 2017 01:57 PM (XUcIQ) He looks like a hood ornament to me.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 08:59 AM (SRKgf)

183 In the SF Bay Area Walmarts are few and far between; there is one in San Leandro that I won't go near due to the crowd that prowl its parking lot though they wear shirts. The one in Mountain View is the only one that I really ever visit.

Posted by: JEM at June 29, 2017 08:59 AM (TppKb)

184 >>Evidence that this guy is guilty: He's not wearing a shirt. From my experience watching COPS, I know whenever you see a shirtless dude who's not on the beach, it's 99.9% likely he's a perpetrator. Maybe he's just some poor sap who couldn't find a shirt that looked good un-tucked?

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 08:59 AM (u4vFl)

185 When 4x4 counts, cops are minutes away.

Posted by: Nick Stokes at June 29, 2017 09:00 AM (l4aLi)

186 You know, if we replaced the wheels on her truck with a treadmill...

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 09:00 AM (u4vFl)

187 And a guy just snatching a purse and running away most definitely does not justify the use of deadly force.

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 01:53 PM (0pcwX)

And, yet, if it were more commonplace, purse-snatching might start to decline!  I don't care.  Don't steal from people and this won't happen.

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:00 AM (EgOr3)

188 Do you have that tired, run down feeling? A pregnant woman overreacted? Yawn. Too bad the guy lived. Now we will have to pay for his upkeep.

Posted by: Tilikum KAW at June 29, 2017 09:00 AM (0x/TW)

189 He looks like a hood ornament to me.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 29, 2017 01:59 PM (SRKgf)

______



Say, those truck nuts on your bumper look so realistic!

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:00 AM (MdC1o)

190 He looks like a hood ornament to me. --- Speed bump.

Posted by: auscolpyr at June 29, 2017 09:00 AM (suO/a)

191 Shirtless is one thing but when I'm King face tats or neck tats will be summary capital punishment.

Posted by: JEM at June 29, 2017 09:01 AM (TppKb)

192 Our property and the rule of law is what we are about. An assault on our property is an assault on our essence. We are not about meeting criminals half-way.

Posted by: gNewt at June 29, 2017 09:01 AM (3wfnv)

193 I had a teenager steal my bike when I was at home. I chased him down in my truck and when he tried to double back I drove up onto someone's sidewalk and knocked him down. Grabbed my bike, went and found a cop, and me and the kid's dad decided the best thing was to have the kid paint my house.

Posted by: The Original REAL Galactic Lord Sir Covfefe at June 29, 2017 09:01 AM (nFwvY)

194 He was in possession of her purse. Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at June 29, 2017 01:57 PM (XUcIQ) She was pregnant and he Had Her Purse? Yeah, no woman will convict on that one. The purse is sacred.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 09:01 AM (rp9xB)

195 Slightly OT: If you throw a gun at somebody, are you guilty of assault with a deadly weapon?

Posted by: Toad-O at June 29, 2017 09:02 AM (cct0t)

196 She will be charged, convicted meh, she should be. Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far.
***
There would be a lot loss property crime if society universally accepted deadly force to stop it.

Of course tolerance of property crime inherently leads to more violent crime as modern policing research (and common sense) clearly show.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:02 AM (eSx+E)

197 Good for her.

Posted by: LASue at June 29, 2017 09:02 AM (hZ+us)

198 Evidence that this guy is guilty: He's not wearing a shirt. From my experience watching COPS, I know whenever you see a shirtless dude who's not on the beach, it's 99.9% likely he's a perpetrator. #ShirtlessGuysLivesMatter #NotVeryMuch,Granted,But-a-Little.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:02 AM (SRKgf)

199 Did they broadcast Benny Hill's "Yakety Sax" over the loudspeakers to make the chase more entertaining? Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (DQ4Fv) Benny Hill was a truly funny guy, but Yakety Sax is by Boots Randolph, if I'm not mistaken. Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at June 29, 2017 01:54 PM (XUcIQ) Correct. But it was Benny Hill's theme song. Along with his Keystone Kops antics while it played on the show's opening credits.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:02 AM (pGfNT)

200 170 >>It only takes 1 juror to say that the guy had it coming to get a mistrial.


Would that would be a miscarriage of justice?

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 01:57 PM (u4vFl)


Preggers, right? If the pants don't fit, you must acquit.

Posted by: flounder, rebel, vulgarian, deplorable, winner at June 29, 2017 09:02 AM (tbOMB)

201 Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2017 01:59 PM (u4vFl) OT but the un tuck guy in his commercials looks like he would be douche. Might be the nicest guy in the world but that commercial just gives me that feeling.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (zO1cf)

202 My prediction is it will never got to court/jury. I think the DA will try and get her to plea bargain to a lesser charge vice no charges. In California, DAs will sometimes drag things out forcing a suspect to either go broke preparing to defend themselves form the serious charge ---or--- take a plea to a much lower charge with little punishment, no jail and short probation.

Posted by: grayswindir at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (xGZ+b)

203 State's laws differ. Most liberal state, once the attack ends, so should any defensive action(s). Which is why if you kill a burglar in your house, always remember that important phrase "I was in fear for my life".

Posted by: navybrat at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (w7KSn)

204 The shirtless thing is totally true, except in Florida. Then it could be anybody.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (xfb67)

205 Miss Vito:  There is no way that these tire tracks up his back could have been made without positraction

Posted by: AE at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (g2dpq)

206 Posted by: JEM at June 29, 2017 01:59 PM (TppKb) There's a shooting at that san leandro Walmart every Christmas shopping season.

Posted by: Rusty Nail at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (toi7g)

207 The purse is sacred.
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 02:01 PM (rp9xB)
_______


Pay heed young'ns
Her purse holds more secrets and more power than the Ark of the Covenant.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (MdC1o)

208 From my experience watching COPS, I know whenever you see a shirtless dude who's not on the beach, it's 99.9% likely he's a perpetrator. In their need to show mostly white guys as perps, that's the kind of white guy you find doing low end crime.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (39g3+)

209 Huckabee-Sanders expected to take questions about Trump's tweets at press briefing. -CNN Drama!

Posted by: Meremortal, 49 at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (3myMJ)

210 I always ask, what would Bernard Goetz do?

Posted by: Ignoramus at June 29, 2017 09:03 AM (+7/1f)

211 190 He looks like a hood ornament to me. --- Speed bump. Posted by: auscolpyr at June 29, 2017 02:00 PM (suO/a) Street theater. They were re-enacting the Tsarnaev bust.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:04 AM (SRKgf)

212 195 Slightly OT: If you throw a gun at somebody, are you guilty of assault with a deadly weapon? Posted by: Toad-O Only if it has the thing that goes up. If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?

Posted by: Roy at June 29, 2017 09:04 AM (7n4KQ)

213 Would that would be a miscarriage of justice? No, that would be jury nullification. Totally valid and useful in some cases. If her lawyer does his job and gets one sympathetic person on that jury it's a mistrial. And I'd bet he could find one in the jury pool.

Posted by: GMan at June 29, 2017 09:04 AM (sxq57)

214 More details here. She's been charged with misdemeanor assault, and he's got a bunch of charges as well, since he clearly did damage her property.
***
Can she sue him for her car's paint work?

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:04 AM (eSx+E)

215 At that point he wasn't any threat, so self-defense is out the window. Chasing someone down and hitting them with your car while they're running away is probably attempted vehicular manslaughter. Imagine if she had pulled out a gun and shot him in the back across the parking lot.

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:04 AM (0mRoj)

216 For the squishes: You will propose that she should have called the police. Entirely sensible. The emergency responder may or may not have answered (not all calls are immediately answered ) The emergency responder may or may not have asked the caller to calmly describe the event in question. The emergency responder may or may not have told the caller to calmly wait for the cops who will write a report that may or may not be tossed to a investigator. The investigator may or may not decide that there is no imminent threat to the community and that while her loss is regretible, it's not a crime-stat, so fuck that shit. Justice served. Like cold shit on a warm sunday. You are the 'first responder' in any situation whether or not you wish to acknowledge it.

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 09:04 AM (udajc)

217 183 In the SF Bay Area Walmarts are few and far between; there is one in San Leandro that I won't go near due to the crowd that prowl its parking lot though they wear shirts. The one in Mountain View is the only one that I really ever visit. Posted by: JEM Huh. San Leandro and Mountain View. (Updates list of places to avoid.)

Posted by: zombie at June 29, 2017 09:05 AM (DQ4Fv)

218 My now ex-wife was, um, mercurial when she was late in her pregnancies, and by 'um, mercurial' I mean she was a bad day waiting to happen for anyone that crossed her. Absolutely no impulse control. Maybe it wasn't a good idea to run down the thief but I'd bet a good attorney could get this woman off without jail time.

Posted by: troyriser at June 29, 2017 09:05 AM (Fw5cQ)

219

 

 And a guy just snatching a purse and running away most definitely does not justify the use of deadly force.

 

That purse probably had a lot of personal identification in it.Would you want some meth   head  getting away with it and wondering if he's going to show up on your doorstep?

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at June 29, 2017 09:05 AM (lKyWE)

220 207 The purse is sacred. Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 02:01 PM (rp9xB) _______ Pay heed young'ns Her purse holds more secrets and more power than the Ark of the Covenant. Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 02:03 PM (MdC1o) And will melt your face if you look inside it.

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:05 AM (0mRoj)

221 me and the kid's dad decided the best thing was to have the kid paint my house.

Posted by: The Original REAL Galactic Lord Sir Covfefe at June 29, 2017 02:01 PM (nFwvY)

I love that!  I hope his dad also beat him within an inch of his life.

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:05 AM (EgOr3)

222 Related to the previous thread though I have a question: why did President Trump pull the trigger on this one now? There wasn't anything particularly bad said about him on the Mika/Joe show yesterday or recently, certainly nothing outside the usual. Why now? What prompted this particular tactic? Its not like the president gets on Twitter at 3 AM drunk and yelling "and another thing!!!" This is on purpose and timed. But why?

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:06 AM (39g3+)

223 I'm not too sympathetic to the "i have a right to defend my property" line of argument in this case. You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner. This woman, probably not with clear thought and malice but, all the same, tried to end this dope's life. You can use force to defend your own life, sure. And if you're in a situation where it's appropriate to use force, then it's appropriate to use lethal force. There's no middle case. To take the contrapositive, if it's not appropriate to use lethal force, it's not appropriate to use force at all. I just don't see this as one of those cases.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 09:06 AM (hcyUh)

224 215 At that point he wasn't any threat, so self-defense is out the window. Chasing someone down and hitting them with your car while they're running away is probably attempted vehicular manslaughter. Imagine if she had pulled out a gun and shot him in the back across the parking lot. Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 02:04 PM (0mRoj) ------------- I call that justice.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 09:06 AM (Fmupd)

225 "Imagine if she had pulled out a gun and shot him in the back across the parking lot." Go on...

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 09:06 AM (zUYFs)

226 She's in the wrong state. NC will convict. The laws around lethal force here aren't in her favor.

Posted by: Mx4 at June 29, 2017 09:06 AM (gw4X+)

227 The perp, he thought he was cunning
But the Explorer you see was still running.
He took off at a trot,
Through Wally's front lot,
And she hit him where the shine wasn't sunning.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:07 AM (MdC1o)

228 I call that justice. Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 02:06 PM (Fmupd) For a purse snatching?

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:07 AM (0mRoj)

229 "Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far."

Them's fightin' words in Texas, NancyBoy!!!

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 09:07 AM (OmOvC)

230 Warai-otoko Your concern is noted.

Posted by: GMan at June 29, 2017 09:07 AM (sxq57)

231 For a purse snatching? Yup.

Posted by: GMan at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (sxq57)

232 This woman, probably not with clear thought and malice but, all the same, tried to end this dope's life.
***
I would argue she was trying to get her pursue back.

At what point are you obligated to let a criminal take your property so as to not hurt their feelings?

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (eSx+E)

233 Maybe .....Perp Loose Purse.....but get Free Tattoo on back that read ...Goodyear LT245/75R16

Posted by: KIM at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (/y/I/)

234 ITs only very recently -- last 30 years or so -- that its become unthinkable to use force to stop crime or defend yourself. Before that people pretty much shrugged if a mugger got gunned down or a burglar got killed.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (39g3+)

235 Defense should be the pregnant woman acted under the influence of systemic, churning, hormonal, momma-bear baby rage. Aka The Sarah Palin Gambit.

Posted by: 13times at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (WHVu+)

236 So how does the TX law that allows you to defend property work? TPC 9.42 says, "A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:" "[if -ed] he reasonably believes that" "the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means" They don't give a minimum value, which seems a bit odd. If the above event happened in TX, it appears the driver would be safe under the law. I guess my question is, does this law still get applied? Is it just on the books like the English law that makes it legal to kill a Welshman on a Sunday? Are people getting legally killed over stealing a small value item?

Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (jhqr1)

237 Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 02:06 PM (39g3+) Theory posited by a Hordeling was that it is to distract from the "Travel Ban" that goes into effect tonight. He has shown himself very willing to take the left's misdirected fire if it keeps them from paying attention to the fact that his policies are being put in place.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (rp9xB)

238 Intellectually I agree that she shouldn't have done this. Emotionally, I'm sick and tired of sympathy for dirtbag criminals, and have no problem with people culling the herd a bit. It's not like sonnets won't get written, or cancer cures discovered when some of these clowns get smoked.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (SRKgf)

239 /purse

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:08 AM (eSx+E)

240 For the squishes: You will propose that she should have called the police. Entirely sensible. The emergency responder may or may not have answered (not all calls are immediately answered ) The emergency responder may or may not have asked the caller to calmly describe the event in question. The emergency responder may or may not have told the caller to calmly wait for the cops who will write a report that may or may not be tossed to a investigator. The investigator may or may not decide that there is no imminent threat to the community and that while her loss is regretible, it's not a crime-stat, so fuck that shit. Justice served. Like cold shit on a warm sunday. You are the 'first responder' in any situation whether or not you wish to acknowledge it. Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 29, 2017 02:04 PM (udajc) In her purse: Credit Cards Medical ID Check Book Cell Phone Cash Yeah, just let him run with it. Like hell.

Posted by: gNewt at June 29, 2017 09:09 AM (3wfnv)

241 228 I call that justice. Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 02:06 PM (Fmupd) For a purse snatching? Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 02:07 PM (0mRoj) It would cut down on purse snatching.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:09 AM (zO1cf)

242 "Before that people pretty much shrugged if a mugger got gunned down or a burglar got killed." Tell me about it

Posted by: Bernard Goetz at June 29, 2017 09:09 AM (+7/1f)

243
Most people are thinking about this the wrong way.

If we imagine that the woman's purse only had a few dollars in it, then we might be inclined to think the man run down was wronged, assaulted.

But consider, that cops can do this to you. They don't even have to be robbed. You can just be FLEEING arrest. - And the cops would be justified in running you down. What if you have been seriously accused of committing a very serious crime?? 

But now consider this. What if the woman - for whatever reason - had in her possession $2,000.00 in cash which represented the sum total of her life savings?
(Someone else might judgmentally claim that holding such a large amount of cash on person is stupid. But who would they be to judge? Perhaps she had good reason to withdraw her savings but needed to stop at the shopping market in order to get food for her children that night.)

If that were the case, then this woman would have needed to use whatever REASONABLE means at her disposal to retrieve her ultimate livelihood.
Her ability to retrieve her life savings from a craven thief will effect the quality of life of her children and even for herself.

If she had a phaser which she could "set for stun" and instead chose to use the kill beam: well, then she'd be guilty.

But what is a pregnant woman supposed to do when she is robbed of everything she has by a nasty, bare-chested thief?



 

Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 09:09 AM (Z2PYk)

244 233 Maybe .....Perp Loose Purse.....but get Free Tattoo on back that read ...Goodyear LT245/75R16 Posted by: KIM at June 29, 2017 02:08 PM (/y/I/) In mirror image, of course.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:09 AM (SRKgf)

245 There have been so many cogent points on each side of this issue that I find myself adrift, and needing new information. Is she hawt?

Posted by: Bandersnatch at June 29, 2017 09:09 AM (gIRsn)

246 Go to lawofselfdefense.com and read some of Andrew Brianca's info there. Car-gun-chair- fists doesn't matter if you don't have a ground for self defense - you don't get to just run people over. Posted by: Janir at June 29, 2017 01:48 PM (Lk5qN) Perp had her purse. What if she had had her pistol in that purse, as yet unbeknownst to the perp? She might be very anxious to recover that weapon before the meth-crazed freak discovered it and used against her, or some other innocent.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at June 29, 2017 09:09 AM (XUcIQ)

247 Huh. San Leandro and Mountain View. (Updates list of places to avoid.) There are actually many good things about Walmart though I don't shop there a lot and they really need to get their ecommerce act together. The one in San Leandro has a somewhat foul reputation for folks getting jacked in the parking lot. The one in Mountain View is fine.

Posted by: JEM at June 29, 2017 09:09 AM (TppKb)

248 There's no middle case. To take the contrapositive, if it's not appropriate to use lethal force, it's not appropriate to use force at all.

I just don't see this as one of those cases.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 02:06 PM (hcyUh)


Except there is a middle case, depending on state law.  In WA, you can use force to stop the commission of a felony (paraphrasing) in addition to protecting life (yourself or other).  I presume that includes felony property crimes.

Posted by: flounder, rebel, vulgarian, deplorable, winner at June 29, 2017 09:10 AM (tbOMB)

249 This is a case where sharia law might not be all bad.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:10 AM (SRKgf)

250 There is exactly one thing I like about the Saudis and one thing I like about the Iranians. Saudis cut the hands off thieves. If a man throws acid on a woman's face, Iran allows the woman to dump acid on the man's face.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at June 29, 2017 09:10 AM (xAvrH)

251 Theory posited by a Hordeling was that it is to distract from the "Travel Ban" that goes into effect tonight. He has shown himself very willing to take the left's misdirected fire if it keeps them from paying attention to the fact that his policies are being put in place.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 02:08 PM (rp9xB)

Yup!  He's absolutely genius with the mis-direction and sleight of hand.  I love him so much!

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:10 AM (EgOr3)

252 Its not like the president gets on Twitter at 3 AM drunk and yelling "and another thing!!!" This is on purpose and timed. But why? Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 02:06 PM (39g3+) ------------- He sent the squirrel running across the street for something. It's anyone's guess. But I do agree there's purpose behind it.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 09:10 AM (Fmupd)

253 I'm not too sympathetic to the "i have a right to defend my property" line of argument in this case. You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner. And you have no right to my property. Period. Full stop. Nothing else to say. Go ahead. Defend the indefensible.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:10 AM (pGfNT)

254 I'm a little bit of a gun geek and believe the 2nd amendment is a good thing and that ccw permits should be easy to get (or that constitutional carry is even better). There should be a line that should not be crossed, life is very valuable more valuable than property. Deadly force to stop a thief is going too far. Property can be replaced or insured a life can not. Deadly force to protect ones own life or the lives of others is justified. The principle that a thief deserves to die is right there with chopping off the heads or hands in some parts of the world.

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 09:10 AM (zZWkn)

255 Dude needed to read "The female of the species" " but the she-bear thus accosted tends the peasant tooth and nail" Everything I need to know, I learned from Rudyard Kipling.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Abbot of St. Costello-on-the-Hurlingbone at June 29, 2017 09:10 AM (AM1GF)

256 Being as she was pregnant waddling him down on foot probably wasn't an option.

Posted by: Northernlurker, Phillips screwdriver of the gods at June 29, 2017 09:11 AM (hJrjt)

257 This is all because of the mean tweets of Trump.

Posted by: FNM and GOPe at June 29, 2017 09:11 AM (npdX6)

258 she hawt? Posted by: Bandersnatch since she's pregnant, she rated a "one" to at least one dude recently.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 09:11 AM (zUYFs)

259 Theory posited by a Hordeling was that it is to distract from the "Travel Ban" that goes into effect tonight. Its a thought. I was thinking maybe it was to snowball MSNBC onto CNN's woes, tie the whole ugly media together in a bundle. When CNN suffers, MSNBC usually gains ratings as the leftist idiots move over to that channel instead.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:11 AM (39g3+)

260 Radar Hate

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at June 29, 2017 09:11 AM (PNcou)

261 Now, just for a Gedankenversuch, imagine that the perp was ... uh ... a member of a protected ethnicity. You can bet your ass she'd be prosecuted then.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:11 AM (SRKgf)

262 Jeff Bridges: "I'm rooting for him (Trump) to do well by our country," he said. "I'm rooting for him as a human being to do the cool thing," Bridges said,... - Hollywood movie star who is the son of a Hollywood movie star is more in touch with America than Johnny "Come Lately" Derp and the other flashes in the lan.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 09:12 AM (Nwg0u)

263 Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (zZWkn) What does the USN stand for in your nic ?

Posted by: dDan at June 29, 2017 09:12 AM (hwYmz)

264 under sharia she wouldn't be allowed to drive.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 09:12 AM (zUYFs)

265 There is exactly one thing I like about the Saudis and one thing I like about the Iranians. Saudis cut the hands off thieves. If a man throws acid on a woman's face, Iran allows the woman to dump acid on the man's face. --- ** ponders spanking hot Saudi women **

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at June 29, 2017 09:12 AM (PNcou)

266 Only law enforcement officials should have access to motor vehicles. Why do you need a car anyway? Manhood issues?

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 29, 2017 09:12 AM (BWL+E)

267 Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 02:08 PM (jhqr1) Again if I could tiny URL I would link to the Texas guy who blew away two burglars that were exiting his neighbor's house with his TV and other belongings. He was on the 911 call when he did it. Grand Jury no caused it.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:12 AM (zO1cf)

268 did the guy get hurt? It's twitter, I can't see twitter video. broken bones? intensive care? critical injuries? or more like he was knocked down by an NFL linebacker. How fast was she going? air bags deployed? that happens at 5mph I've heard.

Posted by: Frank Lee, Major at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (m9X4Y)

269 In her purse: Credit Cards Medical ID Check Book Cell Phone Cash Yeah, just let him run with it. Like hell. Posted by: gNewt House keys and address.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (pGfNT)

270 >>>>And a guy just snatching a purse and running away most definitely does not justify the use of deadly force.

That purse probably had a lot of personal identification in it.Would you want some meth head getting away with it and wondering if he's going to show up on your doorstep?
.
.
.
.Did I say the guy was a saint and shouldn't face the consequences?  IMO he got what he deserved but I don't write the laws the State does and this is clearly a case of excessive force and she deserved to be charged. 

As far as the perp goes he will just take the cash and toss the rest of the stuff into someones backyard or a dumpster.  Punks like that do not have the cohones to track people down especially after robbing them. 

That happened to us twice in Kentucky because we had a corner lot with a tall privacy fence.  Kids breaking into cars in the neighborhood would steal purses take the cash and toss the rest of the stuff into our backyard on the way to the dollar store. 

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (0pcwX)

271 The principle that a thief deserves to die is right there with chopping off the heads or hands in some parts of the world.


Yea, I'm sure this guy was just getting his life back together. Taking care of grandma and working at a day-care... /s


Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (MdC1o)

272 At what point are you obligated to let a criminal take your property so as to not hurt their feelings? Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 02:08 PM (eSx+E) Well, death =/= hurt feelings, so, not sure where to take that line of argument.... I honestly don't have an "answer", because who the feck am I, right? But to gleefully crow that vehicular homicide is the appropriate response to criminal behavior just seems wrong to me.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (hcyUh)

273 Has Nancy Pelosi yet mentioned that if this woman had had an abortion, none of this would have happened?

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (EgOr3)

274 Did you see the video of the guy who got hit by a bus, and then calmly gets up and walks into a pub? Said he needed a pint to calm down.

Posted by: Tinfoilbaby at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (6Ll1u)

275 If I was a prosecutor I would dismiss the case (you want to be that guy?)

If I was on the jury I would refuse to convict.

If I was a voter in the district I would vote against the DA/mayor/responsible elected official if they brought charges against her.

If scumbag doesn't steal her purse, she doesn't run him over. Therefore, it is still scumbags fault.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (eSx+E)

276 I don't know what the law says about the use of force to stop a fleeing criminal, Our laws are retarded. The Law of Common Sense says that once someone commits a crime of violence or robbery against you they have given up any right to much of anything for that situation. If you decide to shoot them in the head, then that's just the chance they took when they tried to hurt or rob you.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (rZ+mb)

277 231 For a purse snatching? Yup. Posted by: GMan at June 29, 2017 02:08 PM (sxq57) Seems a bit Draconian. Out of curiosity, are there crimes in addition to purse-snatching that would apply the death penalty to that are not currently capital crimes?

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:13 AM (0mRoj)

278 249 This is a case where sharia law might not be all bad. Stoning the pregnant woman to death?

Posted by: Under Fire at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (l4aLi)

279 Posted by: dDan at June 29, 2017 02:12 PM (hwYmz) sorry, got cut off: was supposed to read: What does the USN stand for in your nic, if you don't mind telling.

Posted by: dDan at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (hwYmz)

280 The "He Needed Runnin' Over and Seriously Hurtin'" defense is every bit as valid in Texas as the "He Needed Killin'" defense.

Now I do remember one woman convicted of killing her husband, a prominent Houston Dentist, by running him over, but a) she was waiting for him in a parking lot and ambushed him, and b) witnesses said she didn't just run him over, she backed up and ran over him again at least twice.

now that was one pissed off woman.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (OmOvC)

281 "does not justify the use of deadly force." They say it does in Venezuela. Set them on fire and let them run around.

Posted by: Mudd at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (cfHE9)

282

I'm waiting for someone to answer the question as to whether this woman was entitled to make a FORCIBLE effort to stop this fuckin' thief.

Yes or no?

I say that it is obvious that yes she had that right. - But that she is the one who will have to prove it (as a DEFENSE) in a criminal court of law.


Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (Z2PYk)

283 Deadly force to stop a thief is going too far. Property can be replaced or insured a life can not. ********************** Yes, thieves should consider this point very carefully before they act.

Posted by: gNewt at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (3wfnv)

284 Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 02:11 PM (39g3+) Also possible. I'm sure he'd be happy to have accomplished both with one effort.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (rp9xB)

285 >>>But what is a pregnant woman supposed to do when she is robbed of everything she has by a nasty, bare-chested thief? What if the purse was full of ten shades of lipstick, 57 cents in change, Tic Tacs, and a Little Debbie?

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (rPBK6)

286 Well she may have had her lucky gold coin in that purse and he could be committing grand theft, a felony.

Posted by: The Garbone at June 29, 2017 09:14 AM (X2m/e)

287 Yea, I'm sure this guy was just getting his life back together. Taking care of grandma and working at a day-care... /s Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 02:13 PM (MdC1o) Turning his life around. And hoping she didn't turn the car around. And he was an aspiring bumper rapper.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:15 AM (SRKgf)

288 I don't think she jumped into the car to kill the guy, just to catch him rather than waddling after him, and stop him. Which she did. And as others have noted: anger a pregnant woman at your peril, they are often not rational.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:15 AM (39g3+)

289 If someone grabs an apple from your fruit stand and runs, do you have the right to shoot him in the back?

Posted by: Bat Chain Puller at June 29, 2017 09:15 AM (Yi9Gb)

290 Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far. Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (zZWkn) Trespassers should be shot. Thieves of any sort deserve to be shot.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 09:15 AM (rZ+mb)

291 Was it an assault SUV?

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at June 29, 2017 09:16 AM (PNcou)

292 Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 02:14 PM (OmOvC) Not quite. She went to the hotel where he was with his mistress. He blocked her car and she ran over him and then made the circle and ran over him again, the teen daughter was in the car.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:16 AM (zO1cf)

293 Deadly force to stop a thief is going too far. Property can be replaced or insured a life can not.
**********************
Once somebody steals my shit, my concern for their life is over.  I've been robbed and I've been burglarized.  And I wished a slow and agonizing death upon the perpetrators.

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:16 AM (EgOr3)

294 253 I'm not too sympathetic to the "i have a right to defend my property" line of argument in this case. You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner. And you have no right to my property. Period. Full stop. Nothing else to say. Go ahead. Defend the indefensible. Posted by: rickb223 at June 29, 2017 02:10 PM (pGfNT) Well ok then.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 09:16 AM (hcyUh)

295 I honestly don't have an "answer", because who the feck am I, right? But to gleefully crow that vehicular homicide is the appropriate response to criminal behavior just seems wrong to me.
***
What other means did she have at hand to stop him from getting away with her purse?

I presume if she had a "teleport cops here now" button she would have pressed it...but she had only her car.

Citizens shouldn't have to submit to the criminal theft of their property.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:16 AM (eSx+E)

296 OT - Trump and Putin meeting at the G-20 summit next week. Will this mark the end of the world as we know it - screams hysterical press (okay, I made up that last bit)

Posted by: IC at June 29, 2017 09:16 AM (a0IVu)

297 270 >>>>And a guy just snatching a purse and running away most definitely does not justify the use of deadly force. you probably DO NOT want to grab my wallet.

Posted by: The Original REAL Galactic Lord Sir Covfefe at June 29, 2017 09:17 AM (nFwvY)

298 I'm guessing this asshat wasn't Jean ValJean.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at June 29, 2017 09:17 AM (xAvrH)

299 Trespassers should be shot. Thieves of any sort deserve to be shot.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 02:15 PM (rZ+mb)
____


Wouldn't take long before ther'd be a whole lot less trepassin' and thiev'n goin on.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:17 AM (MdC1o)

300 "He was running away and she ran him down" Temporary insanity.

Posted by: Mudd at June 29, 2017 09:17 AM (cfHE9)

301 Another victim of global warming.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:17 AM (SRKgf)

302 I think the Good Samaritan who got his ass beat in Florida and then had to leave town due to death threats might appreciate people slowing their roll before going violent.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at June 29, 2017 09:17 AM (rPBK6)

303 The perp was ... tired. Sorry.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:17 AM (SRKgf)

304 Don't know about where this happened, but defense of property is NOT a viable legal defense for 'assault' here in Clownifornia. 1992 my car was parked outside of base, because my ship was in the Yards in San Diego. I was working 5 to 2... so walked out to my car and a guy was INSIDE my car, stealing my stereo. I walked up and said 'hey, what the F you doing in my car'... Guy said, 'no, is my car' getting crawling out of the broken passenger side window with my stereo in hand... Little scawny guy... had on a leather jacket even though it was hot out... had my stereo in one hand and something else tucked under his arm. Chased him down the street... saying 'drop my shit'... I finally pushed him into a car,.... he dropped my stereo, and ran off. Cops got there, and KNEW who this guy was... went and picked him up... and said I'd be hearing from a Detective... Well.... long story short, they dropped the charges against the guy because they said HE would probably walk, but I would be in Jail... for assault... for pushing him into that car... Talk about an eye opener....

Posted by: Don Q. at June 29, 2017 09:18 AM (NgKpN)

305 Deadly force to stop a thief is going too far. I disagree. I know that's the very recently modern perspective, but you have lost a lot of free expression of your rights when you turn to crime. You know what the origin of the term "outlaw" is? Old English common law. For many crimes you were given the option of leaving the country: take a direct route to the nearest port and sail away never to return. If you did that, you could go and not be bothered. If you stopped, delayed, or ran away, you became "outlaw." That means "outside the law" as in "no laws apply to you any more, you are prey to every single person in England without penalty."

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:18 AM (39g3+)

306 He's also now not only from the hood, but on it too.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:18 AM (SRKgf)

307 33 Yeah, no. If I was on the jury, I would vote to convict her. Being pregnant doesn't enter into the discussion, as far as I'm concerned. Posted by: BurtTC at June 29, 2017 01:31 PM (TOk1P) Pretty much. If you'd convict a man for it, you should convict her too.

Posted by: Hikaru at June 29, 2017 09:18 AM (XMDuf)

308 The "He Needed Runnin' Over and Seriously Hurtin'" defense is every bit as valid in Texas as the "He Needed Killin'" defense. That reminds me of a conversation I overheard where one highly educated Microsoft developer said to another highly educated Microsoft developer that it was actually legal in Texas to kill someone that "needed killing". Not a hint of irony. The second person said, "I believe it." I just walked by and shook my head.

Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 09:18 AM (jhqr1)

309 Legally it may have been questionable. Morally? Hit the gas and feck that guy in particular. He deserved what he got.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert at June 29, 2017 09:19 AM (O9qtX)

310
Again, please answer the question as to whether this woman was entitled to make a FORCIBLE effort to stop this fuckin' thief from stealing her purse and all her valuables in it?  

Yes or no?

Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 09:19 AM (Z2PYk)

311

 

How does this perp not get away? I assume it took her a minute or two to get into the SUV start it up and pull out of the space.I would have been long gone by then

Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at June 29, 2017 09:19 AM (lKyWE)

312 I honestly don't have an "answer", because who the feck am I, right? But to gleefully crow that vehicular homicide is the appropriate response to criminal behavior just seems wrong to me. Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 02:13 PM (hcyUh) ----------- Wow! Another one. Love this country. So many people will to let me steal their shit with no consequences.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 09:19 AM (Fmupd)

313 USN = United states Navy veteran. Why?

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 09:19 AM (zZWkn)

314 Not sure if anyone has said this,  but haven't all of us wanted to run someone over at one pont or another?

Sure, this was a random guy who tried to mug her; I think that many would choose to run down someone they know. But still.

No jury would convict her.

Also ... pregnant + woman+ hormones= biology made her crazy. She had no choice but to turn into Bruce Willis in a Die Hard film.

Posted by: shibumi at June 29, 2017 09:20 AM (aT+Bx)

315 If someone grabs an apple from your fruit stand and runs, do you have the right to shoot him in the back? You have the right to use force to protect your property. He does not have the right to take your property, nor to expect safety or comfort when he takes it.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:20 AM (39g3+)

316 This week he steals from a pregger, next week it is a 78 yo lady he knocks over, breaks her hip and she dies. Running him down is a public service that prevents further crime.

Posted by: The Garbone at June 29, 2017 09:20 AM (X2m/e)

317 Feeling run down? Then don't steal other people's shit.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:21 AM (SRKgf)

318 Legally justified? No. Morally? Depends on your morals...

Posted by: Tilikum KAW at June 29, 2017 09:21 AM (0x/TW)

319 Well.... long story short, they dropped the charges against the guy because they said HE would probably walk, but I would be in Jail... for assault... for pushing him into that car...
***
Seems appropriate;

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/118/088/929.jpg

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:21 AM (eSx+E)

320 Posted by: Don Q. at June 29, 2017 02:18 PM (NgKpN) My sister had the window of her 67 Mustang broken in the theft of her radio. She was told to stop locking her car since the windows were too expensive to keep replacing. That was the "solution".

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 09:21 AM (rp9xB)

321 did the guy get hurt? It's twitter, I can't see twitter video. broken bones? intensive care? critical injuries? or more like he was knocked down by an NFL linebacker. - Article says minor injuries.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 09:22 AM (Nwg0u)

322 Having been robbed, and also having been a victim of a home burglary twice, I've no remorse for thieves.
Zero.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:22 AM (MdC1o)

323 Deadly force to stop a thief is going too far. Property can be replaced or insured a life can not. That's totally ridiculous. The thief decided to violate another person's rights and property. He gave up his own rights and property when he did that. But you think that a thief should be allowed to just take whatever he wants and run away .... because someone might have insurance. Your attitude is totally indefensible. Thieves must understand the great risk they put themselves in when they decide to force their ways on others and to take others' possessions - and that risk must include their lives.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 09:22 AM (rZ+mb)

324 "I guess my question is, does this law still get applied? Is it just on the books like the English law that makes it legal to kill a Welshman on a Sunday? Are people getting legally killed over stealing a small value item?"

Hell yeah, it's still applied!  But you don't hear about it, because a) it doesn't happen that often; you've got to both catch a perp in the act, and be ready to act upon it immediately.  Both are hard to do.   and b) the way it is enforced is that the police investigate and say "oh yeah, you were allowed" and it gets dropped with no charges ever being filed, and ends just being a local news story on page 26.  "Annoying meth-head up on 26th street won't be bothering people any more"

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 09:22 AM (OmOvC)

325 Property can be replaced or insured a life can not. I'd just like to point out that property I legally gain requires a bit of my life to earn. That bit of my life cannot be replaced. Sure, insurance can cover loss, but then the policy becomes more expensive, which again, requires a bit of my life to pay for it.

Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 09:22 AM (jhqr1)

326 USN = United states Navy veteran. Thank you for your service. Pretty much. If you'd convict a man for it, you should convict her too. Wrong. Not only is that two people being victimized, but she's at a point of unusual weakness, even more so than being a woman. Its like robbing a man in a wheelchair vs an ordinary man. The crime is worse, then. This is not some cryptic super-secret legal doctrine that only experts can puzzle out. Its just flat common sense obvious.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:22 AM (39g3+)

327 If she used deadly force, why isn't the guy dead?

Posted by: Toad-O at June 29, 2017 09:22 AM (cct0t)

328 That was awesome!  Looked like she even grabbed a gear while in pursuit.

Er, not that I condone this behavior, mind you.

Posted by: Fritz at June 29, 2017 09:23 AM (2Mnv1)

329 teah, Soona, I'm done arguing with the All Muggers Matter contingent, i'm here to troll at this point. I guess we can call the guy Mr Dent.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 09:23 AM (zUYFs)

330 >>How does this perp not get away? I assume it took her a minute or two to get into the SUV start it up and pull out of the space.I would have been long gone by then He ran in a straight line just begging to get hit. Serpentine.

Posted by: JackStraw at June 29, 2017 09:23 AM (/tuJf)

331 That means "outside the law" as in "no laws apply to you any more, you are prey to every single person in England without penalty." --- This could explain my mother In Law

Posted by: buzzsaw90 at June 29, 2017 09:23 AM (PNcou)

332
It is so much simpler than all that.

The naysayers to this woman's actions (who knows, she might even hate Trump and all Republicans!) need to answer one very simple question: 

Was this woman entitled to make a FORCIBLE effort to stop this fuckin' thief who had snatched her valuables? 

Yes or no?

Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 09:23 AM (Z2PYk)

333 276 Our laws are retarded. The Law of Common Sense says that once someone commits a crime of violence or robbery against you they have given up any right to much of anything for that situation. If you decide to shoot them in the head, then that's just the chance they took when they tried to hurt or rob you. Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 02:13 PM (rZ+mb) That's pretty much where I come down. Modern laws are way too biased against upstanding citizens and in favor of lowlife scum.

Posted by: rickl at June 29, 2017 09:23 AM (xjiRE)

334 OT, but I just wanted to share this choice morsel of left-wing retardation.

In response to an article regarding a new NRA ad:

If any one in America ever comes to confiscate your guns it will be the NRA and their right wing running dogs in Congress---you know, the ones they own. When they talk about "smaller government" be afraid , be very afraid, because "smaller" does not mean less powerful, what it does mean is more power concentrated in the hands of fewer people who are subject to fewer, if any, checks and balances. We usually call that a Dictatorship.

Posted by: Armando at June 29, 2017 09:23 AM (FwRqg)

335 331 That means "outside the law" as in "no laws apply to you any more, you are prey to every single person in England without penalty." --- This could explain my mother In Law Posted by: buzzsaw90 at June 29, 2017 02:23 PM (PNcou) Hostis humani generis, eh?

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:23 AM (0mRoj)

336 If she used deadly force, why isn't the guy dead?
___
He's not dead-dead.

Posted by: Whoopi Goldberg at June 29, 2017 09:24 AM (eSx+E)

337 Raines was hospitalized with minor injuries. no one was killed pantwaists. good lord. a pregnant woman has more balls.

Posted by: The Original REAL Galactic Lord Sir Covfefe at June 29, 2017 09:24 AM (nFwvY)

338 I have no sympathy for the thief either. He was as wrong as the driver in this case. They will both be charged with felonies.

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 09:24 AM (zZWkn)

339 I bet she had a stack of magazines on the seat.

Posted by: Under Fire at June 29, 2017 09:24 AM (l4aLi)

340 How does this perp not get away? I assume it took her a minute or two to get into the SUV start it up and pull out of the space.I would have been long gone by then Posted by: Deplorable Male Logic at June 29, 2017 02:19 PM (lKyWE) --- WORD

Posted by: Billie Joe and Bobbie Sue at June 29, 2017 09:24 AM (PNcou)

341 I'm not saying there's a tidy answer here, but the gleeful acceptance of "Fuck it. 24/7 murder-ball!" is basically throwing away the very concept of a state or government. If you have the right, at all times, to use lethal force as a means of immediately redressing a crime against you (any crime, not just this one case of purse-snatching), we're basically living in a vae victis society. Not saying that's necessarily wrong, but it's what many here seem to be arguing for. I'm just not on board with it.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 09:24 AM (hcyUh)

342 Do you guys put up signs on your property ' we don't shoot burglars' or do you rely on other people to put that fear into potential burglars?

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:24 AM (zO1cf)

343 "But to gleefully crow " To Kill a Mockingbird Shot rabid dog down in cold blood. Picked the best shot cause they didn't want to miss. Canadian Sniper killed ISIS commander at two miles. ISIS Commander didn't see or hear it coming. Death sentence for some dogs when they are captured by Animal Control. She helped the guy out. He now has a chance to turn his life around before he could become a Bernie fan and be executed for leaking DNC dirt to WikiLeaks.

Posted by: Mudd at June 29, 2017 09:25 AM (cfHE9)

344 Repeat after me: "He threatened me" "I thought he was going to come back and kill me"

Posted by: Gridlock at June 29, 2017 09:25 AM (4nmNX)

345 more power concentrated in the hands
of fewer people
***
So when all those conservatives try to take power from one guy in DC and give it to 50 guys/gals in each state is that more or less concentration?

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:25 AM (eSx+E)

346 Yeah people are acting like she ran over the guy's head and crushed it like a melon. She knocked him down.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:25 AM (39g3+)

347 Article says minor injuries. -- Figured so. bruises and abrasions is a long way from vehicular homicide. And who knows, maybe she didn't intent to kill the guy, and just wanted to knock him down. No intent, no crime. The precedent has been set.

Posted by: Frank Lee, Major at June 29, 2017 09:25 AM (m9X4Y)

348 In the Old Testament, Israel was give the eye-for-an-eye rule to bring equity. So, if someone stole your donkey, you couldn't slaughter his whole family. Law brings equity. Lawlessness brings inequity. As is clear from the bureaucratic mobsters running the country, we are a lawless society. We should expect this and worse to come.

Posted by: gm at June 29, 2017 09:25 AM (QFb9P)

349
Was this woman entitled to make a FORCIBLE effort to stop this fuckin' thief who had snatched her valuables? 

Yes or no?


------ I hear no answer from the idiot naysayers. None.



Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 09:25 AM (Z2PYk)

350 While it's true that no good ever came from stringy guys with no shirt on, this was kinda overkill. Give her a slap on the wrist and a warning about hormones while pregnant, give the guy a slap on the wrist and a warning about being a imbecile with no shirt on, and move along.

Posted by: joncelli, Present at the Autopsy at June 29, 2017 09:26 AM (RD7QR)

351 Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 02:24 PM (hcyU You start to lose when you add a strawman to your point.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:26 AM (zO1cf)

352 >>>>That's totally ridiculous. The thief decided to violate another person's rights and property. He gave up his own rights and property when he did that. But you think that a thief should be allowed to just take whatever he wants and run away .... because someone might have insurance.

Your attitude is totally indefensible. Thieves must understand the great risk they put themselves in when they decide to force their ways on others and to take others' possessions - and that risk must include their lives.
.
.
.There is a fine line on when deadly force is justified and it varies State by State.  But I can pretty much say that if you shoot and kill someone who grabs a purse and is running away you are going to face charges.  And you better hire a very good lawyer. 

I personally would not kill someone for stealing from me or the wife.  My line in the sand is if they try to hurt the wife or come into my house, then I will open fire until the threat is neutralized.  

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:26 AM (0pcwX)

353 I guess we can call the guy Mr Dent. Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 02:23 PM (zUYFs) ---------- Heh.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 09:26 AM (Fmupd)

354 You have the right to use force to protect your property. He does not have the right to take your property, nor to expect safety or comfort when he takes it. Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 02:20 PM (39g3+) *********************** It is your property. It is not for someone else to arbitrarily value it.

Posted by: gNewt at June 29, 2017 09:26 AM (3wfnv)

355 A couple I know from tiny Fredek, Texas went to Paris and on the way from the airport on the Metro a guy grabbed her purse and jumped out at a stop. Jen jumped out too, chased him down and got her purse back. One strong swing with a country girl's purse floored him. Their Metro car gave her a rousing ovation.

Posted by: Dave at Buffalo Roam at June 29, 2017 09:26 AM (Eyx+b)

356 So poor that he can't afford a shirt. Very sad. Anyway, he probably gets free medicaid to pay his medical bills.

Posted by: nerdygirl at June 29, 2017 09:26 AM (+lVUW)

357 "I would vote to convict" what a fucking fag thing to say. man up.

Posted by: The Original REAL Galactic Lord Sir Covfefe at June 29, 2017 09:27 AM (nFwvY)

358 but the gleeful acceptance of "Fuck it. 24/7 murder-ball!" is basically throwing away the very concept of a state or government
***
In say 1799 , do you expect that a thief would be allowed to prance away, slowly, after grabbing property from a woman or that the woman and any men around her would use force to stop the thief?


Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:27 AM (eSx+E)

359 I'm not saying there's a tidy answer here, but the gleeful acceptance of "Fuck it. 24/7 murder-ball!" is basically throwing away the very concept of a state or government. If you have the right, at all times, to use lethal force as a means of immediately redressing a crime against you (any crime, not just this one case of purse-snatching), we're basically living in a vae victis society. Not saying that's necessarily wrong, but it's what many here seem to be arguing for. I'm just not on board with it. Then get the fucking cops to prosecute IN EVERY INSTANCE and not have the DA drop the charges. Because when they drop the charges, the state is not longer legitimate and protecting it's citizens.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:27 AM (pGfNT)

360 In the article it says he was running off with her purse. In TX you can use deadly force to protect property. It's a bad idea to mess with pregnant women or new mothers. They're likely to be in mama bear mode and willing to fuck you up. It's his tough luck that he made a shitty decision.

Posted by: stace at June 29, 2017 09:27 AM (pb2K/)

361 >>>>Repeat after me:

"He threatened me"

"I thought he was going to come back and kill me"
.
.
.And you had better hope that there was no one close by taking a video like this one that showed the perp running away as fast as he could. 

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:27 AM (0pcwX)

362 Well.... long story short, they dropped the charges against the guy because they said HE would probably walk, but I would be in Jail... for assault... for pushing him into that car... Talk about an eye opener.... Posted by: Don Q. at June 29, 2017 02:18 PM (NgKpN) You should have just killed him, and un-assed the area.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at June 29, 2017 09:27 AM (XUcIQ)

363 You know what caused this right?Trump's Tweets.

Posted by: steevy at June 29, 2017 09:27 AM (rmVvL)

364

Repeat after me:

"He threatened me"

"I thought he was going to come back and kill me"

 

That would be a defense. "He had my DL with my address. I was afraid he could come to my house and attack me and my unborn child."

 

Bam. Not guilty.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert at June 29, 2017 09:28 AM (O9qtX)

365 Give her a slap on the wrist and a warning about hormones while pregnant, give the guy a slap on the wrist and a warning about being a imbecile with no shirt on, and move along. Posted by: joncelli, Present at the Autopsy at June 29, 2017 02:26 PM (RD7QR) Charge her, then drop the charges. Charge the shithead with a felony, and ring him up.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:28 AM (SRKgf)

366 304 Don't know about where this happened, but defense of property is NOT a viable legal defense for 'assault' here in Clownifornia. That sucks. Here in HoosierVille ... lethal force in defense of self, property, or a third party is A.O.K.

Posted by: ScoggDog at June 29, 2017 09:28 AM (8dl4J)

367 That's pretty much where I come down. Modern laws are way too biased against upstanding citizens and in favor of lowlife scum.
Posted by: rickl at June 29, 2017 02:23 PM (xjiRE)
_______


This goes on to point the need to publish time served/sentenced for any inmate released.


So mama bear doesn't run him over but he gets arrested. What's he get? Maybe a year in county?
Two?

He's back on the street in 3 months, to a halfway house with voluntary reporting, free to continue his thiev'n ways, only with now better training in how not to get caught.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:28 AM (MdC1o)

368 364 Repeat after me: "He threatened me" "I thought he was going to come back and kill me" That would be a defense. "He had my DL with my address. I was afraid he could come to my house and attack me and my unborn child." Bam. Not guilty. Posted by: AZ Hi Desert at June 29, 2017 02:28 PM (O9qtX) That's not going to be a viable claim of self defense.

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:29 AM (0mRoj)

369 According to Daily Mail, she's only charged with misdemeanor. Prosecutors would be lucky to even win on that.

Posted by: gm at June 29, 2017 09:29 AM (QFb9P)

370 Was this woman entitled to make a FORCIBLE effort to stop this fuckin' thief who had snatched her valuables? Yes or no? Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 02:23 PM I vote yes. This is still a democracy, right? we are allowed to vote on it?

Posted by: Frank Lee, Major at June 29, 2017 09:29 AM (m9X4Y)

371 Repeat the mantra: Guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt. Yep.

Posted by: JAS at June 29, 2017 09:29 AM (EX4Wr)

372 We get a story out of Iraq where a woman was fed the cooked remains of her 1 year old son after being starved for 3 days, and people are upset about a robber being hit by a truck?

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:29 AM (39g3+)

373 I have no sympathy for the thief either. He was as wrong as the driver in this case. They will both be charged with felonies.

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 02:24 PM (zZWkn)

His wrong precipitated hers.  If he hadn't been a scum-sucking, thieving waste of space, she would have done nothing to him.  I don't get this at all.  The only thing I can figure is the people who are posting all this "poor thief" stuff have never been the innocent victim of a crime.

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:29 AM (EgOr3)

374 If you have the right, at all times, to use lethal force as a means of immediately redressing a crime against you (any crime, not just this one case of purse-snatching), we're basically living in a vae victis society. Posted by: Warai-otoko Flaming straw-man? Flaming straw-man? Who ordered the Flaming straw-man? This is expensive shit, guys. Don't make me throw this thing out!

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 09:29 AM (udajc)

375 This is still a democracy, right? we are allowed to vote on it?
___
No.

Posted by: The Ninth Circus at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (eSx+E)

376 And you had better hope that there was no one close by taking a video like this one that showed the perp running away as fast as he could. Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 02:27 PM (0pcwX) Now here's an interesting question: if you took the video, and realized what happened, do you give the video to the cops or 86 it?

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (SRKgf)

377 As a CCW holder in North Carolina, the Castle Doctrine applies to my house, my vehicle and my business.  However, if they have left the house, vehicle or business and pose no immediate threat, I cannot use that as a defense to kill them.  She is obviously charged, but I suspect a jury will feel that her actions are defensible. 

But, while she may not have anything of  financial value in her purse, if she has any type of ID, she could assume that the perpetrator would use that information to torment her further. 

Posted by: The Mouse that Roared at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (DxWUs)

378 We usually call that a Dictatorship.

Posted by: Armando at June 29, 2017 02:23 PM (FwRqg)


That IS epic stupid, even beating out the MSFT armchair lawyers. 

Posted by: flounder, rebel, vulgarian, deplorable, winner at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (tbOMB)

379 I think Texas allows you to use force to defend someone else's property. Posted by: Grump928(c) at June 29, 2017 01:46 PM (QQ+il) ... Yes, but they are supposed to request that you do so. This is what made Joe Horn's case so interesting. That and his hollering out "You're dead" indicates he was not shooting to merely stop the threat. Don't get me wrong, I think he's a hero. But you have to mind your P's and Q's if you're going to fire buckshot into somebody robbing your neighbor's house. We have instances here too of clerks killing robbers over cases of beer, no charges filed. Dear God I love Texas.

Posted by: TexasDan[/i] at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (yL25O)

380 i'd charge her with littering

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (PNcou)

381
Well the purse sure goes flying up in the air at the end of it.  I say convict the thief and give a driving while preggo ticket to the lady.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (r+sAi)

382 If you've ever watched the "Cops" episodes that deal with prostitution, it's not like "Pretty Woman". Women who will screw some icky stranger for $15 are not glamorous. Or good looking.

Posted by: nerdygirl at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (+lVUW)

383 Banana Splits Guy @302: Almost asked you, then I looked it up. Geez, what a story. Witnesses who don't know either say the guy was asking the little girl, Is that your father? And still the father is feeling self-righteous.

Posted by: JPS at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (i0KM/)

384

That's not going to be a viable claim of self defense.

 

Not to a prosecutor. But a jury will buy that.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (O9qtX)

385 USN = United states Navy veteran. Why? Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 02:19 PM (zZWkn) Appreciate your response. Lots of mil people on blog, just trying to keep up.

Posted by: dDan at June 29, 2017 09:30 AM (hwYmz)

386 That would be a defense. "He had my DL with my address. I was afraid he could come to my house and attack me and my unborn child." Bam. Not guilty. Posted by: AZ Hi Desert at June 29, 2017 02:28 PM (O9qtX) That's not going to be a viable claim of self defense. Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 02:29 PM (0mRoj) In a law book maybe. In a jury room? Good luck.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:31 AM (pGfNT)

387 Preggo lady can claim hormones gave her temporary insanity

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at June 29, 2017 09:31 AM (hMwEB)

388 "If you have the right, at all times, to use lethal force as a means of immediately redressing a crime against you " Then you are Bill and Hilary Clinton. Or you live in some parts of Detroit or Chicago. Large parts of Mexico. People figure out the real rules and adapt. The fact that a couple of people posting here won't go to that Walmart out of safety concerns speaks volumes. They could have convicted OJ if they had tried him in a civilized area. They didn't because of cameras. Fame and Fortune. Using two people's death to get book deals. Sickening.

Posted by: Mudd at June 29, 2017 09:31 AM (cfHE9)

389 In early colonial days, pre-USA, just about all crimes were capital crimes. No jails, no money for jails anyway. If you were a thief, you might get branded for the first offense. But if you were caught thiefing a second time, you hung. Life was hard back then and so were the people.

Posted by: Boots at June 29, 2017 09:31 AM (EBwPV)

390 Don't know about where this happened, but defense of property is NOT a viable legal defense for 'assault' here in Clownifornia. Also in California (see Breitbart) a Trump supporter attending a Trump rally, when surrounded by angry anti-trump protesters reveals his legally carried firearm and is arrested for 'brandishing' a weapon while surrounded by an angry mob.

Posted by: Frank Lee, Major at June 29, 2017 09:31 AM (m9X4Y)

391 give the guy a slap on the wrist and a warning about being a imbecile with no shirt on, and move along.
Posted by: joncelli, Present at the Autopsy at June 29, 2017 02:26 PM (RD7QR)
_________



Good God almighty... no.

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:31 AM (MdC1o)

392 Fuck it. 24/7 murder-ball!"

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 09:32 AM (OmOvC)

393 Dude, rule #1: Don't fuck with a pregnant lady. They might just fucking kill you. If I was on the jury, I'm pretty sure a "temporary insanity" defense would sway me.

Posted by: DanInMN at June 29, 2017 09:32 AM (h5ffp)

394 I love the guy's hands flying up as he gets hit. Honestly, I hope he did do it and she gets set free because that is comedy gold.

Posted by: The Resistance at June 29, 2017 09:32 AM (J70i0)

395 Who Run Bartertown?

Posted by: Hikaru at June 29, 2017 09:32 AM (XMDuf)

396 >>> You know what caused this right?Trump's Tweets.<<<

He was bleeding badly from a purse-lift.  I said No!

Posted by: Fritz at June 29, 2017 09:33 AM (2Mnv1)

397 >>>>And you had better hope that there was no one close by taking a video like this one that showed the perp running away as fast as he could.
Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 02:27 PM (0pcwX)



Now here's an interesting question: if you took the video, and realized what happened, do you give the video to the cops or 86 it?
.
.
Most people do not like cops so they would most likely erase it unless there was reward money involved.   

I live my life like I am under 24/7 video surveillance when I leave my house and I act accordingly.  

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:33 AM (0pcwX)

398 It's a bad idea to mess with pregnant women or new mothers. They're likely to be in mama bear mode and willing to fuck you up. It's his tough luck that he made a shitty decision. Posted by: stace Hormones are a real thing.

Posted by: nerdygirl at June 29, 2017 09:33 AM (+lVUW)

399 It is your property. It is not for someone else to arbitrarily value it. Posted by: gNewt at June 29, 2017 02:26 PM (3wfnv) .... The thief has already valued his life for us. If your life is worth more than a six pack, don't risk it stealing a six pack.

Posted by: TexasDan[/i] at June 29, 2017 09:33 AM (yL25O)

400 Now here's an interesting question: if you took the video, and realized what happened, do you give the video to the cops or 86 it? Fucking microsoft & the blue screen of death! And at such an inopportune time!

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:33 AM (pGfNT)

401 As late as the 1950s it was fully lawful and socially approved in most of these United States for any citizen to SHOOT a fleeing criminal. This needs to be brought back because BLACK LIVES MATTER, so long as they are law abiding, as do pregnant lives and every other kind of life, EXCEPT FOR ATTACKING OR FLEEING PERPS, whose lives don't matter as much, and who need a good strong deterrent to being attacking or fleeing perps.

Posted by: Alec Rawls at June 29, 2017 09:33 AM (AphMS)

402 You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner. I disagree.

Posted by: Grump928(c) at June 29, 2017 09:34 AM (QQ+il)

403 We get a story out of Iraq where a woman was fed the cooked remains of her 1 year old son after being starved for 3 days,
***
I'd be a little concerned that this is another modern take on an ancient legend along these lines from this region.

But on general principle I say we level bomb Raqqa anyway.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:34 AM (eSx+E)

404 In say 1799 , do you expect that a thief would be allowed to prance away, slowly, after grabbing property from a woman or that the woman and any men around her would use force to stop the thief? Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 02:27 PM (eSx+E) What amazes me is that there WERE guys there.... who basically did nothing to stop the perp... So She had to....

Posted by: Don Q. at June 29, 2017 09:34 AM (NgKpN)

405 Now here's an interesting question: if you took the video, and realized what happened, do you give the video to the cops or 86 it? Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 29, 2017 02:30 PM (SRKgf) I'd definitely shit-can it ... then trip the dude and ground guide the chic as she backed over him for good measure.

Posted by: ScoggDog at June 29, 2017 09:34 AM (tRLIC)

406 This reminds me of the 90s case (possibly urban legend) when a shop in a less-wholesome part of town kept being robbed, the perpetrators would break in through a weak point in the roof, and rob the shop. Well, the owner got fed up with it, hauled an old bedspring under the drop point, wired it to a plug, and plugged it in. Next day he comes back: dead guy fried on the coil springs. He's charged with murder. But really, setting a trap to protect your property; nobody but the invader is to blame for triggering it.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:35 AM (39g3+)

407 I'm not saying there's a tidy answer here, but the gleeful acceptance of "Fuck it. 24/7 murder-ball!" is basically throwing away the very concept of a state or government. Uh ... I didn't see any state or government anywhere in the area for this whole episode. Did I miss something? Were there cops holding this guy down when she ran him over? The state or government is not around when someone breaks into your house at 2am. If you have the right, at all times, to use lethal force as a means of immediately redressing a crime against you (any crime, not just this one case of purse-snatching), we're basically living in a vae victis society. You have the G-d-given right to defend yourself or your property and to inflict whatever damage on the offender that you want or deem necessary in that situation. Why would you put restrictions on the actions of a free person while someone else is in the act or has just attacked or stolen from them? Not saying that's necessarily wrong, but it's what many here seem to be arguing for. I'm just not on board with it. Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 02:24 PM (hcyUh) We are arguing for common sense and what everyone knows is fair and just. The attacker or thief has chosen to put himself in that situation and to put an innocent person at risk of who knows what. That action by the criminal must carry with it risks. The criminal chose. The innocent victim had no choice and has no way of knowing how far it will all go. Deadly force for those crimes are just reasonable options that the victim deserves to have. Not that a victim should have to be worrying about whether he's going to go to jail with every move. The restrictions that get placed on free people who are victims of others are quite insane, these days.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 09:35 AM (rZ+mb)

408 nerdygirl, 382: I was driving out of where I lived years ago, stopped at a corner, and a middle-aged blonde to whom the years had not been at all kind motioned me to roll down her window. Being naive I did. She asked if I'd like to get together later, for money. I was briefly tempted to ask how much she was offering, but then I felt sorry for her, and just said No, thanks.

Posted by: JPS at June 29, 2017 09:35 AM (i0KM/)

409 That's my purse!!!

*groinkick*

Posted by: Bobby Hill at June 29, 2017 09:36 AM (SpeiC)

410 You start to lose when you add a strawman to your point. Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 02:26 PM (zO1cf) I honestly don't think it's a strawman, but i'll cop to being hyperbolic. I do think it really is substantially the same though. To say that this woman's actions should be legal is equivalent to saying anyone may use lethal force at any time to redress a crime. If there is no theory of a dividing line between threat to life and threat to property, that's where we're at. it doesn't change the fact that crime sucks and criminals deserve what they get when shit like this goes down. There's no tears in my beers for this jackass. I feel the court of horde opinion is arraying against me now though, and i don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, so i'll get moving along now. Have a good day everyone.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 09:36 AM (hcyUh)

411 I'd be a little concerned that this is another modern take on an ancient legend along these lines from this region. Yeah, it is unsupported and its just the mother's word. On the other hand: IS has done horrific, unthinkable stuff in the past, so... plausible at least.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:36 AM (39g3+)

412
Hey Joncelli at #350,

With all due respect (because I've been there): what is your limiting principle?

The reason why there is no requirement for state-hired police officers to risk their lives for the sake of law-abiding citizens is because there is no "LIMITING PRINCIPLE".
Otherwise they could be state-required to sacrifice their lives for any perceived (alleged) misdeed.

The same holds true for a law-abiding citizen regarding taking FORCIBLE action to protect themselves from FORCIBLE crime.
So long as no alternative means can be demonstratively proven as available, then a law-abiding citizen can use whatever means at his/her disposal to protect his/her interests against a law-violating criminal.





Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 09:36 AM (Z2PYk)

413 Doubtless she was also scolded and lectured by police. She is supposed to let the criminal do what he wants, then sit on the ground and cry, and let the police come in and do their job. (Well, that is the attitude of too many cops and all Statists, anyway.)

Posted by: CatchThirtyThr33 at June 29, 2017 09:36 AM (kcQyA)

414 Nope, didn't see a thing sir..

Posted by: Korean defending his property from his LA rooftop. at June 29, 2017 09:36 AM (MdC1o)

415 We have instances here too of clerks killing robbers over cases of beer, no charges filed. Dear God I love Texas. Posted by: TexasDan at June 29, 2017 02:30 PM (yL25O) The fact is that Pareto's rule applies to crime as well: most of the crime comes from a small proportion of the population. I doubt that there are many one-off criminals. It was a crime today, probably some other crime yesterday, almost certainly another one tomorrow. So when one of these clowns get whacked even in the commission of a minor crime it probably has a salutary effect on crime stats for years afterwards.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:36 AM (SRKgf)

416 Hell every cop show from the 50's had the line ' Stop or I'll shoot!!! Bam Bam!! '

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:37 AM (zO1cf)

417 We benefit from righteous and scary neighbors whether we appreciate it or not.

Posted by: BourbonChicken at June 29, 2017 09:37 AM (VdICR)

418 I'm going to let the jury figure this one out. Their job, not mine.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Abbot of St. Costello-on-the-Hurlingbone at June 29, 2017 09:37 AM (AM1GF)

419 >>>>You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner.


I disagree.
.
.
.Ask that Doctor in CT who murdered his neighbor because he thought the neighbor molested his young daughter.  The neighbor never did anything and the DR. got 20 years hard time. 

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:37 AM (0pcwX)

420 Evidence that this guy is guilty: He's not wearing a shirt. It also looks like he's got his underwear sticking out of pants or maybe it's a diaper

Posted by: TheQuietMan at June 29, 2017 09:37 AM (493sH)

421 Are we sure this didn't happen in Florida?

Posted by: jwest at June 29, 2017 09:37 AM (Zs4uk)

422 Doubtless she was also scolded and lectured by police. She is supposed to let the criminal do what he wants, then sit on the ground and cry, and let the police come in and do their job. (Well, that is the attitude of too many cops and all Statists, anyway.) Posted by: CatchThirtyThr33 at June 29, 2017 02:36 PM (kcQyA) Their job? Taking a report and filing it. Then off to Dunkin' Donuts.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:37 AM (SRKgf)

423 Yeah people are acting like she ran over the guy's head and crushed it like a melon. She knocked him down. Posted by: Christopher R Taylor **** While I am saddened he did not die, the law doesn't care either way. She used deadly force against a guy she was not in imminent threat of being killed by, or suffering severe bodily injury from.

Posted by: Tilikum KAW at June 29, 2017 09:38 AM (uhftQ)

424 Well, that is the attitude of too many cops Yeah, I have nothing but respect and gratitude for police, and have known several who were all great guys. Its thankless work and you can't make a single mistake. But their attitude of "let us take care of everything and just be a passive victim next time" does not set well with me.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:38 AM (39g3+)

425 When they talk about "smaller government" be afraid, be very afraid, because "smaller" does not mean less powerful, what it does mean is more power concentrated in the hands of fewer people who are subject to fewer, if any, checks and balances. We usually call that a Dictatorship. That's some weapons-grade stupid right there. In an ideal Conservative world, we'd still have 1 President, 100 Senators, 535 Congressmen, and some arbitrary number of Supreme CJs. The Federal gov't would be defanged (less power for everyone), and the federal workforce (who are coming up with hundreds of new regulations that carry the force of law daily) would be hemimated at least. That person is seriously arguing "less gov't" means no Senators or Congressmen or Supes? What a 'tard.

Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 09:38 AM (jhqr1)

426 We are arguing for common sense and what everyone knows is fair and just. The attacker or thief has chosen to put himself in that situation and to put an innocent person at risk of who knows what. That action by the criminal must carry with it risks. The criminal chose. The innocent victim had no choice and has no way of knowing how far it will all go. Deadly force for those crimes are just reasonable options that the victim deserves to have. Not that a victim should have to be worrying about whether he's going to go to jail with every move. The restrictions that get placed on free people who are victims of others are quite insane, these days. Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair Close it up. Shut it down. We have an eloquent threadwinner.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:39 AM (pGfNT)

427 Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 02:24 PM (hcyUh) Chemjeff?

Posted by: Don Q. at June 29, 2017 09:39 AM (NgKpN)

428 He ran in a straight line just begging to get hit. Serpentine. That's what boggled me about this video: he had infinite opportunities to duck between other cars or into a cart corral and she wouldn't be able to hit him. Instead he did exactly what was necessary to get hit.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 29, 2017 09:39 AM (3J/LN)

429 Now here's an interesting question: if you took the video, and realized what happened, do you give the video to the cops or 86 it? Fucking microsoft & the blue screen of death! And at such an inopportune time! Posted by: rickb223 No, because the likelyhood of your willful destruction of evidence would be caught and your ass would be convicted. Then again, your harddrives might suffer a case of neodymium magnets in your coffee mug that you forgot about.

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 09:39 AM (udajc)

430 OK just watched it. She DID NOT run him over. She hit him and stopped instantly.

Posted by: The Original REAL Galactic Lord Sir Covfefe at June 29, 2017 09:39 AM (nFwvY)

431 Superman: THIS LOOKS LIKE A JOB FOR ... oh ... ohhhhh ... Well, nevermind.

Posted by: BourbonChicken at June 29, 2017 09:39 AM (VdICR)

432 Maybe.....Bounty that Sheriff's department pay for Varmint or Coyote should be doubled for Shirtless...Toothless...Meth addicted Purse Snatcher?

Posted by: KIM at June 29, 2017 09:39 AM (/y/I/)

433 Here's the basic problem: we've become so soft on crime, and so sympathetic toward those who commit it, that we risk vigilantism arising in an effort to get justice that many perceive is not forthcoming from the state.

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:39 AM (SRKgf)

434 Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 02:35 PM (39g3+ Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:40 AM (zO1cf)

435 "a middle-aged blonde to whom the years had not been at all kind motioned me to roll down her window" meth. not even once.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 09:41 AM (zUYFs)

436 This reminds me of the 90s case (possibly urban legend) when a shop in a less-wholesome part of town kept being robbed, the perpetrators would break in through a weak point in the roof, and rob the shop.
***
I remember that story as well.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:41 AM (eSx+E)

437 >>>>Well, that is the attitude of too many cops

Yeah, I have nothing but respect and gratitude for police, and have known several who were all great guys. Its thankless work and you can't make a single mistake.

But their attitude of "let us take care of everything and just be a passive victim next time" does not set well with me.
.
.
.When four cars in our neighborhood in Kentucky got egged one night the Cop taking our report told me that if I caught the kids to beat the $hit out of them before I called the Cops.  My wife still can't believe he said that to us. 

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:41 AM (0pcwX)

438 While I am saddened he did not die, the law doesn't care either way. I'm not sure. There's a pretty broad sliding scale of the proper use of force, and a pregnant woman is given a huge amount of leeway. Plus: ID, address, phone, keys, etc. She has very good reason to be afraid of this guy coming back or misusing her information. Stealing a wallet sucks, its lots of stuff like money and ID. A purse is like a woman's life stuffed into a bag. Its even more of a problem. A pregnant woman's purse? Even if the law is going to say she went too far (by knocking him over and scratching him up), I can't imagine a jury on earth that would agree. Even if you take some kind of high concept position of making a statement about vigilantism and the sacred value of life, this probably isn't the hill to die on.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:41 AM (39g3+)

439 Chemjeff? Ouch.

Posted by: WitchDoktor, AKA VA GOP Sucks at June 29, 2017 09:41 AM (tVWQB)

440 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 02:40 PM (zO1cf) That's too bad ... because traps are AWESOME !!!

Posted by: ScoggDog at June 29, 2017 09:41 AM (tRLIC)

441 In Texas, one can use force, if used immediately or in fresh pursuit, to recover stolen property. And one can use deadly force under certain circumstances (but not under the circumstances in this story, I think, because it didn't occur at night). That said, I'd acquit in a case like this even if she killed the SOB. And if I were a prosecutor, I'd never bring this charge.

Posted by: Curmudgeonly Ex-Clerk at June 29, 2017 09:41 AM (ppBhU)

442 402 You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner.
I disagree.

I do as well.  Where does the state get the authority to be judge, jury, and executioner?  From us, who already have it.  In the name of the Social Compact, we grant that authority, which we already have, to the State in the expectation that they will use it in a way that is beneficial to all of us.

When the State isn't around, and when there is no reasonable expectation that the State will be able to effectively carry out its duties, then those rights can and should be reasonably reclaimed by each of us.  Now we need to be good Judges and not hanging Judges, and in this case this woman was - she didn't kill him, she just crimped his moves for a little while and put the fear of God and pregnant women into his soul.   I concur with her judgment.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 09:42 AM (OmOvC)

443 I am not a lawyer, but I've read about "use of force". The legal standard in almost the whole United States is roughly summed up as: You may only use potentially lethal force when there is an immediate, otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent. I'm perfectly happy to consider rape as "grave bodily harm" and so does most of the USA. Slamming someone's head into a sidewalk repeatedly is danger of death. Stealing a purse, not so much. As I understand it she would have been justified in using "reasonable" force to apprehend him... for example tripping him and making him fall. Or asking a linebacker to tackle him. The video didn't play for me, but hitting with a car is going beyond reasonable force. She might get a light sentence or a probation, but I don't see her skating untouched from this. Still, she might get a jury trial, and she's pregnant, so who knows. But I won't be hitting anyone with my car unless one or more lives are at stake.

Posted by: mr_jack at June 29, 2017 09:42 AM (M59SC)

444 But their attitude of "let us take care of everything and just be a passive victim next time" does not set well with me.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 02:38 PM (39g3+)
________


Me either and I said so after my house was broken into.
Since then I have decided that I will defend my family, my property, and my way of life however I may choose depending upon what I have available at the time.
Warning, I'm old, so don't expect me to chase you very far before I slow you down.

Posted by: Korean defending his property from his LA rooftop. at June 29, 2017 09:42 AM (MdC1o)

445 You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner. I disagree. . . .Ask that Doctor in CT who murdered his neighbor because he thought the neighbor molested his young daughter. The neighbor never did anything and the DR. got 20 years hard time. Posted by: The Great White Scotsman Goal posts on wheels. We are talking about caught-in-the-act vs supposition. Forget talking about "alleged" this and that when caught in the act. The lady whose purse was stolen caught the perp IN THE ACT. There is no more proof possible than caught in the act. Same as the "alleged" Hodgkinson.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:43 AM (pGfNT)

446 No, because the likelyhood of your willful destruction of evidence would be caught and your ass would be convicted. For a federal crime? Probably. For local or state? Very unlikely. Its not illegal to delete files on your own phone or device. They'd have to push really hard to get that one past anyone in a jury.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:43 AM (39g3+)

447 It was a crime today, probably some other crime yesterday, almost certainly another one tomorrow. So when one of these clowns get whacked even in the commission of a minor crime it probably has a salutary effect on crime stats for years afterwards. Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 29, 2017 02:36 PM (SRKgf) ... In fact, the particular case I remember, or at least the way I like to remember it, is that the perp walked in literally every day and stole the same thing, case of beer. Clerk finally had it one day.

Posted by: TexasDan[/i] at June 29, 2017 09:43 AM (yL25O)

448 "Wet clean-up in aisle B-5."

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 09:43 AM (mvenn)

449 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. -- What about bear traps? Are bear traps ok?

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at June 29, 2017 09:43 AM (hMwEB)

450 I bet Mr Dent wished he *had* been wearing a diaper after getting unexpectedly hit by angry pregnant woman

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 09:43 AM (zUYFs)

451 >>>>I'm not sure. There's a pretty broad sliding scale of the proper use of force, and a pregnant woman is given a huge amount of leeway. Plus: ID, address, phone, keys, etc. She has very good reason to be afraid of this guy coming back or misusing her information.

Stealing a wallet sucks, its lots of stuff like money and ID. A purse is like a woman's life stuffed into a bag. Its even more of a problem. A pregnant woman's purse?

Even if the law is going to say she went too far (by knocking him over and scratching him up), I can't imagine a jury on earth that would agree.

Even if you take some kind of high concept position of making a statement about vigilantism and the sacred value of life, this probably isn't the hill to die on.
.
.
.Fairly certain he did not get her keys or she would not be running him down with her SUV in the parking lot. 

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:43 AM (0pcwX)

452 Ask that Doctor in CT who murdered his neighbor because he thought the neighbor molested his young daughter.
***
Not really equivalent.

This is more in line with the guy who found a scumbag molesting his daughter in Texas and beat the shit out of him. Should he have used force to stop the crime, or called the cops and waited?

Do you, or do you not, have the right to use force to stop a crime in progress?

This isn't a case where someone stole her purse and she later saw this guy and thought maybe it was him. She had him dead to rights....so to speak.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:44 AM (eSx+E)

453 I was briefly tempted to ask how much she was offering, but then I felt sorry for her, and just said No, thanks.

Posted by: JPS at June 29, 2017 02:35 PM (i0KM/)


I got caught at a stop where a "homeless" guy was asking for money.  I had to motion to the lady behind him on her bike to go ahead and cross in front of me, to which "homeless" guy thought he was getting a score, until I could waive him off. 

Awkward.

Posted by: flounder, rebel, vulgarian, deplorable, winner at June 29, 2017 09:44 AM (tbOMB)

454
Just a simple citizen's arrest.  Move along.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 29, 2017 09:44 AM (r+sAi)

455 >>>60 Not a Florida lawyer, but most states do not allow anybody to use deadly force to defend property, and running somebody over with a car (or trying to) is deadly force. I don't know -- not at that speed. She was only doing like 20.

Posted by: ace at June 29, 2017 09:44 AM (8rNrN)

456 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 02:40 PM (zO1cf) Booby traps don't discriminate. A curious child might be the victim.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at June 29, 2017 09:44 AM (XUcIQ)

457 let me just say that *I* personally would buy that argument, because I wish too.

Posted by: ace at June 29, 2017 09:45 AM (8rNrN)

458 Maybe she could go with the "I saw the parking spot first and had my turn signal on" defense.

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 09:45 AM (mvenn)

459 What she did was wrong. She should not have done it. She did it anyway. So be it. She should request a jury trial. If I am on the jury, I will hold out for innocence. I will hang the jury as long as necessary, until the kid starts preschool if needed.

Posted by: rd at June 29, 2017 09:45 AM (4dz1m)

460 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 02:40 PM (zO1cf) --- then how do you catch the boobies?

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at June 29, 2017 09:45 AM (PNcou)

461 "Run them down," a wise man said

Posted by: ace at June 29, 2017 09:45 AM (8rNrN)

462 She had the receipt in her purse for a prior abortion. Her right to privacy trumps all others.

Posted by: JAS at June 29, 2017 09:45 AM (EX4Wr)

463 takes off Korean sock, puts back on the Irish one

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (MdC1o)

464 As I understand it she would have been justified in using "reasonable" force to apprehend him... for example tripping him and making him fall. Or asking a linebacker to tackle him. The video didn't play for me, but hitting with a car is going beyond reasonable force. You should watch the video, because she didn't crush him under her wheels like Beetle Bailey. She knocked him down and stopped. She wasn't going fast enough to result in lethal force. Cars are not an instant death machine that murders with a touch. Its a matter of degrees of force, not a switch on or off. If I hit you with the side of a gun, that's not an attempt at lethal force, even though I used a gun. Even the law has to have some logic and common sense applied.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (39g3+)

465 When four cars in our neighborhood in Kentucky got egged one night the Cop taking our report told me that if I caught the kids to beat the $hit out of them before I called the Cops. My wife still can't believe he said that to us. Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 02:41 PM (0pcwX) When I moved to my current little small town in Indiana ... I had to update my carry permit. Local PD told me ... and I quote ... ..."If you ever have to use this, you don't call 911. You call us. We'll make that shit right." I swear on that. No bullshit.

Posted by: ScoggDog at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (tRLIC)

466 When four cars in our neighborhood in Kentucky got egged one night the Cop taking our report told me that if I caught the kids to beat the $hit out of them before I called the Cops. My wife still can't believe he said that to us. Because he knew the "state" wouldn't do squat.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (pGfNT)

467 Gnarly. Shirtless. Dude. I mean, he deserves a bumper tap just for that.

Posted by: joncelli, Present at the Autopsy at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (RD7QR)

468 >>>>You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner.





I disagree.
.
.
.Ask that Doctor in CT who murdered his neighbor because he thought the neighbor molested his young daughter. The neighbor never did anything and the DR. got 20 years hard time.
Posted by: The Great White Scotsman



Goal posts on wheels.
We are talking about caught-in-the-act vs supposition.

Forget talking about "alleged" this and that when caught in the act.

The lady whose purse was stolen caught the perp IN THE ACT. There is no more proof possible than caught in the act.
Same as the "alleged" Hodgkinson.
.
.
.Nope sorry the goal posts did not budge an inch.  The original question and response stand regardless if anyone was caught in the act:

You DON'T have the right to arrogate to yourself the roles of judge, jury and executioner.

I disagree.

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (0pcwX)

469 but hitting with a car is going beyond reasonable force.
=====

There are states now that have amended their laws, mostly in response to protesters attacking cars, that keeping going is not unreasonable even if someone is hit.

Couldn't see the video either, but if someone was taking video rather than helping the pregnant lady, some man cards need to be turned in.

Posted by: mustbequantum at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (MIKMs)

470 449 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. -- What about bear traps? Are bear traps ok? Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at June 29, 2017 02:43 PM (hMwEB) You could claim they were set for bears but they might doubt your story if they were located in the attic.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (zO1cf)

471 216 For the squishes: You will propose that she should have called the police. Entirely sensible. The emergency responder may or may not have answered (not all calls are immediately answered ) The emergency responder may or may not have asked the caller to calmly describe the event in question. The emergency responder may or may not have told the caller to calmly wait for the cops who will write a report that may or may not be tossed to a investigator. The investigator may or may not decide that there is no imminent threat to the community and that while her loss is regretible, it's not a crime-stat, so fuck that shit. Justice served. Like cold shit on a warm sunday. You are the 'first responder' in any situation whether or not you wish to acknowledge it. Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 29, 2017 02:04 PM (udajc) This, right here, is the #1 reason I find the term "first responder" grating. I can't remember who said it - I think it was a sheriff out of WI - but he stated the truth: "You are your own first responder."

Posted by: CatchThirtyThr33 at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (kcQyA)

472 446 No, because the likelyhood of your willful destruction of evidence would be caught and your ass would be convicted. For a federal crime? Probably. For local or state? Very unlikely. Its not illegal to delete files on your own phone or device. They'd have to push really hard to get that one past anyone in a jury. Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 02:43 PM (39g3+) This of course presupposes that the cops knew you had video. How could they know whether you did or didn't?

Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (SRKgf)

473 Booby traps don't discriminate. A curious child might be the victim. Or a fireman, or an EMT, or a concerned neighbor who heard you calling out for help.

Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 09:46 AM (jhqr1)

474 >>>>I'm not sure. There's a pretty broad sliding scale of the proper use of force, and a pregnant woman is given a huge amount of leeway. Plus: ID, address, phone, keys, etc. She has very good reason to be afraid of this guy coming back or misusing her information. This is a totally bullshit argument which I'm completely willing to buy into if needed.

Posted by: ace at June 29, 2017 09:47 AM (8rNrN)

475 >>>She used deadly force no she didn't. the dude is not an immortal and he's still alive. she got awfully awfully physical with him though.

Posted by: The Original REAL Galactic Lord Sir Covfefe at June 29, 2017 09:47 AM (nFwvY)

476 When the State isn't around, and when there is no reasonable expectation that the State will be able to effectively carry out its duties, then those rights can and should be reasonably reclaimed by each of us.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 02:42 PM (OmOvC)

This!

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:48 AM (EgOr3)

477 I have to assume that if someone is recording, there was a bit of an altercation.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at June 29, 2017 09:48 AM (oVJmc)

478 it was just a vehicular tackle, your honor

Posted by: ace at June 29, 2017 09:48 AM (8rNrN)

479 Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at June 29, 2017 02:45 PM (PNcou) With a soft caress.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 09:48 AM (zO1cf)

480 Bravo Tom Servo.. Well put!

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:48 AM (MdC1o)

481 just a PIT maneuver deployed against the rear bumper of a human vehicle

Posted by: ace at June 29, 2017 09:48 AM (8rNrN)

482 Or a fireman, or an EMT, or a concerned neighbor who heard you calling out for help.
***
Back in the old days, where the state didn't pretend citizens were all children, people were generally judged on the outcome of their actions.

Negligently kill a fireman? That's a hang'n.

Kill a thief instead? Here's a high five from your neighbors.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 09:49 AM (eSx+E)

483 This is a totally bullshit argument which I'm completely willing to buy into if needed. ----

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at June 29, 2017 09:49 AM (hMwEB)

484 FUCH that couch fucher

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2017 09:49 AM (M+Lyo)

485 470 449 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. -- What about bear traps? Are bear traps ok? Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at June 29, 2017 02:43 PM (hMwEB) You could claim they were set for bears but they might doubt your story if they were located in the attic. Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 02:46 PM (zO1cf) ... What if you bait it specifically for hobos? Asking for a friend.

Posted by: TexasDan[/i] at June 29, 2017 09:49 AM (yL25O)

486 OT: Idea stolen from Mark Steyn: the Tickle Me Acosta doll.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 09:49 AM (Nwg0u)

487 This of course presupposes that the cops knew you had video. How could they know whether you did or didn't? Yep. Even if witnesses saw you holding your phone up as if you were recording, you could just say, "In all the excitement I thought I was recording, but I must have missed the record button. Sorry."

Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 09:49 AM (jhqr1)

488 Back in the old days, where the state didn't pretend citizens were all children, people were generally judged on the outcome of their actions. Negligently kill a fireman? That's a hang'n. Kill a thief instead? Here's a high five from your neighbors. Posted by: 18-1 at June 29, 2017 02:49 PM (eSx+E) Exactly.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 09:50 AM (rZ+mb)

489 I think it was a sheriff out of WI - but he stated the truth: "You are your own first responder." Posted by: CatchThirtyThr33 No! I claim that phrase! It's fucking mine. * mutters to self loudly for the next nine minutes ...

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 09:50 AM (udajc)

490 >>it was just a vehicular tackle, your honor Why didn't she just knock the purse out his hand with the car like they do on tv?

Posted by: JackStraw at June 29, 2017 09:50 AM (/tuJf)

491 Maybe..... video taken .....Out of context?

Posted by: KIM at June 29, 2017 09:50 AM (/y/I/)

492 Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 02:37 PM (0pcwX) Not the same since the thief was *committing a crime* by running away with her purse. Physically stopped while *in Commission* of the crime is nothing like some guy being paranoid and simply deciding his neighbor was a molester.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 09:50 AM (rp9xB)

493 What if you bait it specifically for hobos? Asking for a friend. Posted by: TexasDan at June 29, 2017 02:49 PM (yL25O) Use Sterno. Works every time.

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:50 AM (0mRoj)

Posted by: KIM at June 29, 2017 09:51 AM (/y/I/)

495 Frontier Justice.

Posted by: JAS at June 29, 2017 09:51 AM (EX4Wr)

496 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 02:40 PM (zO1cf) I believe my fougasse installations are legal in Alabama.

Posted by: Grump928(c) at June 29, 2017 09:51 AM (QQ+il)

497 Maybe..... video taken .....Out of context?
Posted by: KIM at June 29, 2017 02:50 PM (/y/I/)
_______


Deceptively edited?

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:51 AM (MdC1o)

498 In California, where the voters have effectively decriminalized everything short of murder, crime is going off the scale.  The cops (mostly) rightly figure why go to a lot of trouble when nothing is going to happen to the scrotes that are committing it? 

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:51 AM (EgOr3)

499 Mama don't play.

Posted by: huerfano at June 29, 2017 09:51 AM (TO4Og)

500
I hope that guy has insurance to pay for giving her a fender bender.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 29, 2017 09:51 AM (r+sAi)

501 "Unreasonable force. Why didn't she just drive up alongside him and snatch the purse from his hands?" /MFM

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 09:52 AM (mvenn)

502 She's PREGNANT people. She is not sane.

Posted by: Max Power at June 29, 2017 09:52 AM (q177U)

503 The most infamous booby trap, that gets people both hurt and arrested for making them, is the infamous "spring-gun" where a string is attached to the trigger of a shotgun (or other gun, but shotgun is the usual) that is aimed at the door.  Easy to make, and a good way to shoot a friend who hasn't heard from the owner in question for a while and is concerned about him.  Or a cop, or a landlord.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 09:52 AM (OmOvC)

504 just a PIT maneuver deployed against the rear bumper of a human vehicle Posted by: ace YEP And the convictions of cops for doing that? ............

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 09:52 AM (udajc)

505 Fairly certain he did not get her keys or she would not be running him down with her SUV in the parking lot. ' These days you don't necessarily need your keys to open or start your car. But a lot of people have different sets: home and car, or duplicates. You're right though, likely he didn't get her keys. She must have had them out, getting into the rig when he grabbed her purse and ran.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 29, 2017 09:52 AM (39g3+)

506 he was slower than I initially thought your honor. I was just trying to catch him and whip his ass like hollywood claims is possible.

Posted by: The Original REAL Galactic Lord Sir Covfefe at June 29, 2017 09:53 AM (nFwvY)

507 This is a totally bullshit argument which I'm completely willing to buy into if needed. Posted by: ace at June 29, 2017 02:47 PM (8rNrN) Heh. Yep. And that's why we get to insist on a jury of our peers. Because sometimes our peers might say "stick your law up your ass".

Posted by: ScoggDog at June 29, 2017 09:53 AM (tRLIC)

508 You could claim they were set for bears but they might doubt your story if they were located in the attic. Posted by: Jack Sock Hey, I've seen video of a bear open a closed car door. Just slipped its enormous claws under the pull handle and pulled. I wouldn't doubt a bear's ability to get into an attic.

Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 09:53 AM (jhqr1)

509 It reminds me of the scene in Crocodile Dundee where Dundee throws a soup can at a purse-snatcher's head.  IRL, it would have killed him, but the crowd applauded. 

Posted by: California Girl at June 29, 2017 09:53 AM (Pt5D1)

510 nude camp .

Posted by: chavo del ocho at June 29, 2017 09:53 AM (BZtGk)

511 Oh, she could say she just wanted to catch up to him and politely ask him to return her purse, but her foot slipped and she didn't brake in time.

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at June 29, 2017 09:53 AM (hMwEB)

512 Use Sterno. Works every time. Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 02:50 PM (0mRoj) You might mistakenly snag Kitty Dukakis.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 09:53 AM (rZ+mb)

513 504 just a PIT maneuver deployed against the rear bumper of a human vehicle Posted by: ace YEP And the convictions of cops for doing that? ............ Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 29, 2017 02:52 PM (udajc) They're effectively held to a lower standard than the rest of us.

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:53 AM (0mRoj)

514 490 Why didn't she just knock the purse out his hand with the car like they do on tv? Posted by: JackStraw 501 "Unreasonable force. Why didn't she just drive up alongside him and snatch the purse from his hands?" /MFM Posted by: Muldoon ****** This much, JackStraw! =><=

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 09:54 AM (mvenn)

515 502 She's PREGNANT people. She is not sane. Posted by: Max Power at June 29, 2017 02:52 PM (q177U) YOU TOOK THE LAST SHOPPING CART! I KEEL YOU!

Posted by: That Pregnant Chick at the Stop 'N Shop at June 29, 2017 09:54 AM (RD7QR)

516 WalMart may be liable for not having speed bumps installed.

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 09:55 AM (mvenn)

517 Frontier Justice. Posted by: JAS Fixed.

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 09:55 AM (udajc)

518 >>This much, JackStraw! =><= Obviously we are the only two adults in the room.

Posted by: JackStraw at June 29, 2017 09:55 AM (/tuJf)

519 515 502 She's PREGNANT people. She is not sane. Posted by: Max Power at June 29, 2017 02:52 PM (q177U) YOU TOOK THE LAST SHOPPING CART! I KEEL YOU! Posted by: That Pregnant Chick at the Stop 'N Shop at June 29, 2017 02:54 PM (RD7QR) That's pretty typical on Black Friday.

Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 09:56 AM (0mRoj)

520 He was a good boy. Turning his life around. Was an unemployed speed bump who had just enrolled in crash test dummie school.

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 09:56 AM (mvenn)

521 She's PREGNANT people. She is not sane. I'm thinking that played a major role.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at June 29, 2017 09:56 AM (oVJmc)

522 Couple of weeks ago, I had parked on the fringe of the BJs (like Costco but with a funnier name) parking lot. I noticed on the way to the car some sketchy characters, so I kept them in my peripherial vision. Opened the back and threw my purse all the way to the front, then locked the car and started unloading into the back. Sketchy fuckwit starts sideling up near me, so I turn and face him. He moves in a wide arc and tries to come up behind me.


However, he didn't know that two of my sons were on their way out (25, wrestler, lax, football) and 22 (ironman football, lax). He kept trying to get behind me. As the boys approached the car, I said, "Hey, this guy is bothering me." Creep jumped out of his skin, boys started toward him, asking him if they "could help him." Eventually, they suggested he lie face down on the pavement until the cops they called got there.


Which taught me two things, I need to carry regardless and two never park on the fringe.

Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 09:56 AM (wQp4D)

523 WalMart may be liable for not having speed bumps installed. Posted by: Muldoon at June 29, 2017 02:55 PM (mvenn) LOL. But in our court system not impossible.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 09:56 AM (rZ+mb)

524 >>>>Fairly certain he did not get her keys or she would not be running him down with her SUV in the parking lot. '

These days you don't necessarily need your keys to open or start your car. But a lot of people have different sets: home and car, or duplicates.

You're right though, likely he didn't get her keys. She must have had them out, getting into the rig when he grabbed her purse and ran.
.
.
.It does appear to be an older SUV from the video.  In my 2016 Tacoma if the key fob gets more than 5 feet from the ignition sensor it pretty much locks up and can't be driven and it starts beeping.......key fob not detected....key fob not detected.  It is really annoying at the boat ramp. 

Posted by: The Great White Scotsman at June 29, 2017 09:56 AM (0pcwX)

525

For those who simply don't _yet_ understand:

This person (in this case a pregnant woman) had the right to FORCIBLY defend her valuables against a FORCIBLE thief. As soon as the thief crossed that threshold with a malicious eye for stealing her goods: he put himself in danger of being subject to whatever reasonable means were available to bring his criminality to a halt. Period.

If someone says something to the effect of "Oh, that's just too horrible. Someone ought not lose their life simply because he's a thief" : the answer is two fold.
First off, the thief created this ACTIVE situation. (It's not the same as the thief being hunted down later.) Secondly, the thief himself is FORCIBLE. - That is, it is only reasonable that the thief using FORCE to steal from someone else would use whatever means necessary to accomplish his felonious thievery. Simply put, the thief should be reasonably presumed to be dangerous.
And third, finally, if it is okay to use FORCE to stop the thief, the only reasonable limitation would be one of immediate and OBVIOUS availability.

- After all, the FORCIBLE thief is the one who CREATED this mortally dangerous situation to others and to HIMSELF.










Posted by: Cold Civil War at June 29, 2017 09:57 AM (Z2PYk)

526 498 In California, where the voters have effectively decriminalized everything short of murder, crime is going off the scale. The cops (mostly) rightly figure why go to a lot of trouble when nothing is going to happen to the scrotes that are committing it? Anything under $1000 that doesn't involve B&E or a physical assault is now effectively a ticket for which the perp will never appear. If you leave your car unlocked, if you leave something in your yard, that bike on the rack on the car, it's all good. Thank you voters of California for props 47 and 57.

Posted by: JEM at June 29, 2017 09:57 AM (TppKb)

527 That's a great story, dagny!!

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 09:57 AM (EgOr3)

528 Anything under $1000 that doesn't involve B&E or a physical assault is now effectively a ticket for which the perp will never appear. And in some jurisdictions they'll ignore the B&E part. Not in our town, so far, fortunately.

Posted by: JEM at June 29, 2017 09:58 AM (TppKb)

529 They're effectively held to a lower standard than the rest of us. Posted by: Insomniac at June 29, 2017 02:53 PM (0mRoj) And that's the problem. Citizens should not be held to higher standards than the police. Here is what should happen. She should go to court. Did she hurt anyone besides the criminal? No Did she act recklessly and could have injured an innocent bystander? Yes Did she act maliciously in stopping the criminal (repeatedly run over him, etc.)? No So she gets some reckless driving offense and that's it. In my opinion fleeing criminal is fair game.

Posted by: The Resistance at June 29, 2017 09:58 AM (J70i0)

530 YOU TOOK THE LAST SHOPPING CART! I KEEL YOU! Posted by: That Pregnant Chick at the Stop 'N Shop It can't keel. Please surrender your cart.

Posted by: not Doug Marcaida[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 09:58 AM (udajc)

531 Miss Preggers has a white trash / trailer park vibe going on. I like it.

Posted by: ScoggDog at June 29, 2017 09:58 AM (tRLIC)

532 Yeah, when I was pregnant some guy complained when my mother wrote a check in the 10 items or fewer line. I started yelling at him and followed him out the store yelling at him. Not sane, but sorta fun.

Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 09:58 AM (wQp4D)

533 You might mistakenly snag Kitty Dukakis.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 02:53 PM (rZ+mb)
______


Kitty's a hobo? oh my...

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 09:58 AM (MdC1o)

534 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. -- What about bear traps? Are bear traps ok? Posted by: @votermom ***** You have a problem with hairy, gay, men wandering onto your property?

Posted by: Tilikum KAW at June 29, 2017 09:59 AM (+aCe4)

535 Maybe....it just crazy coincidence that driver's husband currently in traction at Charlotte General?

Posted by: KIM at June 29, 2017 09:59 AM (/y/I/)

536 502 She's PREGNANT people. She is not sane. Posted by: Max Power at June 29, 2017 02:52 PM (q177U) ----------- I thought what she did was very sane.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 10:00 AM (Fmupd)

537 527 That's a great story, dagny!!

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 02:57 PM (EgOr3)



Thanks Peaches. It was sorta amusing for me. I knew they were on their way out so I didn't even get an elevated heart rate. Sorta, "heh, he's gonna be surprised."

Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 10:00 AM (wQp4D)

538 Anything under $1000 that doesn't involve B&E or a physical assault is now effectively a ticket for which the perp will never appear.

If you leave your car unlocked, if you leave something in your yard, that bike on the rack on the car, it's all good.

Thank you voters of California for props 47 and 57.

Posted by: JEM at June 29, 2017 02:57 PM (TppKb)

Yup.  And then they're all on the nextdoor dot com bitching and moaning about all the thievery and vandalism.  I try to remind them that they voted for it.  They think security cameras are the answer.  Because most criminals will pose for them on the way into your house.

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 10:00 AM (EgOr3)

539 >>>Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property.<<<

Honestly officer, I don't know how a half dozen deadly rattlesnakes made it into the foyer and bit that perpetrator.

Posted by: Fritz at June 29, 2017 10:01 AM (2Mnv1)

540 Kitty's a hobo? oh my... Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 02:58 PM (MdC1o) No ... but she couldn't keep herself away from any alcohol alternatives in a pinch. They had to keep the rubbing alcohol locked up in her house.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 10:01 AM (rZ+mb)

541 Speaking of cray cray, our NATO ally Turkey says Pac Man is Islamophobic. http://tinyurl.com/ya3km5t6

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 10:01 AM (Nwg0u)

542 I started yelling at him and followed him out the store yelling at him. Not sane, but sorta fun.

Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 02:58 PM (wQp4D)


He's lucky he didn't get run down in the parking lot.


Playing with fire, gentlemen.  Playing with fire.

Posted by: flounder, rebel, vulgarian, deplorable, winner at June 29, 2017 10:02 AM (tbOMB)

543 They had to keep the rubbing alcohol locked up in her house.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 03:01 PM (rZ+mb)
_______


damn, that's hard core..

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 10:02 AM (MdC1o)

544 This of course presupposes that the cops knew you had video. How could they know whether you did or didn't? Yep. Even if witnesses saw you holding your phone up as if you were recording, you could just say, "In all the excitement I thought I was recording, but I must have missed the record button. Sorry." Posted by: bonhomme at June 29, 2017 02:49 PM (jhqr1) Done that even when it wasn't an excitable moment.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 10:03 AM (pGfNT)

545 496 Even in Texas you can't set deadly booby traps on your property. Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 02:40 PM (zO1cf) I believe my fougasse installations are legal in Alabama. Posted by: Grump928(c) at June 29, 2017 02:51 PM (QQ+il) A bread booby trap? How does that work?

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 10:03 AM (zO1cf)

546 Remember that this dude not only chose to attack a woman, but one made more physically vulnerable because of her pregnancy. If there had been a little old lady with a cane around, he probably would have chosen her. Since he had no qualms about victimizing someone he judged to be much weaker than him, I can't get too wound up about the fact that his victim turned the tables on him.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampsersands at the present time) at June 29, 2017 10:03 AM (ZM2xo)

547 Excellent driving and precision parking: Marry Me!

Posted by: regular joe at June 29, 2017 10:03 AM (O50yS)

548 No, no. Kitty Dukakis is caught with isopropyl alcohol. So aftershave might do it too.

Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 10:04 AM (wQp4D)

549 "You might mistakenly snag Kitty Dukakis" She says electroshock therapy saved her life acording to Wikipedia. Maybe we should put her in as President with John McCain as her Vice President. Bipartisan.

Posted by: Mudd at June 29, 2017 10:05 AM (cfHE9)

550 Which taught me two things, I need to carry regardless and two never park on the fringe. Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 02:56 PM (wQp4D) Yep, never park on the fringe. Back in mid 90's was sitting in car while wife was grocery shopping. Saw car with two black utes pull up beside an SUV at fringe of lot. Door beside SUV opened and kept watching one guy leaning in and out. Suddenly saw a crowbar. Got out of car tried to stop a family to get them to go inside and call the cops. They were Asian and barely spoke English. So, I started running at the guys and shouted at them. They took off. Got the license plate and gave it to the cops when they showed up. The couple who had just purchased the vehicle showed up. Guy just looked stunned at his missing door lock and wife gave me a hug.

Posted by: The Resistance at June 29, 2017 10:05 AM (J70i0)

551 In CA, I wanted to put some razor wire on top of the wall around a big industrial property because we had a lot of problems at night (had the videos to prove it).  I was told that if they tried to climb in and hurt themselves on the razor wire, the property owner would be liable.  Seriously.  And this was prior to the recent thug-loving propositions.

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 10:06 AM (EgOr3)

552 WalMart may be liable for not having speed bumps installed. Posted by: Muldoon at June 29, 2017 02:55 PM (mvenn) LOL. But in our court system not impossible. - Didja see Michael "Gentle Giant" Brown's mom made off with $1.5 mil?

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 10:06 AM (Nwg0u)

553
Oh man, those taxpayers in SF must just not give a crap about their tax dollars:

http://tinyurl.com/ya7abr6o

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 29, 2017 10:07 AM (r+sAi)

554 Setting traps is a bad idea, ask Byron Smith.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at June 29, 2017 10:07 AM (rPBK6)

555 What makes the lack of effective law enforcement in California so reprehensible is that the Rich, all Liberal, all live in gated communities or compounds, they have chauffeurs that stay with their cars, they have the money to afford private security to keep an eye on everything they own, 24/7.   They NEVER take the risk of a lawless society.  It is only the poor and the failing middle classes who bear the brunt of these wretched lack of enforcement.  The criminals prey on the small fish, the poor, constantly because it's so easy and they know no one will do anything about it.

In California, the social situation is approaching the same point that pre-revolutionary France reached:  A society dominated by clueless, wealthy, twits, who insulate themselves from all of the consequences of their decisions, but who continue to dictate how everyone else should live.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 10:08 AM (OmOvC)

556 "A Texas rancher who beat his daughter's accused molester to death moments after he discovered the man raping the 5-year-old girl, will not be charged . . . " http://tinyurl.com/7d3rwk8

Posted by: gNewt at June 29, 2017 10:09 AM (3wfnv)

557 Not only did I accost strangers when I was pregnant, I could projectile vomit, cry or go to sleep at a moments notice. Sorta like having all your bodily functions on overload. Also got insanely thirsty and hungry. Nothing wrong, big healthy babies but I'm not easy when I'm not on hormone overdrive. Gotta feel bad for my husband, tho. I can easily see running over some methhead in the parking lot.

She didn't back up and drive over him a second time. That was incredibly sensible. Showed a lot of self restraint.

Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 10:09 AM (wQp4D)

558 Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 03:06 PM (Nwg0u) Shame she didn't love him *before* he was dead. As a mom I feel sick at the attitude that a child is only worthwhile for producing Welfare when young and "wrongful" death payouts when older.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 10:09 AM (rp9xB)

559 Wow. She hit him like a wildly out of control bus slamming into a black guy and taking out the stores' awning and the guy got up and walked into the store. That's what I got out of it. How 'bout you?

Posted by: Corona at June 29, 2017 10:09 AM (/GAGc)

560 Setting traps is a bad idea, ask Byron Smith. Posted by: Banana Splits Guy I'll take "MISSING THE POINT ON PURPOSE," for $8,000,000,000, Alex.

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i][/b] at June 29, 2017 10:10 AM (udajc)

561 Fuck that asshole. Hit him again.

Posted by: John Marston at June 29, 2017 10:10 AM (SkuXa)

562 Pregnant woman v. black, male thief.  Which jurors are going to side with the latter?  The women?  Even the sistahs gonna be like, "n*gg* had it comin', messin' with a pregnant woman".  The bruthas gonna be, "ooooh, turn in your man card now brah". 

Posted by: SFGoth at June 29, 2017 10:10 AM (dZ756)

563 Wow. She hit him like a wildly out of control bus slamming into a black guy and taking out the stores' awning and the guy got up and walked into the store. That's what I got out of it. How 'bout you? That's a great video. I like that he got up and went into the pub for a pint.

Posted by: Grump928(c) at June 29, 2017 10:11 AM (QQ+il)

564 Three Life Lessons from COPS I always tell my boys: 1. Always wear a shirt 2. Brush your teeth (so you still have them) 3. Never wear your pants below your ass Do these things and you will stay out of jail.

Posted by: 99Problems at June 29, 2017 10:11 AM (zWaPh)

565 Three Life Lessons from COPS I always tell my boys: 1. Always wear a shirt 2. Brush your teeth (so you still have them) 3. Never wear your pants below your ass Do these things and you will stay out of jail. ***** I was told there should be no meth.

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 10:12 AM (mvenn)

566 42 In many ways, this is the story of Obama. Posted by: joe, living dangerously at June 29, 2017 01:32 PM

I concur.

Posted by: Corona at June 29, 2017 10:12 AM (/GAGc)

567 Didja see Michael "Gentle Giant" Brown's mom made off with $1.5 mil?>>>

And will be broke again within a couple months.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at June 29, 2017 10:12 AM (r5KeJ)

568 "A Texas rancher who beat his daughter's accused molester to death moments after he discovered the man raping the 5-year-old girl, will not be charged . . . " Take back the language. Caught in the fucking act is NOT accused, alleged, or any other mealy mouth bull shit.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 10:12 AM (pGfNT)

569 In CA, I wanted to put some razor wire on top of the wall around a big industrial property because we had a lot of problems at night (had the videos to prove it). I was told that if they tried to climb in and hurt themselves on the razor wire, the property owner would be liable. Seriously. And this was prior to the recent thug-loving propositions. Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 03:06 PM (EgOr3) Yep, laws concerning property and liability for the owners have gone totally insane in most of the states. I'm sure it all started with some small, reasonable sounding cases ... after which it all morphed into an insane monster where, basically, property owners are liable for everything and criminals violating those properties are liable for nothing and entitled to a bevy of prizes for breaking the law. Also, the slip and fall cases have gotten totally insane along with the criminal cases. As with so many things, the courts and their detachment from reality have led to asinine laws and unreasonable judgments. Eventually this will all come to an end ... because it must.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 10:12 AM (rZ+mb)

570 Hah!

'The Heat of the Moment' - Asia

I never meant to be so bad to you . . .

Posted by: mustbequantum at June 29, 2017 10:13 AM (MIKMs)

571 552---Didja see Michael "Gentle Giant" Brown's mom made off with $1.5 mil? Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 03:06 PM (Nwg0u) ---------------------------- Talk about injustice. That absolutely infuriates me.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at June 29, 2017 10:13 AM (0jtPF)

572 I love my family.
Sister texts me "FYI, I'm in a cath lab." over 2 hours ago.
I respond like anybody else might. "What? Where, how are you?" right away.

Just now I get , "yea, 100% blockage, been defibbed twice, I'm good."

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 10:13 AM (MdC1o)

573 She should be charged with Littering (the parking lot with the perp's skid marks).

Posted by: 99Problems at June 29, 2017 10:13 AM (zWaPh)

574 Horse thieves were hanged. Just saying.

Posted by: IrishEi at June 29, 2017 10:14 AM (HiDrR)

575 that might have been every dime she owned in the purse.

Posted by: willow at June 29, 2017 10:14 AM (v12G8)

576 If man had run over topless woman who had stolen his wallet?

Posted by: Simplemind at June 29, 2017 10:14 AM (vvEDl)

577 Yeah, that would be attempted vehicular hommicide in most places.

You shoot at somebody and miss it is attempted homicide - you hit them - the proper charge is assault. She didn't miss - correct charge.

Posted by: [/i] [/u] [/s] [/b]An Observation at June 29, 2017 10:15 AM (T2qzP)

578 Talk about injustice. That absolutely infuriates me. Posted by: Margarita DeVille at June 29, 2017 03:13 PM (0jtPF) should have had to split it with the store clerk.

Posted by: willow at June 29, 2017 10:15 AM (v12G8)

579 Just now I get , "yea, 100% blockage, been defibbed twice, I'm good." Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 03:13 PM (MdC1o) Uhm, wow. Is she generally that mellow or are they giving her some quality pharmaceuticals?

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at June 29, 2017 10:15 AM (rp9xB)

580 >>>I'll take "MISSING THE POINT ON PURPOSE," for $8,000,000,000, Alex There were comments about traps. Just saying Byron Smith might be a cautionary tale.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at June 29, 2017 10:16 AM (rPBK6)

581 557 Not only did I accost strangers when I was pregnant, I could projectile vomit, cry or go to sleep at a moments notice. Sorta like having all your bodily functions on overload. Also got insanely thirsty and hungry. Nothing wrong, big healthy babies but I'm not easy when I'm not on hormone overdrive. Gotta feel bad for my husband, tho. I can easily see running over some methhead in the parking lot. She didn't back up and drive over him a second time. That was incredibly sensible. Showed a lot of self restraint. Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 03:09 PM (wQp4D) Jeez. No wonder John was hesitant about letting you into Galt's Gulch.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2017 10:16 AM (Fmupd)

582 First, I'm sorry i missed te sissy thread below, and second, I cant stop laughing at the video i watched ohhh...10 times. Does that make me a bad person?

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:16 AM (31vnC)

583 Pregnant Woman: Trump Shirtless Meth-head: Mika and her squeeze

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at June 29, 2017 10:16 AM (XWkhW)

584 - Didja see Michael "Gentle Giant" Brown's mom made off with $1.5 mil? The insurance company made the settlement, undoubtedly just to wash their hands of the whole matter. But the result is that it only feeds the attitude of cashing in on an opportunity, which then guarantees that another insurance company will pay off in the future, and so on and so on and so on. So the third party insurance company, just to rid itself of a nuisance, fosters a problem for itself and society. If the problem stayed with the primary parties, there would be a lot less likelihood of settling claims with undeserving plaintiffs.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at June 29, 2017 10:16 AM (oVJmc)

585 Horse thieves were hanged. Just saying. Posted by: IrishEi at June 29, 2017 03:14 PM (HiDrR) And looters are supposed to be shot on sight ...

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 29, 2017 10:17 AM (rZ+mb)

586 576 If man had run over topless woman who had stolen his wallet?

Posted by: Simplemind at June 29, 2017 03:14 PM (vvEDl)


Next time, pay your escort.

Posted by: flounder, rebel, vulgarian, deplorable, winner at June 29, 2017 10:17 AM (tbOMB)

587 was reading on Razib's Twitter that China built 14k miles of track 2007-17, 10k more by 2025. California? 500 miles, 2029. let's not go there. tis a silly place.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at June 29, 2017 10:17 AM (zUYFs)

588 If man had run over topless woman who had stolen his wallet? Posted by: Simplemind at June 29, 2017 03:14 PM (vvEDl) Next time, pay your escort. Posted by: flounder Yeah. Dude would be guilty for starting the whole chain of events.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 10:18 AM (pGfNT)

589 Off to go see what "I'm good" really means.
My sister is a tough chic, but dammit anyway,

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 10:18 AM (MdC1o)

590 503 The most infamous booby trap, that gets people both hurt and arrested for making them, is the infamous "spring-gun" where a string is attached to the trigger of a shotgun (or other gun, but shotgun is the usual) that is aimed at the door. Easy to make, and a good way to shoot a friend who hasn't heard from the owner in question for a while and is concerned about him. Or a cop, or a landlord. Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 02:52 PM (OmOvC) So you're saying everything the kid did in the movie Home Alone was illegal? Who knew?

Posted by: Northernlurker, Phillips screwdriver of the gods at June 29, 2017 10:18 AM (hJrjt)

591 I'll bet if she was driving a Smart cart would be Ok, cause Gaia.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:19 AM (31vnC)

592 Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 03:09 PM (wQp4D) It's weird how different women handle pregnancy. My sister was utterly miserable. But I have a friend who had 6 kids and she felt and looked great during pregnancy. Just got the little baby bump like she had swallowed a basketball, her skin and hair looked terrific, she had tons of energy, felt more cheerful and upbeat than usual and her labors were short. She told me she would not have had 6 if she had been as uncomfortable during pregnancy as most women's are. Some of her friends, who suffered much more than she did, resented her for treating pregnancy like a breeze.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampsersands at the present time) at June 29, 2017 10:19 AM (ZM2xo)

593 That was awesome! Looked like she even grabbed a gear while in pursuit. Er, not that I condone this behavior, mind you. Posted by: Fritz at June 29, 2017 02:23 PM (2Mnv1) ........... That was just her slamming it in 4WD.

Posted by: wth at June 29, 2017 10:19 AM (HgMAr)

594 "So the third party insurance company, just to rid itself of a nuisance, fosters a problem for itself and society" who knew?!

Posted by: aethelraed the unready at June 29, 2017 10:20 AM (zUYFs)

595 Just now I get , "yea, 100% blockage, been defibbed twice, I'm good."

Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 03:13 PM (MdC1o)

Dammit, IP!  Don't they have to put in one of those stents or do the reaming thing?  Hope she's near by and you can get on over to her. 

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 10:20 AM (EgOr3)

596 Off to go see what "I'm good" really means. My sister is a tough chic, but dammit anyway, Posted by: IP at June 29, 2017 03:18 PM (MdC1o) -------- I'm hoping for the best for her, IP. Let us know.

Posted by: bluebell ~ The Joy of Cooking, Moron Edition at June 29, 2017 10:20 AM (sBOL1)

597 >>...She didn't back up and drive over him a second time. That was incredibly sensible. Showed a lot of self restraint.


Heh.

Yes, pregnancy hormones are intense.

Posted by: Lizzy [/i] at June 29, 2017 10:20 AM (NOIQH)

598 That was just her slamming it in 4WD. Posted by: wth at June 29, 2017 03:19 PM (HgMAr) Ya gotta climb right up on that perp.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:20 AM (31vnC)

599 Home Alone is about a psychopathic monster torturing two nonviolent criminals. Everyone knows this.

Posted by: John Marston at June 29, 2017 10:21 AM (SkuXa)

600 "If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really.

Posted by: Twin Cities Daydrunk, still a Tigers fan at June 29, 2017 10:21 AM (1aMQH)

601 Hope your sis is as fine as she makes it sound, IP!!

Posted by: Lizzy [/i] at June 29, 2017 10:21 AM (NOIQH)

602 Gees IP. Prayers.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:21 AM (31vnC)

603 Her birth control pills were in the purse and as the left has conclusively proven, taking away a woman's birth control is morally equivalent to killing her, therefore, death penalty.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 10:22 AM (pGfNT)

604 594 Her birth control pills were in the purse and as the left has conclusively proven, taking away a woman's birth control is morally equivalent to killing her, therefore, self-defense and he has to pay for repairs to her Jeep. Posted by: JB1000 at June 29, 2017 03:19 PM (16OL0) Carrying birth control when you're 5 months preggers?

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampsersands at the present time) at June 29, 2017 10:22 AM (ZM2xo)

605 Breaking News: Purse-snatcher Robert Raines has officially been retired from his criminal career. Wait for it...

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 10:22 AM (mvenn)

606 I'll bet that crook is 'woke' now though.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:22 AM (31vnC)

607 601 "If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. Posted by: Twin Cities Daydrunk, still a Tigers fan at June 29, 2017 03:21 PM (1aMQH) Were the injuries terminal?

Posted by: TexasDan[/i] at June 29, 2017 10:22 AM (yL25O)

608 "If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. That is a shockingly bad pun.

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 10:23 AM (pGfNT)

609 Heh.

Yes, pregnancy hormones are intense.

Posted by: Lizzy at June 29, 2017 03:20 PM (NOIQH)

Indeed they are. My pregnancy was pretty great except for the crying bouts. And screaming at my husband. And then crying again.

Posted by: IC at June 29, 2017 10:23 AM (a0IVu)

610 Some of her friends, who suffered much more than she did, resented her for treating pregnancy like a breeze. Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampsersands at the present time) at June 29, 2017 03:19 PM (ZM2xo) --------- Well that's just mean of them. It's not like she could control their pregnancies! Did they want her to pretend to suffer? My pregnancies were no easier but no harder than most, but I would never begrudge anyone who had an easier time than I did.

Posted by: bluebell ~ The Joy of Cooking, Moron Edition at June 29, 2017 10:23 AM (sBOL1)

611 If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. ****** Are you positive?

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 10:23 AM (mvenn)

612 Carrying birth control when you're 5 months preggers? She doesn't want twins?

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 10:24 AM (pGfNT)

613 Dude pops up out of nowhere in front of the jeep with his hands up then puts em down as the jeep backs away quickly.....That videos even funnier when you run it backwards.

Posted by: The Walking Dude at June 29, 2017 10:24 AM (ARzf8)

614 WalMart's gonna be sued for some reason, watch.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at June 29, 2017 10:24 AM (oVJmc)

615 595 "So the third party insurance company, just to rid itself of a nuisance, fosters a problem for itself and society" who knew?! Posted by: aethelraed the unready at June 29, 2017 03:20 PM (zUYFs) Not a nuisance but an exposure to a jury award much larger and at least that much in defense costs. It's a business decision and I agree that when I'm forced to pay something over my objections instead of going to trial it aggravates me. I would have brought this one to trial . The cost would have been a wash though if the defendants prevailed.

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 10:24 AM (zO1cf)

616 613 If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. ****** Could go either way. AC/DC.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:25 AM (31vnC)

617 601 "If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. Posted by: Twin Cities Daydrunk, still a Tigers fan at June 29, 2017 03:21 PM (1aMQH) Criminal justice has never been the same since the adoption of Ohm's Law.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at June 29, 2017 10:25 AM (XWkhW)

618 "If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. That is a shockingly bad pun. Thought for sure you guys wouldn't be that quick on the draw for battery puns. I guess the horde is ever ready.

Posted by: Blanco Basura at June 29, 2017 10:25 AM (Q6Lfj)

619 Carrying birth control when you're 5 months preggers? She doesn't want twins? Posted by: rickb223 **** Snort!

Posted by: [/b][/i][/s]Muldoon at June 29, 2017 10:25 AM (mvenn)

620 613 If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. ****** Are you positive? Posted by: Muldoon at June 29, 2017 03:23 PM (mvenn) ... In these cases they generally throw you into a closed cell.

Posted by: TexasDan[/i] at June 29, 2017 10:25 AM (yL25O)

621 Some of her friends, who suffered much more than she did, resented her for treating pregnancy like a breeze.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampsersands at the present time) at June 29, 2017 03:19 PM (ZM2xo)
---------
Despicable to resent someone like that!  They sound like the kind of people who would buy into that whole "vote for me because I'm a woman" canard that Cankles was constantly screeching about. 

Posted by: Peaches at June 29, 2017 10:26 AM (EgOr3)

622 Nood

Posted by: rickb223 [/s][/b][/i][/u] at June 29, 2017 10:26 AM (pGfNT)

623 622 613 If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. ****** Are you positive? Posted by: Muldoon at June 29, 2017 03:23 PM (mvenn) ... In these cases they generally throw you into a closed cell. Posted by: TexasDan Give them the electric chair

Posted by: Roy at June 29, 2017 10:26 AM (7n4KQ)

624 615 Dude pops up out of nowhere in front of the jeep with his hands up then puts em down as the jeep backs away quickly.....That videos even funnier when you run it backwards. Posted by: The Walking Dude at June 29, 2017 03:24 PM (ARzf And it says 'Paul is dead.' *only old timers would get it*

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:27 AM (31vnC)

625 And it says 'Paul is dead.' *only old timers would get it* Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 03:27 PM (31vnC) --------- Who you calling old, bucko?

Posted by: bluebell ~ The Joy of Cooking, Moron Edition at June 29, 2017 10:27 AM (sBOL1)

626 Historical fact of the day: George Washington never insulted anyone on Twitter.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 10:27 AM (Nwg0u)

627 606 Breaking News: Purse-snatcher Robert Raines has officially been retired from his criminal career. Wait for it... Posted by: Muldoon at June 29, 2017 03:22 PM (mvenn) I think something was lost in the transmission.

Posted by: joncelli, Longbow Afficianado and Phalangist at June 29, 2017 10:28 AM (RD7QR)

628 We have an Energizer Bunny president.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, the Unwoking Dead at June 29, 2017 10:28 AM (Nwg0u)

629 627 And it says 'Paul is dead.' *only old timers would get it* Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 03:27 PM (31vnC) --------- Who you calling old, bucko? Posted by: bluebell ~ The Joy of Cooking, Moron Edition at June 29, 2017 03:27 PM (sBOL1) ..and former pot heads. Lol.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:28 AM (31vnC)

630 532 Yeah, when I was pregnant some guy complained when my mother wrote a check in the 10 items or fewer line. I started yelling at him and followed him out the store yelling at him. Not sane, but sorta fun. Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 02:58 PM (wQp4D) Yeah, part of what happens is you become even more protective of loved ones. It's a good kind of insanity as long as it's not taken too far. When my kid was a newborn, i finally became assertive to asshole panhandlers or anyone else who looked like a potential threat. This was long overdue. I don't like parking lots anyway--I was attacked in one decades ago. When a stranger approaches you in a parking lot, only rarely is it for innocent purposes.

Posted by: stace at June 29, 2017 10:29 AM (pb2K/)

631 ..and former pot heads. Lol. Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 03:28 PM (31vnC) ------ Well, I guess I have to go with old, then.

Posted by: bluebell ~ The Joy of Cooking, Moron Edition at June 29, 2017 10:29 AM (sBOL1)

632 The best thing about that video is the second little hop that Explorer takes. Not sure if it was a parking block or the human curb, hoping the latter.

Posted by: JEM at June 29, 2017 10:30 AM (TppKb)

633 Oh man, those taxpayers in SF must just not give a crap about their tax dollars: http://tinyurl.com/ya7abr6o Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 29, 2017 03:07 PM (r+sAi) .......... Maybe they should rename SF to... Pelosi Town.

Posted by: wth at June 29, 2017 10:31 AM (HgMAr)

634 Interesting Thread

Posted by: Lamech le Proud at June 29, 2017 10:31 AM (m9X4Y)

635 78 I still have never been inside a Walmart. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a Walmart, even from the outside. In many ways, this is the story of Obama.

Posted by: Ray Van Dune at June 29, 2017 10:32 AM (dSzXU)

636 Well, I guess I have to go with old, then. Posted by: bluebell ~ The Joy of Cooking, Moron Edition at June 29, 2017 03:29 PM (sBOL1) Lets say 'mature' shall we? And wise, yeah...wise.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at June 29, 2017 10:33 AM (31vnC)

637 "628 Historical fact of the day: George Washington never insulted anyone on Twitter."

You know who else never insulted anyone on Twitter???

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 29, 2017 10:34 AM (OmOvC)

638 625 622 613 If you throw a D-cell at them and hit them, is it assault or battery?" Depends on the charge, really. ****** Are you positive? Posted by: Muldoon at June 29, 2017 03:23 PM (mvenn) ... In these cases they generally throw you into a closed cell. Posted by: TexasDan Give them the electric chair This "joke" is going to keep on going, and going, and going...

Posted by: Ray Van Dune at June 29, 2017 10:36 AM (dSzXU)

639 And a guy just snatching a purse and running away most definitely does not justify the use of deadly force.

I may be wrong, but in Texas I believe it does - depending on the amount of money involved in the theft. There was a case of a neighbor down here who saw thieves running from the house next door to his. Gunned them down - not guilty, and in accordance with the law; his lawyer pointed out that section of the law to the jury.

In Texas - moreover - any citizen may use deadly force to stop the commission of a felony.

Posted by: [/i] [/u] [/s] [/b]An Observation at June 29, 2017 10:36 AM (T2qzP)

640 <> --And if her phone is in her purse? --Or her asthma meds? --Or anything else she needs to get home in one piece? Nope. Unless they prove she hallucinated the whole thing, this potential juror is nullified. Stealing my purse should be a known potential suicide move.

Posted by: delayna at June 29, 2017 10:39 AM (KNFU5)

641 Yeah, she ran over him. Big deal. It was the necessary force needed to affect the arrest*. I've seen cops do this, stop a guy running by hitting them with their cop cars. Safer for the cop. Doesn't have to risk himself wrestling with a potentially dangerous suspect. *Fine. Citizens arrest. Same thing.

Posted by: Taco Shack at June 29, 2017 10:40 AM (C+qQ0)

642 Probably just an alka line about what really happened. ( pushing the envelope with that one)

Posted by: Jack Sock at June 29, 2017 10:40 AM (zO1cf)

643 I don't care what she did to him, he stole her purse, her property. With everything I keep in my purse, I would be furious too. They would have been finding bits of him all over the parking lot.

Posted by: Abby at June 29, 2017 10:48 AM (HBU7W)

644 "And you had better hope that there was no one close by taking a video like this one that showed the perp running away as fast as he could." Hah! I've got thirty years on that dude, and I run faster than that when the drier beeps.

Posted by: delayna at June 29, 2017 10:59 AM (KNFU5)

645 She has an excellent crime of passion defense. Zero time between his action and her reaction, and many reasonable people seem to understand how they might have done the same thing. Further, he is unsympathetic and she is highly sympathetic. I think changes will be reduced to something she'll agree to plea, e.g. almost nothing.

Posted by: Mx4 at June 29, 2017 11:00 AM (gw4X+)

646 I just hope the stress (physical and mental) of being mugged, hitting him with her truck, and being in legal trouble doesn't cause her to lose the baby. Q: if she does, can they charge scumbag with 1st degree homicide (death occurring because of felony he committed)?

Posted by: delayna at June 29, 2017 11:02 AM (KNFU5)

647 Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampsersands at the present time) at June 29, 2017 03:19 PM (ZM2xo)


Oh, I felt great. Never felt better in my life than when I was pregnant. But it "doubled" my already assertive personality, if that makes sense. Also every body need and function doubled too. But I felt awesome, like superwoman. Little sinusy toward the end, but that's about it.

Oh, and the last one was at 40.

Posted by: dagny at June 29, 2017 11:04 AM (wQp4D)

648 If anyone's still reading this thread, i'll pop back in to the fray: I know I'd be pissed off as all hell if this woman crashed into my car while chasing this prick. I'd probably sue her ass off for it. But if I came out of the store, saw all this shit go down, and then ran over and straight up murdered her then and there for smashing my car, I'd be a monster. How would that be substantially different than her attempting to kill this guy for snatching her purse? "If I didn't kill him, he might have gotten away with it without punishment!" She was goaded into it, put into a panic/crisis situation, sure. I doubt the actual thought "I'm going to end this guy's life right here and now" was actually in her mind. But she's a rational adult (haha, pregnant, hormones, ok, whatever) who is responsible for her actions. Is the majority consensus here honestly arguing that murder is an acceptable response to this situation? Or is it just the emotional joy of seeing some prick get what he deserves right on the spot?

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 29, 2017 11:40 AM (hcyUh)

649 She should totally take a jury trial if they're stupid enough to run this case in North Carolina. You might get ten jurors to vote to convict but there will be at least two holdouts.

Posted by: hoodaticus at June 29, 2017 11:52 AM (vitRc)

650 She will be charged, convicted meh, she should be. Deadly force to protect property in my mind is a step to far.

Posted by: USNtakim at June 29, 2017 01:24 PM (zZWkn)


I wouldn't vote for conviction.

Posted by: redbanzai at June 29, 2017 11:58 AM (SrkNc)

651 Please do not refer to this as a "rundown", it is a "matter".

Posted by: gobagoo at June 29, 2017 02:04 PM (A/saJ)

652 Stopping a criminal in the heat of the moment? Priceless. Why you should never avoid jury duty? You might get to acquit her using our greatest power as an individual citizen, jury nullification.

Posted by: Joe Mack at June 29, 2017 04:05 PM (QX0Xt)

653 May the deadly FORCE be wit 'U...YEEPS R MADE to chase shoitless KREEPS...when that kids born he is gonna kick ass and take names in the nursery WAL-MART UBER ALICE!

Posted by: saf at June 30, 2017 01:44 AM (cS/ge)

Hide Comments | Add Comment




What colour is a green orange?




374kb generated in CPU 1.5, elapsed 4.5572 seconds.
64 queries taking 3.4058 seconds, 891 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.