Shoplifter killed over toothpaste

Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Shoplifter killed over toothpaste

2010-05-10 22:51:39

#126

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5367|London, England

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
This is just ridiculous. No one defends their RIDICULOUS and insulting claims, fascism, denying rights to people, etc. and to add insult to injury you won't even read what I said.

Vigilantism applies ONLY when they are in the act of committing a crime, when they have forfeited their rights. I gave Turquoise about 5 quotes that indicated that on the last page. When they forfeited their rights, social contract doesn't apply. They are then in a state of anarchy. hurr durrrrr

The justice system itself has NO BEARING on someone in the act of committing a crime. Conviction has absolutely nothing to do with it.

No, as long as a justice system is in place, they are within a social contract setting even if they commit a crime. The justice system is meant to met out punishment to those that violate our common laws. The social contract is always in place as long as the state they are in is not in a state of anarchy. A guy running down the street with a tv is still beholden to the social contract which is why he will stand before a judge and jury. Vigilantism only has a place where anarchy is the rule rather than the exception. An example would be in the Wild West where police officers, judges and juries were rare.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2010-05-10 23:10:35

#127

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6115|eXtreme to the maX

Charge him, let the jury decide. Store clerks shouldn't be doing that.

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2010-05-10 23:11:17

#128

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6716|67.222.138.85

JohnG@lt wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
This is just ridiculous. No one defends their RIDICULOUS and insulting claims, fascism, denying rights to people, etc. and to add insult to injury you won't even read what I said.

Vigilantism applies ONLY when they are in the act of committing a crime, when they have forfeited their rights. I gave Turquoise about 5 quotes that indicated that on the last page. When they forfeited their rights, social contract doesn't apply. They are then in a state of anarchy. hurr durrrrr

The justice system itself has NO BEARING on someone in the act of committing a crime. Conviction has absolutely nothing to do with it.
No, as long as a justice system is in place, they are within a social contract setting even if they commit a crime. The justice system is meant to met out punishment to those that violate our common laws. The social contract is always in place as long as the state they are in is not in a state of anarchy. A guy running down the street with a tv is still beholden to the social contract which is why he will stand before a judge and jury. Vigilantism only has a place where anarchy is the rule rather than the exception. An example would be in the Wild West where police officers, judges and juries were rare.

You aren't using any semblance of the meaning of the word contract. When you violate the terms of agreement the contract has no meaning. The justice system is to determine whether or not the contract was violated, and that is why people in the system are given a set of rights. It is also why people awaiting trial have somewhat limited rights. During the crime there is no doubt about guilt or innocence.

2010-05-11 05:13:17

#129

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6660|USA

Turquoise wrote:
mikkel wrote:
lowing wrote:
THey ask why would you kill someone over toothpaste. I ask why would you risk your life over toothpaste?
You ask that because your sense of justice is warped. You do not risk your life stealing a tube of toothpaste any more than you risk your life taking a walk around the block. Meeting death as a consequence of either is wholly unreasonable.
No kidding...

who said anything about it being reasonable? But it is clearly undeniable that it is within the realms of reality. Law abiding citizens can be crazier than a criminal, so it is best not to fuck with anyone. Thus ending the lesson.

2010-05-11 05:20:30

#130

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6660|USA

Turquoise wrote:
lowing wrote:
THey ask why would you kill someone over toothpaste. I ask why would you risk your life over toothpaste?

I do love the families assertion, " oh sure he was a convict, and a drug addict, but he was such a good person". I don't think I will loose any sleep tonight.
For a guy who dislikes fascism, you seem not to mind it in law enforcement.

law and order is not fascism and what happened is not endorsed by our laws. I simply don't give a shit when a criminal is killed while committing a crime. I think we have been through this.

2010-05-11 05:22:49

#131

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6684|Canberra, AUS

No tears shed but vigilantism is most certainly not something I condone.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2010-05-11 05:23:30

#132

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6660|USA

mikkel wrote:
lowing wrote:
mikkel wrote:

You ask that because your sense of justice is warped. You do not risk your life stealing a tube of toothpaste any more than you risk your life taking a walk around the block. Meeting death as a consequence of either is wholly unreasonable.
Sorry, a convictied felon, and drug addict........More to the story than him being killed over toothpaste..

I never said it was justice, he never made it to justice. When you commit a crime, there is a chance you might turn into the victim, the real price you pay for your criminal behavior. THe thing is, when you commit a crime, you stand a chance of fucking with someone more crazy than you are, and when you instigate the confrontation, and you loose, it is your problem.
Are you honestly trying to convince me that it's better to accept irrational and disproportionate reprisal than to detest it? The law does not disappear when broken, and this kind of behaviour remains illegal. "It is your problem" just doesn't fly.

Actually, the clerk apparently has never been a threat to anyone in his life except a criminal....I have no problem with it. If the criminal did not fuck with the clerk, the clerk woulda had a normal day, and the criminal would be alive.

I do not enorse or condemn what happend. To me it is just a matter of fact that it did happen. I don't care, nor do would I feel like I should live in fear with a CVS clerk on the loose.

2010-05-11 05:25:50

#133

IG-Calibre: comhalta; +226|6751|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann

Hey!!!!! what do ya know.... another thread of LOLowing pure comedy gold, haven't read one of those in aaaaaaaaaaages..

2010-05-11 05:31:23

#134

Jaekus: I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose; +957|5187|Sydney

Except now the clerk is a bigger criminal than the guy who stole some toothpaste ever was... but hey, everyone's a law abiding citizen till they're caught.

2010-05-11 05:32:53

#135

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6660|USA

Turquoise wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Crime and punishment is not a zero-sum game. The results of crime are not of a nature that can be "paid back" to society by the offending party, assuming the justice system even gets a hold of the perpetrator. To maintain the rights of people that break the social contract is to either 1) assume no crime will exist or 2) accept a state where society will crumble in a relatively short period of time. If people think they can get away with anything and face at worst consequences equal to their crime then the incentive is there to commit crime. It is impossible to maintain order in a system with that characteristic.

That's why for the period of time you are actually breaking social contract, you are absolutely on your own. If you break it, escape, and later turn yourself in then of course it is imperative that limits are placed on the system to maintain the rights of the possibly innocent, that's what the Bill of Rights is for. When someone is actually in the act of burglary, rape, murder etc. and to extend those same rights to them as if they are a member of society is to provide protection to those that have shrugged the responsibilities of being a member of society.

That's why though he clearly should not have been killed, I feel no sympathy for the thief. As I would feel no sympathy for the man who killed him if another person tried to stop the man from killing the thief if he had accidentally killed him. When you are actively working against a stable society you forfeit your rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
Well, like I said, not all of us look at it in draconian terms, and I would posit that your assumptions are incorrect as shown by various societies that do not dole out draconian punishments nor accept vigilante justice but still have low crime -- much lower than ours in fact.

How is it you can not accept there are uknowns for criminals to face everytime they turn against their fellow citizens? Why should all the unknowns be faced by the victims? He was killed during a crime fuck'em

I would also say one big reason our crime is higher, is because we are an instant gratification society. We want something and we want it now. ALL of us have little patience to satisfy our wants, most of us can do so legally, some of us won't wait for legal means for their gratifications and will turn against another and steal their rewards.

2010-05-11 05:35:44

#136

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6660|USA

Turquoise wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Turquoise wrote:

You're clearly trying to justify vigilante justice. I'm explaining why it isn't logical.
and it isn't because...?
Ok... let's break this one down, shall we?...

Guy steals toothpaste. Clerk chokes and kills thief. Thief's family demands justice. Well... I guess if vigilante justice is ok, then the thief's family can go out and kill the clerk. Then, the clerk's family is pissed about that....

It's a bit problematic to say the least.

They could try and kill the clerk I guess, but he sounds like one bad mother fucker, so again the ones fucking with someone else is taking the risk. IE the clerk might kill them as well for fucking with him ,and I will be here applauding.

2010-05-11 05:39:11

#137

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6660|USA

Turquoise wrote:
JohnG@lt wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Well, for that matter... what does vigilante justice have to do with the social contract?
Do you believe you have the right to defend your home? How does that differ from 'vigilante justice'? Shouldn't you call the police instead of interfering with the intruders as they rape your wife/daughter/mother/gf/dog/sheep/cow/goat etc? How do you feel about 'citizens arrests'?
I believe in proportionate force. If a home invader has a deadly weapon, you should be able to defend with deadly force.

However, the example in the OP did not even involve a weapon.

Sorry gotta disagree. If some one is breaking in, I have no desire to conduct an interview and compare weapons to make sure I do not actually have the invader out gunned. In fact during home invasion it is my desire, NOT to be proportionate, but to be over powering disproportionately.

If they break in they will be shot, if they break in with a knife, they will be shot, if they break in with a gun, they had better shoot first if they do not want to be shot.

Last edited by lowing (2010-05-11 06:21:54)

2010-05-11 08:21:49

#138

LostFate: Same shit, Different Arsehole; +95|6494|England

lowing wrote:
THey ask why would you kill someone over toothpaste. I ask why would you risk your life over toothpaste?

I do love the families assertion, " oh sure he was a convict, and a drug addict, but he was such a good person". I don't think I will loose any sleep tonight.

Lowing you are so fucked up its unreal, if i ever met you in person i would fucking beat you.

2010-05-11 08:30:29

#139

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6725

LostFate wrote:
lowing wrote:
THey ask why would you kill someone over toothpaste. I ask why would you risk your life over toothpaste?

I do love the families assertion, " oh sure he was a convict, and a drug addict, but he was such a good person". I don't think I will loose any sleep tonight.
Lowing you are so fucked up its unreal, if i ever met you in person i would fucking beat you.

Yes the kid was such an angel wasn't he? He was a good lad. Well if he was such a fucking good kid why did he rob a shop for a fucking toothpaste. Did he deserve to die? No. Did he kinda had it coming? Yes.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2010-05-11 08:39:08

#140

jord: Member; +2,382|6687|The North, beyond the wall.

I stole dixy chicken. Once, tasted nice.

2010-05-11 08:40:21

#141

LostFate: Same shit, Different Arsehole; +95|6494|England

Cybargs wrote:
LostFate wrote:
lowing wrote:
THey ask why would you kill someone over toothpaste. I ask why would you risk your life over toothpaste?

I do love the families assertion, " oh sure he was a convict, and a drug addict, but he was such a good person". I don't think I will loose any sleep tonight.
Lowing you are so fucked up its unreal, if i ever met you in person i would fucking beat you.
Yes the kid was such an angel wasn't he? He was a good lad. Well if he was such a fucking good kid why did he rob a shop for a fucking toothpaste. Did he deserve to die? No. Did he kinda had it coming? Yes.

Shut your face you fucking moron, how did he have it coming? its a 50p tube of tooth paste for Christ sake.

2010-05-11 08:42:39

#142

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5367|London, England

LostFate wrote:
lowing wrote:
THey ask why would you kill someone over toothpaste. I ask why would you risk your life over toothpaste?

I do love the families assertion, " oh sure he was a convict, and a drug addict, but he was such a good person". I don't think I will loose any sleep tonight.
Lowing you are so fucked up its unreal, if i ever met you in person i would fucking beat you.

Congrats on being even more worthless to this particular forum than Sh1fty.

2010-05-11 08:44:41

#143

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6725

LostFate wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
LostFate wrote:

Lowing you are so fucked up its unreal, if i ever met you in person i would fucking beat you.
Yes the kid was such an angel wasn't he? He was a good lad. Well if he was such a fucking good kid why did he rob a shop for a fucking toothpaste. Did he deserve to die? No. Did he kinda had it coming? Yes.
Shut your face you fucking moron, how did he have it coming? its a 50p tube of tooth paste for Christ sake.

He shouldn't have been stealing in the first place. Not like he was randomly killed. Shit happens.

2010-05-11 08:46:22

#144

jord: Member; +2,382|6687|The North, beyond the wall.

Aye shit tastes better when its free.

2010-05-11 09:13:11

#145

LostFate: Same shit, Different Arsehole; +95|6494|England

JohnG@lt wrote:
LostFate wrote:
lowing wrote:
THey ask why would you kill someone over toothpaste. I ask why would you risk your life over toothpaste?

I do love the families assertion, " oh sure he was a convict, and a drug addict, but he was such a good person". I don't think I will loose any sleep tonight.
Lowing you are so fucked up its unreal, if i ever met you in person i would fucking beat you.
Congrats on being even more worthless to this particular forum than Sh1fty.

Why is that?

I'm 100 % serious in what i said, anybody who thinks that this lad deserved to die for stealing some 50 p tooth paste deserves a beating.

Last edited by LostFate (2010-05-11 09:13:49)

2010-05-11 09:16:16

#146

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5367|London, England

LostFate wrote:
JohnG@lt wrote:
LostFate wrote:

Lowing you are so fucked up its unreal, if i ever met you in person i would fucking beat you.
Congrats on being even more worthless to this particular forum than Sh1fty.
Why is that?

I'm 100 % serious in what i said, anybody who thinks that this lad deserved to die for stealing some 50 p tooth paste deserves a beating.

So you feel so strongly about the subject that you would do physical harm to another individual. I guess you don't see anything wrong with that or even the remotest hint of irony. Good to know.

Shouldn't you be off working in a coal mine or a factory or something? Perhaps digging ditches?

2010-05-11 09:46:40

#147

-Sh1fty-: plundering yee booty; +510|5483|Ventura, California

lowing wrote:
THey ask why would you kill someone over toothpaste. I ask why would you risk your life over toothpaste?

I do love the families assertion, " oh sure he was a convict, and a drug addict, but he was such a good person". I don't think I will loose any sleep tonight.

Your posts on this forum restore my faith in humanity.

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.

2010-05-11 09:48:21

#148

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6716|67.222.138.85

on topic please

2010-05-11 09:57:26

#149

-Sh1fty-: plundering yee booty; +510|5483|Ventura, California

War Man wrote:
I wouldn't charge the employer, he just was dealing with a shoplifter and over did it
mtb0minime wrote:
Employee should've just knocked the guy's teeth out. The irony would be overwhelming.
Lol
13/f/taiwan wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
At my store, our company rules prohibit us from chasing shoplifters. I guess this is why.
If you touch anyone(without their permission) while at work the company which employs you can be held liable. It has happened before. Security guardtackles a shop lifter and holds him against his/her will. Shoplifter sues the company which employed the security guard(why would you sue a guard who makes <15k a year) and wins. And then the security guard gets fired.
Which pisses me off, liberalism for ya though.

QFT

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.

2010-05-11 11:15:11

#150

Ilocano: buuuurrrrrrppppp.......; +341|6676

jord wrote:
Aye shit tastes better when its free.

Ah, but it wasn't free. It cost him more than he bargained for. He paid with his life.

Not that the perp deserved it, but shit can happen when committing a crime.

Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Shoplifter killed over toothpaste

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Shoplifter killed over toothpaste

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:

LostFate wrote:

lowing wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

LostFate wrote:

lowing wrote:

LostFate wrote:

lowing wrote:

LostFate wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

LostFate wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

LostFate wrote:

lowing wrote:

LostFate wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

LostFate wrote:

lowing wrote:

War Man wrote:

mtb0minime wrote:

13/f/taiwan wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

jord wrote:

Board footer