holy shit that is awesome
they should give that guy a fuckin medal or something, not punish him

So it's only killin' that counts, huh? Oh, well. Please ask your specialist if any of what he said is locale-dependant, and in what way. IANAL.



I did. Ultimately, we don't agree, and I said that too.

In Texas, for instance, you can pursue to reclaim stolen goods. Address that.

It is, though it's irrelevant to the situation. What is relevant is the self-defense claim, which is obviously not true. If you don't wish to accept this as fact or are unable to for various reasons, then there is no logical argument here.

Intuitively I doubt this includes unreasonable force. Althought I must ask that you quit bringing up irrelevant points. This happened in Arizone, not Texas.

And if you are acknowledging he did pursue them, then you must also acknowledge that this was not self-defense. He was in no danger when he crushed their vehicle.

This wasn't self-defense. You can be in denial all you want, but as it stands you have no logical argument.

Until you come up with something that makes sense, I will not be replying.

ok you two, remember we're all buddies, discussing an issue civilly. I appreciate the courtesy that you have used so far, but want to remind you to stick with it. thanks!

that worst part is that the guy driving the hummer will probably get charged for something, which is just ridiculous.

If you would like to logically argue your opinion, considering the points already made, I would be happy to participate.

Mac, hun, next time READ the discussion, so you'll know that's what we've been talking about for the last page and a half! ;)

oh whatever, thats all i had to say anyway :p

but it's not the first time or the last that something like that has happend to a shop owner or someone's home

I already told you we were going in circles. And I reiterated it in my previous post.

I don't know the law in Arizona. Do you?



You don't know Texas very well. What they consider "unreasonable force" is beyond anything a normal human can handle. They allow people to recover their property, they allow you to shoot tresspassers on sight (and on site), and I'm certain this particular event wouldn't be an issue there. But I can't speak for AZ.

Nope. Danger has nothing to do with it. He was defending his property. Again, you're begging the question unless you know for a fact that AZ doesn't allow this.

the heat of the moment and individual in the moment will dictate the actions taken.

He wasn't defending his property. He crushed their vehicle. No where in the article is it mentioned that the owner went for his money or ever recovered it. What it does state, is that he crushed their vehicle after the robbers left the scene. Given the FACTS PRESENTED, you are left with enough to make up an argument (given you have the ability).


If you really "have nothing", I recommend you adopt the more rational opinion or at least cease bringing up irrelevant information and creating false information.

Opinion, yours.


So answer the question: what is AZ law's position on this?

I really believe that we as a nation have taken the touchy feely philosophy too far.

These guys knew they were breaking the law. They assaulted the man for money (note assault, we don't know of battery was involved but that would be worse). They did not show any compassion or regard for this person's rights or health. Why the fuck should they be shown any different?

There's a farmer in Britain who shot a burglar after having been robbed several times. Guess who went to prison as the danger to society? Now that he's up for parole, it's being argued that burglars have a right to be protected from this maniac and that he should remain in jail. Is this where we're headed?

Sheep are never going to be able to live with lions. Not unless they have the means to kick the living shit out of any lion that tries to mess with them regardless of how they were raised as cubs etc. etc. . Sorry, but that's the way it goes.

And if they can kick the shit out of a lion, they're not sheep.

Heh, forget it.

No, actually, the chain of events are factual. Re-read the article.

From http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/13/00404.htm:

I don't know exactly what you mean by "touchy feely", but if you're referring to attempting to retain justice, I must disagree.

Because it is their constitutional right to due process, not vigilante justice. (If vigilante justice fits the crime then they shouldn't be charged by the courts at all, if you're going to go that route).

Straw-man fallacy. On top of that, these are different circumstances.

Also, irrelevant to the charging and punishment of the suspects or the owner.

I have it on my wall.

Well, that's pretty clear. IMHO, it's wrong-headed, but it's clear.

So where does that leave your points?

They way things work you are only allowed to protect yourself not your stuff with force. If someone robs you and is walking out of the house and you shoot him you are at fault for using excessive force. If that ever happens make sure they fall so they are facing in and shoot to kill. If you only injure them they can still sue you for damages for using excessive force if they can prove that your physical well being wasn't in danger. It's pathetic I know.

I think this guy gave those crooks what they deserved. I'm worried that he'll end up fighting this in court for a long time. Truely I hope those guys die in that if they survive I wouldn't be surprised if they sued him. I hope he gets off on this. It will set a precedent that will allow us to actually protect our stuff as well as ourselves. Go hummers! :)

He was not protecting his stuff. They were already gone with his stuff and posed no further threat to him or his "stuff." He endangered himself and other drivers probably in a rage to get revenge on the thieves. I would hope that chages are laid. Would you be pissed if no charges are laid and more people start doing this and eventually one carves up your lawn as he crashes while trying to get he bad guys. Or even worse smokes a 10 yo kid on his bike and kills or cripples him.

Throw the book at the fucker. Vigilantes have no place in society.

Although what he did was wrong, If everyone stopped being a fucking victim and stood up to the criminals you'd have a few less people but you'd have alot less criminals. people are too fucking scared to get hurt/die. Grow some fucking balls! Work as a fucking team and get shit done!

You can see I'm in a very bad mood right now...

If anything, charge the guy with wreckless driving, and endangerment to bystanders.

Harming the criminals on the otherhand, should be overlooked.

Police today are to soft, everything they do has to be ok'd first, and cannot hurt thier public look.

If they would only do what is right, and not whats for the better of thier political view.

Your opinion only.

Okay, I'll answer you: doesn't say anything to my points. It says that the laws in AZ are wrong-headed, that the guy did the right thing, that the thieves should die, and that you're beating a dead horse. Enough already.