Man arrested for shooting thieves breaking in to arlington store

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington might have elected tafti but no Arlington jury willl convict this guy.

I would. I don’t want cowboy vigilantes shooting down anyone they want.

And there are plenty of other people in Arlington who are ok with people defending their peop tand businesses, and odds are, at least one (or more) will be in the jury box next to you.

Boom, instant hung jury, no conviction.

People, yes.

"Business", no.

It's called insurance FFS.

I pay insurance. I don’t like my premiums going up because claims are constantly being made by people being taken advantage of by criminals.

I’m totally ok with this clerk shooting a burglar, and no jury I’m ever on is ever going to convict someone in these circumstances. Just won’t happen. Period.

VA gets bluer and bluer every day.

And guess what? We don't like cowboy vigilantes.

LOCK HIM UP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington might have elected tafti but no Arlington jury willl convict this guy.

I would. I don’t want cowboy vigilantes shooting down anyone they want.

And there are plenty of other people in Arlington who are ok with people defending their peop tand businesses, and odds are, at least one (or more) will be in the jury box next to you.

Boom, instant hung jury, no conviction.

People, yes.

"Business", no.

It's called insurance FFS.

I pay insurance. I don’t like my premiums going up because claims are constantly being made by people being taken advantage of by criminals.

I’m totally ok with this clerk shooting a burglar, and no jury I’m ever on is ever going to convict someone in these circumstances. Just won’t happen. Period.

VA gets bluer and bluer every day.

And guess what? We don't like cowboy vigilantes.

LOCK HIM UP.

He didn't go out searching for the burglars after the fact; it was done during the break in. If he went after them later, then sure I agree with you that's a vigilante and she shoudl be locked up. But the robbers are the bad guys here - they chose to break/enter, steal, etc. If someone breaks into your house at 5 AM, are you supposed to just sit there and not defend your home? They're just taking stuff and you have insurance so no big deal right?

Idiots on this board never cease to amaze me....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only in arlington will someone getting attacked by criminals be charged

whats the message, if you are in arlington criminal break in?

https://www.arlnow.com/2020/03/29/police-store-employee-charged-after-shooting-would-be-thief/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only in arlington will someone getting attacked by criminals be charged

whats the message, if you are in arlington criminal break in?

https://www.arlnow.com/2020/03/29/police-store-employee-charged-after-shooting-would-be-thief/

Makes perfect sense to me, actually. You can't just shoot someone because they broke in to a store.

[Anonymous]

I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington might have elected tafti but no Arlington jury willl convict this guy.

I would. I don’t want cowboy vigilantes shooting down anyone they want.

And there are plenty of other people in Arlington who are ok with people defending their peop tand businesses, and odds are, at least one (or more) will be in the jury box next to you.

Boom, instant hung jury, no conviction.

People, yes.

"Business", no.

It's called insurance FFS.

I pay insurance. I don’t like my premiums going up because claims are constantly being made by people being taken advantage of by criminals.

I’m totally ok with this clerk shooting a burglar, and no jury I’m ever on is ever going to convict someone in these circumstances. Just won’t happen. Period.

VA gets bluer and bluer every day.

And guess what? We don't like cowboy vigilantes.

LOCK HIM UP.

A jury will never convict on this. It’ll be hung, 100% guaranteed.

You can’t even get a unanimous verdict about his guilt here on DCUM. How in the hell do you think you’ll find a dozen Virginians to agree?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arlington might have elected tafti but no Arlington jury willl convict this guy.

I would. I don’t want cowboy vigilantes shooting down anyone they want.

And there are plenty of other people in Arlington who are ok with people defending their peop tand businesses, and odds are, at least one (or more) will be in the jury box next to you.

Boom, instant hung jury, no conviction.

People, yes.

"Business", no.

It's called insurance FFS.

I pay insurance. I don’t like my premiums going up because claims are constantly being made by people being taken advantage of by criminals.

I’m totally ok with this clerk shooting a burglar, and no jury I’m ever on is ever going to convict someone in these circumstances. Just won’t happen. Period.

VA gets bluer and bluer every day.

And guess what? We don't like cowboy vigilantes.

LOCK HIM UP.

He didn't go out searching for the burglars after the fact; it was done during the break in. If he went after them later, then sure I agree with you that's a vigilante and she shoudl be locked up. But the robbers are the bad guys here - they chose to break/enter, steal, etc. If someone breaks into your house at 5 AM, are you supposed to just sit there and not defend your home? They're just taking stuff and you have insurance so no big deal right?

Idiots on this board never cease to amaze me....

Sound an alarm. If you’re a gun nut - flash the gun. Fire a warning shot.

I wouldn’t shoot someone over a TV or some beef jerky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

I wish there was a way that gun nuts only shot gun nuts.

That would at least be fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

I wish there was a way that gun nuts only shot gun nuts.

That would at least be fair.

Ha! A lot if the time they’re so paranoid they shout themselves or friends by accident. Remember the donor Dick Cheney shot in the face?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

I wish there was a way that gun nuts only shot gun nuts.

That would at least be fair.

Ha! A lot if the time they’re so paranoid they shout themselves or friends by accident. Remember the donor Dick Cheney shot in the face?

But then on the flip side you get toddlers shooting people. Or kids accidentally shooting themselves. It’s not their fault that their parents are paranoid and reckless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

Ha ha yes! We were taking our daily lock-down walk yesterday and passed all the houses in the neighborhood with the "everyone welcome here" signs out front. My husband said, "Doe that mean we can ring the bell right now and ask for a glass of water?" I couldn't stop laughing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

Ha ha yes! We were taking our daily lock-down walk yesterday and passed all the houses in the neighborhood with the "everyone welcome here" signs out front. My husband said, "Doe that mean we can ring the bell right now and ask for a glass of water?" I couldn't stop laughing.

Only if you have no papers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

Ha ha yes! We were taking our daily lock-down walk yesterday and passed all the houses in the neighborhood with the "everyone welcome here" signs out front. My husband said, "Doe that mean we can ring the bell right now and ask for a glass of water?" I couldn't stop laughing.

I’m sure they would be happy to give you a glass of water - if you weren’t armed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

I wish there was a way that gun nuts only shot gun nuts.

That would at least be fair.

When gun nuts break into a store, they can be shot too. Guns do not care who they shoot.

If you don't want to be shot when breaking into a store, what's the easiest way to ensure that does not happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish there was a way to ensure that people who don’t believe in a right to defense of life and property were the only ones who would ever be victims of crime.

That would at least be fair.

I wish there was a way that gun nuts only shot gun nuts.

That would at least be fair.

When gun nuts break into a store, they can be shot too. Guns do not care who they shoot.

If you don't want to be shot when breaking into a store, what's the easiest way to ensure that does not happen?

Take away 2A rights.