Woman charged for trying to shoot tires of shoplifter

[Conservative65]

She should have shot the thief in the head and done the rest of us a favor.

Quite right...a summary public execution can be the only just sentence for a shoplifter!
Surely the woman is destined to be the new Conservative hero de-jour.

A thief is a thief. The amount taken or using a term to lessen that the person STOLE something is irrelevant. Here's a hint. Don't steal and it won't be an issue.

If you steal from me, I don't care if it's a penny or all I have. Stealing is stealing.

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

The laws of my State say that people have a right to protect themselves, their families, and other from intruders or attackers with the expectation of remaining unmolested and safe in their homes, businesses, and vehicles. While the two scenarios above may not required concealed weapons, my states grants the right of someone outside of their home to protect themselves in situations where it does.

By the way, they have that right without fear of civil or criminal prosecution.

 

[Conservative65]

Trying to shoot the fucking tires out... good grief.

I agree. Deflection is dangerous. The first shot takes the glass, the second tap goes to the head.

I doubt a dumb hoe who thinks it's wise to open fire in a public parking lot can make a head shot

She should have shot the thief in the head and done the rest of us a favor.

Here you are, RWer's. You own him. He is the poster child of why there are plenty of people walking around who don't have the judgement necessary to be a responsible gun owner.

I have the judgment to know that a thief is a thief. Here you are LWer's. You can have the piece of shit. He is the poster child of why the country is so fucked up. He cares for sorry thieves.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm sure that there is a [Leftist Male Feminization Center] near where you live... .

Yes... that will solve the problem.

 

[ChrisL]

A thief is a thief. The amount taken or using a term to lessen that the person STOLE something is irrelevant. Here's a hint. Don't steal and it won't be an issue.

If you steal from me, I don't care if it's a penny or all I have. Stealing is stealing.

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

You are such a know-it-all, telling thers what they "need." Puuhleese!

Ok, if you don't like that answer, here is another one. A felon loses his right to own a gun forever. So should she.

Well, I would disagree with that too. I think that only violent crimes that were committed with a gun should be the requirement that the government has to prove before messing with a citizen's rights.

 

[Conservative65]

A thief is a thief. The amount taken or using a term to lessen that the person STOLE something is irrelevant. Here's a hint. Don't steal and it won't be an issue.

If you steal from me, I don't care if it's a penny or all I have. Stealing is stealing.

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

You are such a know-it-all, telling thers what they "need." Puuhleese!

Ok, if you don't like that answer, here is another one. A felon loses his right to own a gun forever. So should she.

Again telling people what you think they need. Why can't you lefties mind your own fucking business.

 

[Conservative65]

Quite right...a summary public execution can be the only just sentence for a shoplifter!
Surely the woman is destined to be the new Conservative hero de-jour.

A thief is a thief. The amount taken or using a term to lessen that the person STOLE something is irrelevant. Here's a hint. Don't steal and it won't be an issue.

If you steal from me, I don't care if it's a penny or all I have. Stealing is stealing.

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

You are such a know-it-all, telling thers what they "need." Puuhleese!

Arrogant pieces of shit like Vandalshandle think they know what's best for the rest of us.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Quite right...a summary public execution can be the only just sentence for a shoplifter!
Surely the woman is destined to be the new Conservative hero de-jour.

A thief is a thief. The amount taken or using a term to lessen that the person STOLE something is irrelevant. Here's a hint. Don't steal and it won't be an issue.

If you steal from me, I don't care if it's a penny or all I have. Stealing is stealing.

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

The laws of my State say that people have a right to protect themselves, their families, and other from intruders or attackers with the expectation of remaining unmolested and safe in their homes, businesses, and vehicles. While the two scenarios above may not required concealed weapons, my states grants the right of someone outside of their home to protect themselves in situations where it does.

By the way, they have that right without fear of civil or criminal prosecution.

Nobody is that obtuse, Conservative. You have the right to protect yourself if you are threatened. This guy didn't threaten anyone. If she had shot him, she would have won the civil suit, and the shooter would have gotten the slammer for manslaughter.

 

[Conservative65]

So you do think the amount stolen matters and that a thief really isn't a thief unless they steal something of an amount to the level you determine. Got it. You support thieves which puts you on the same sorry level they are.

By your logic, you support a toddler getting shot in the head for stealing a gumball. That's fucked up man.

By your logic, a toddler and an adult think on the same level. A toddler doesn't know better. An adult should.

What's fucked up is you give an adult THIEF a pass.

No. What's fucked up is you think all crimes deserve a death penalty. And from vigilante citizens no less.

Not all crimes. What's fucked up is you don't think any crime does.

No what's fucked up is you supporting opening fire in a crowded parking lot like this was the wild west. Gun laws were put in place to stop us from being like the wild west.

I support treating thieves the way they need to be treated.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

You are such a know-it-all, telling thers what they "need." Puuhleese!

Ok, if you don't like that answer, here is another one. A felon loses his right to own a gun forever. So should she.

Again telling people what you think they need. Why can't you lefties mind your own fucking business.

You really should try that anger management class, 65. It can do wonders for the stress that you seem to be living with.

 

[ChrisL]

A thief is a thief. The amount taken or using a term to lessen that the person STOLE something is irrelevant. Here's a hint. Don't steal and it won't be an issue.

If you steal from me, I don't care if it's a penny or all I have. Stealing is stealing.

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

You are such a know-it-all, telling thers what they "need." Puuhleese!

Arrogant pieces of shit like Vandalshandle think they know what's best for the rest of us.

I don't think he's a piece of shit. Arrogant . . . okay.

 

[Conservative65]

A thief is a thief. The amount taken or using a term to lessen that the person STOLE something is irrelevant. Here's a hint. Don't steal and it won't be an issue.

If you steal from me, I don't care if it's a penny or all I have. Stealing is stealing.

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

The laws of my State say that people have a right to protect themselves, their families, and other from intruders or attackers with the expectation of remaining unmolested and safe in their homes, businesses, and vehicles. While the two scenarios above may not required concealed weapons, my states grants the right of someone outside of their home to protect themselves in situations where it does.

By the way, they have that right without fear of civil or criminal prosecution.

Nobody is that obtuse, Conservative. You have the right to protect yourself if you are threatened. This guy didn't threaten anyone. If she had shot him, she would have won the civil suit, and the shooter would have gotten the slammer for manslaughter.

Were you there? Depends on whose on the jury. Bleeding hearts like you would. Honorable people who know a thief is a thief wouldn't.

 

[Conservative65]

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

You are such a know-it-all, telling thers what they "need." Puuhleese!

Ok, if you don't like that answer, here is another one. A felon loses his right to own a gun forever. So should she.

Again telling people what you think they need. Why can't you lefties mind your own fucking business.

You really should try that anger management class, 65. It can do wonders for the stress that you seem to be living with.

You should really try getting a clue. It will make life much easier for you than living like a stupid piece of shit.

Guess living in Arizona around all the illegal wetbacks has made you weak.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You really should try that [Leftist Male Feminization] class... . It can do wonders for the stress that you seem to be living with.

It's certainly done wonders for you.

 

[bucs90]

Trying to shoot the fucking tires out... good grief.

Why not? For decades you libs have said cops should do that or shoot a person in the knee when being charged. Oh...NOW you realize that hitting a moving target under stress is very very hard.


As for the OP....she's a moron. No one was in danger. CWP should only be used when life is in danger.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Didn't I agree with you?
Shoot that dirty shoplifter in the head!
And shoot people that walk out of a shop knowing that they've been given too much change...damned thieves!

And shoot jaywalkers too...if you don't follow the rules then you deserve to die.

Oooo...ooo...what about those dirty bastards that spit on the sidewalk!
I hate that...gun them down too I say!

Well, there are certainly different degrees of thievery. If a person breaks into your home to steal things and you are there? Then, yes, I think you should be able to defend yourself as well as your property, and your store too, such as if looters or thieves are trying to rob you.

You don't need to carry a concealed weapon for either of those scenarios.

The laws of my State say that people have a right to protect themselves, their families, and other from intruders or attackers with the expectation of remaining unmolested and safe in their homes, businesses, and vehicles. While the two scenarios above may not required concealed weapons, my states grants the right of someone outside of their home to protect themselves in situations where it does.

By the way, they have that right without fear of civil or criminal prosecution.

Nobody is that obtuse, Conservative. You have the right to protect yourself if you are threatened. This guy didn't threaten anyone. If she had shot him, she would have won the civil suit, and the shooter would have gotten the slammer for manslaughter.

Were you there? Depends on whose on the jury. Bleeding hearts like you would. Honorable people who know a thief is a thief wouldn't.

Well, since the police have brought charges, I guess that they are not honorable in your eyes.

 

[Faun]

It was really stupid, but should we "discriminate" against stupid people? I know that what she did was really freaking stupid, but at the same time I'm conflicted because I know how important our rights are. What criteria should the government use in order to determine who is able to practice their natural rights to self defense?

When someone abuses their rights at the life-threatening endangerment of others; they should lose those rights.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

US woman charged for shooting at fleeing shoplifter

A perfect example of a CCW person playing Charles Bronson in a busy parking lot, and putting bystanders at risk.

Is she what some call a "responsible gun owner"?

legally, you can only use deadly force when you have a reasonable belief that failing to do so will cause you or another innocent to suffer imminent severe bodily harm

so what she did was improper. and a shoplifter is not a criminal activity that justifies using such force

however, I don't really get all worked up if criminals get shot

How do you feel about her losing her right to carry because of this incident? For a little while, forever, not at all?

It's not a matter of 'losing' her right to carry a concealed weapon, she forfeited that right, the consequence of her ignorance and stupidity.

If she's convicted of a felony, and that conviction prevents her from possessing a firearm or carrying a concealed weapon, she has only herself to blame.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Why not? For decades you libs have said cops should do that or shoot a person in the knee when being charged. Oh...NOW you realize that hitting a moving target under stress is very very hard.

As you stated in the rest of your post, in this case it was fucking stupid. This woman was an idiot. Hell even YOU were able to see that.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

It's not a matter of 'losing' her right to carry a concealed weapon, she forfeited that right, the consequence of her ignorance and stupidity.

If she's convicted of a felony, and that conviction prevents her from possessing a firearm or carrying a concealed weapon, she has only herself to blame.

Proving once again... that even a blind nut, finds a squirrel now and then.

 

[turtledude]

It's not a matter of 'losing' her right to carry a concealed weapon, she forfeited that right, the consequence of her ignorance and stupidity.

If she's convicted of a felony, and that conviction prevents her from possessing a firearm or carrying a concealed weapon, she has only herself to blame.

you have a point here "professor"?