JoePa Style.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

Does anyone really think the punishment for theft should be death? People talk about the punishments in the Middle-East, at least there they only cut off one hand not kill you, now who is the barbarian?

---

No I don't but that doesn't mean I have to feel sorry for the thief that rips off the wrong person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DGearyFTE

Interesting story, however it is untrue.

http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/click.asp

Origins: This item circulates under a variety of titles, including "Gun Ownership in Texas," "Texas Feminine Protection," "Gun Control," "A True Woman's Gun Story," "Purse Snatcher Takes the Wrong Purse," and "You Gotta Love Texas."

It's not a real news story, even though some versions attempt to present the tale as such. Actual news stories contain checkable details, such as the when and where of the incidents being described and the names of the people involved. In a real news story, the shooter would not be identified as "A woman," nor would the jurist who heard her case be identified as "the arraignment judge."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Exo200

Story is a fake , let it go !!!

---

Sure, it was but the point is still real.

I haven't been around the world, but I've been around the block. During that walk around the block I have met people who have made bad choices in the past and yet since then have made positive contributions to their respective communities and society in general. They did not deserve to die for the choices they made back then and the world would have been poorer for their loss. Many one-time bad choices are made by people who aren't career criminals or ever will be. Death penalty for them? I think not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smallgamer

I haven't been around the world, but I've been around the block. During that walk around the block I have met people who have made bad choices in the past and yet since then have made positive contributions to their respective communities and society in general. They did not deserve to die for the choices they made back then and the world would have been poorer for their loss. Many one-time bad choices are made by people who aren't career criminals or ever will be. Death penalty for them? I think not.

---

So what about the victime, does she/he get a second chance of not been robbed, beat up or raped? What about the concequence for the kids of the victim? Sorry, you won't eat tonight because of some AH.....
If the concequence of making bad choices were harder maybe it would be easier to make good one or none. And, I don't think few more or less people on earth really matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seabast

So what about the victime, does she/he get a second chance of not been robbed, beat up or raped? What about the concequence for the kids of the victim? Sorry, you won't eat tonight because of some AH.....
If the concequence of making bad choices were harder maybe it would be easier to make good one or none.

---

I'm not talking about the threat of physical assault/rape, nor do I suggest that the people I am speaking of committed such heinous acts. That type of threat warrants an extreme response. Theft followed by flight is vastly different and does not warrant such a response, IMHO.

Now, I will concede that the act of the perpetrator in this fictional yet realistic scenario we are debating does constitute assault due to the manner the young lady was roughly liberated of her purse. And if the purse snatcher was observed approaching in an aggressive manner by her, I do agree that self defense measures would be appropriate, in that she would only know she was being assaulted, not why (which wouldn't matter in such a case). However, her decision to shoot him was made when the threat of bodily was rapidly diminishing, if not completely gone. I stand by my original observations. Anyway, I'm off to work now and will check in on this thread tomorrow a.m.. Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smallgamer

Now, I will concede that the act of the perpetrator in this fictional yet realistic scenario we are debating does constitute assault due to the manner the young lady was roughly liberated of her purse. And if the purse snatcher was observed approaching in an aggressive manner by her, I do agree that self defense measures would be appropriate, in that she would only know she was being assaulted, not why (which wouldn't matter in such a case). However, her decision to shoot him was made when the threat of bodily was rapidly diminishing, if not completely gone. I stand by my original observations. Anyway, I'm off to work now and will check in on this thread tomorrow a.m.. Cheers.

---

I know what you mean it's like car thief, do you deserve to die for that when politician steal everyday without been shot..... But the thing is, it's too easy when there is little concequences and sometime enough is enough and as you grow older enough comes quicker....

If we move this "theoretical" scenario to Canada,the robbery victim would have been most certainly charged with first degree murder. Once a crook is "in flight",the threat is over and deadly force is never authorized. In this country,she could be going to prison. Having said that,I love a good "revenge" story. Charles Bronson's "Death Wish" series is one of my favorites.

Texas has strong Mexican law ties and is somewhat unique in their laws wrt property and the defense of and the laws around it.

It was a felony(sort of equal to a Canadian indictable offense)to cut a fence. I guess it likely still is.

Louisiana is the same way with some French law holdover/influence.(Odd or different laws)

I suppose wrt self defense and property, it boils down to who owns your body and or property? You or the "State."
For the most part in the US the "State" doesn't own you or your property and many juries won't likely convict on self defense and not guaranteed to upon killing a thief.

Texas is the only State that comes to mind about coded justification of lethal force for defense of property.

Michigan has the same law as Texas where you can use lethal force to protect your property