Ownder Defends Business

mom'sfolly :

Dissenting view here:

I don't think an air conditioner is worth a human life. If the thieves were in the home, or threatening the man, I would feel differently.

Remember, think of the children....What if that air conditioner was used to cool some old people or some infants, and they died of heat exhaustion.

How many lives have these thieves put behind the financial curve, due to stealing a $2,000 or $3,000 unit?

I'm glad that they got a dose of lead poisoning.​
 
mom'sfolly :

Dissenting view here:

I don't think an air conditioner is worth a human life. If the thieves were in the home, or threatening the man, I would feel differently.

I think that all thieves that have the nerve to break into someones house should be shot. Really.. not even joking. Or maybe chop their hands off?? Nah.. then they'd just mooch off the system for the rest of their lives...
Shoot 'um...​
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Then the robbers should've thought of that. IMHO when a person does something illegal then they take their chances. If they get shot then it really boils down to it was their choice.

And that sums up the "Inherent Risk Of Criminal Activities" thing I think should be on the books.

If you go to a place and ride a horse and you get bucked off you cannot sue the owner because of the "Inherent Risk of Equine Activities"... in other words EVERYONE knows that sitting on a 2000lb animal could get you hurt... EVERYONE also knows that in a country where arms are permitted that your bum could get shot if you try and rob, rape, murder, etc... Inherent Risk in those activities... why isn't this on the books? Makes NO sense that someone else's choice can get YOU sued.
hmm.png


Their choice to risk Their Life for an air conditioner was Their choice and they should have to face the consequences of Their Actions.

The victim of Their Choice shouldn't be further victimized by Government Endorsed and Enforced theft.
 
Hopefully they will just die so the house owner wont have to worry about them sueing him...
 
So, because they just stole things that were attached to outside of the business that's okay?

That's not trespassing, breaking and entering, burgling...
There aren't two of them and one of the owner ...
It's outside the walls so it's not your property thus you've no right to protect it?

Funny, but if someone's poking around in my yard trying to steal my unit, my dog, my kids' bikes, etc. I still consider it trespassing, theft, and I most certainly see them as a threat to our health and well being.

Like HLAC said with the sign... only that's MY opinion... I can't force someone else to agree that their life is worth more than my cheap TV. That is their choice. Just like it's a jumper's choice to bungee, to skydive, etc. They reckon the thrill/booty is worth the risk.

Comes down to choice. That man chose to defend his property and life... but he'd have never had to make that choice if not for THEM choosing to break the law.

What kind of country do we live in where criminals think it's perfectly acceptable to rob? No consequences? No defense? That owners will just lie down and take it?
 
Gutsie Guy! Good for him... I don't believe in becoming a victim if a firearm is within reach! Both my daughter & I are CWP holders... we went thru training together...
wink.png
 
mom'sfolly :

They were not in a house. They stole the units from outside a business....just saying.....

actually, it doesn't matter
smile.png
That's the beauty of these laws. If more criminals were maimed and killed instead of slapped on the wrists, then guess what might happen? Less folks would be turning to crime. The punishment they would have gotten from stealing the copper on his AC is a joke. those punks would have been charged with vandalism. Instead of wasting taxpayer money on prosecuting worthless scum with a worthless sentence, they got the 50 cent solution. a quarter for every shotgun shell
wink.png
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom