Good guy with a gun kills shoplifter - Page 2

Thermal · 30th November 2022, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by sarge

I just looked, and from what I read, you can purchase a long gun in New Jersey and you may carry it in New Jersey without permit……the law at least allows it and does not seem to be overly restrictive as to where it is allowed.

How it reads online, again, is deceptive. You don't technically need a permit to buy a long gun, but you do need a State firearms purchaser ID, which is a permit by any other name. It does not transfer carry privliges. There has been much debate about whether you can kinda sorta carry a long gun legally, but to the debaters, I say 'try it. I dare you'. I can personally vouch for police treatment of what they will do to you if you open carry out of hunting garb and season. It's not pretty.

Quote:

And New Jersey is now a ‘shall issue’ state, not a ‘may issue’ state. Instead of simply not issuing concealed carry licenses for pistols, officials must issue the permit unless they can demonstrate a compelling reason not to.

'Shall issue' to receive a permit to buy a handgun, good for one handgun within a 90 day window. You still can't carry. It's a wide open secret here that there is simply nothing you can do or say to justify to your local police chief that a CCW is warranted. My towns chief brags openly that it has never issued one, just like any other town in the county.

Quote:

You do seem to have (by US standards) fairly restrictive new legislation crafted after the Supremes stupidity this past June.

When I was in the NRA over a quarter century ago (trying to be a responsible owner), they referred to NJ as being 'a gun owners Hell', even back then. But the not-being-shot-at angle is kind of nice.

sarge · 30th November 2022, 04:46 PM

Originally Posted by Thermal

How it reads online, again, is deceptive. You don't technically need a permit to buy a long gun, but you do need a State firearms purchaser ID, which is a permit by any other name. It does not transfer carry privliges. There has been much debate about whether you can kinda sorta carry a long gun legally, but to the debaters, I say 'try it. I dare you'. I can personally vouch for police treatment of what they will do to you if you open carry out of hunting garb and season. It's not pretty.

For rifles, the State Firearms ID does confer open carry privileges*, and you have 50,000 residents with a State Firearms ID. As you have a different license for handguns, that means you have 50,000 unique individuals that may carry a long gun in public without permission from the local authorities.

What would your police do to someone that is legally carrying a firearm in public? I am all for a local police chief denying a permit for any reason he can think of in a ‘May issue’ state (if they existed, of course), but it is a different thing to have a local cop harassing citizens engaged in a constitutionally protected activity…however wrong I believe the courts have gotten it.

Quote:

'Shall issue' to receive a permit to buy a handgun, good for one handgun within a 90 day window. You still can't carry. It's a wide open secret here that there is simply nothing you can do or say to justify to your local police chief that a CCW is warranted. My towns chief brags openly that it has never issued one, just like any other town in the county.

Yes…for handguns. I get that it is extremely unlikely that you will encounter a person legally carrying a handgun, open or concealed. But long guns do not require a permit to carry. They require a permit to purchase, and the state (locals?) don’t seem to be all that reluctant to issue these permits in the past and no longer can just deny since you became a ‘shall issue’ state in June.

Quote:

When I was in the NRA over a quarter century ago (trying to be a responsible owner), they referred to NJ as being 'a gun owners Hell', even back then. But the not-being-shot-at angle is kind of nice.

I agree. There is zero reason for the average person to carry a gun, concealed or otherwise.

*I don’t live there and have never really visited. I’m just going by what I can read online.

Norman Alexander · 30th November 2022, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

Sorta kinda. Its de factor legal in every state to open carry, at least a long gun, except in New Jersey. But, most municipalities have an ordnance outlawing open carry, so you can only legally open carry in rural areas. That was the status quo for a very long time, then the more "red" states started banning municipalities from banning open carry.

ETA: that chart on wiki is kinda silly. I mean Florida says you can't, but look at all the exceptions:

Open carry of firearms is generally banned except for certain protected places and activities, including in the home, place of work, hunting, fishing, camping, or while practice shooting and while traveling to and from those activities.

That doesn't make things better overall.

Norman Alexander · 30th November 2022, 06:15 PM

Originally Posted by Thermal

Conversely, it's odd to me to hear these tales of open carry. All over my State, and in my haunts out to Philly and NYC, and visiting other cities or resorts, I never see them.

Eta: we have visitors who never heard of this law either, and are quite offended at the treatment they receive by local police, which is replete with terms like 'under arrest' and 'multiple felonies'

While I expressed surprise above, I have to admit that of the dozens of times I have been to the USA (admittedly only for a few weeks at a time), I have very rarely even seen a gun except on a policeman's hip. One exceptions was the raving prepper gun-nut and general weirdo I was forced to work with for a few days in Portland, OR. He had a pistol in his bottom drawer at work "in case the government came for him".

Anyway, back to the topic!

bruto · 30th November 2022, 07:22 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

I hate to say this, but I wonder if there is anything the violent thief could have done differently in order to prevent this?

Of course, as always, there's a trivial truth in the fact that one cure for vastly excessive punishment for a small crime is, of course, to avoid committing any crimes. That works at least most of the time, just as it's true that just about anything that goes wrong could have been prevented by doing something else. Shot while shoplifting? Don't shoplift. Run over in the road? Stay off the road. Car burst into flames? Shoulda taken the bus. But aside from the trite truism, does it say anything of importance about the important aspect of this event?

casebro · 30th November 2022, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/da...ted-shoplifter

Sounds like this guy was really against men hitting women. But if this account is true, I don't see him walking.

He didn't shoot a man for being a shoplifter, he shot a man who was assaulting two women. His lawyer may have a good argument, isn't assault mentioned as a reasonable cause?

And the dead guy's criminal record?

I suspect Sir Galahad will be a long time before breathing free air.

Which states have "citizens arrest" laws? Pull a gun, arrest him for committing a felony, then shoot him in the back for trying to escape?

Thermal · 30th November 2022, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by sarge

For rifles, the State Firearms ID does confer open carry privileges*, and you have 50,000 residents with a State Firearms ID. As you have a different license for handguns, that means you have 50,000 unique individuals that may carry a long gun in public without permission from the local authorities.

Wiki sums up neatly what has been my understanding since I was a teen regarding carry of handguns or long guns:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Open carry is allowed only with a permit to carry a handgun and is generally not practiced except by security officers and others who carry firearms on duty. While it is technically legal to carry long guns with a valid Firearm Purchaser ID card, it is generally frowned upon by law enforcement, except when hunting. One can expect to be detained and questioned in most places if carrying in this manner. However, open carry of loaded long guns is not permitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Jersey

I get that things are in flux with the NY ruling regarding handgun carry, but the powers that be seemed to have found a way around it. It seems that if you are denied (which seems to happen...pretty much all the time), you are not informed which agency denied you or on what grounds.

Quote:

What would your police do to someone that is legally carrying a firearm in public? I am all for a local police chief denying a permit for any reason he can think of in a ‘May issue’ state (if they existed, of course), but it is a different thing to have a local cop harassing citizens engaged in a constitutionally protected activity…however wrong I believe the courts have gotten it.

Per Wiki above, you should expect to be 'detained and questioned'. That is the understatement of the year. Per my experience, you are met with guns drawn and ordered to the ground, treated as if you were an active shooter.

Quote:

Yes…for handguns. I get that it is extremely unlikely that you will encounter a person legally carrying a handgun, open or concealed. But long guns do not require a permit to carry. They require a permit to purchase, and the state (locals?) don’t seem to be all that reluctant to issue these permits in the past and no longer can just deny since you became a ‘shall issue’ state in June.

The running guideline has been that pretty much anyone can get a long gun card, as long as you don't have a violent criminal history. I admit to being quite surprised that my fair state of 7 million has only 50K long gun cards issued. I would have assumed an order of magnitude more.

As far as carry goes, it is solidly law that you cannot carry a loaded long gun in public (see Wiki above). This has allowed for hunting use, which is pretty much everywhere in the non-suburban-New-York parts of the State (lots of woods here). But there is no straight out prohibition against carrying an unloaded long gun. Just expect to be...how did they put it?...'detained and questioned'. Looks pretty painful, the way they detain you, by the way.

Quote:

I agree. There is zero reason for the average person to carry a gun, concealed or otherwise.

I'm getting sympathetic to the idea of women carrying. I mean, a big guy can overpower a woman with ease. I would much prefer non-lethal alternatives be made more available to women, though. Bullet wounds can leave long lasting trauma to both parties.

Quote:

*I don’t live there and have never really visited. I’m just going by what I can read online.

It's lovely. Come visit! Bring about four times as much cash as you think you could possibly spend. Just come unarmed. We had a woman a little while back come in from the adjoining State of Pennsylvania, who carried a handgun in her glove box, which is perfectly legal in her home state. Here, it is a handful of felonies, as her arrest and conviction convinced her of.

Warp12 · 30th November 2022, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by bruto

Shot while shoplifting? Don't shoplift. Run over in the road? Stay off the road. Car burst into flames? Shoulda taken the bus. But aside from the trite truism, does it say anything of importance about the important aspect of this event?

Come on now, bruto.

Are you really equating getting shot during a theft and assault, with someone getting run over while crossing the street? Or a car randomly catching on fire?

As far as the "important aspect" of this event, well I consider that in dispute. I'm sure you know that I bring up personal responsibility a lot, and how it is ignored in today's society. Who really had the most control over the outcome of this situation? The dead, violent thief, that's who. In my view the lesson here is, "See kids, this is why we don't steal".

Remember, this guy didn't accidentally steal. He didn't accidentally assault people. He set out to commit crime. The fellow who shot him may have had a perfectly legal weapon, and simply been overwhelmed with a sudden stressful situation. But the thief put himself in a clear position of danger due to criminal activity.

I should add, I doubt the criminal didn't know that people carry in TX. He figured he could waltz into the store, steal, then assault two women, and not be held accountable. Well, he was dead wrong.

plague311 · 30th November 2022, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Come on now, bruto.

Are you really equating getting shot during a theft and assault, with someone getting run over while crossing the street? Or a car randomly catching on fire?

As far as the "important aspect" of this event, well I consider that in dispute. I'm sure you know that I bring up personal responsibility a lot, and how it is ignored in today's society. Who really had the most control over the outcome of this situation? The dead violent thief, that's who. In my view the lesson here is, "See kids, this is why we don't steal".

Remember, this guy didn't accidentally steal. He didn't accidentally assault people. He set out to commit crime. The fellow who shot him may have had a perfectly legal weapon, and simply been overwhelmed with a sudden stressful situation. But the thief put himself in a clear position of danger due to criminal activity.

I should add, I doubt the criminal didn't know that people carry in TX. He figured he could waltz into the store, steal, then assault two women, and not be held accountable. Well, he was dead wrong.

Most thieves don't expect to get caught and have to use violence. I mean, again, "no ****", right? Or are you seriously implying his thought process was, "I'm going to go in here, get caught shoplifting, throw hands at these two women, and waltz off", and during the whole thing he was thinking, "Yup, this is all going to plan."

The killer had a thousand different options. He chose murder. Hopefully it costs him the rest of his life. I believe I read he was in his mid-40s. Anything over 20 years pretty much ***** his life completely up. He should have thought twice.

arthwollipot · 30th November 2022, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by Thermal

Conversely, it's odd to me to hear these tales of open carry. All over my State, and in my haunts out to Philly and NYC, and visiting other cities or resorts, I never see them.

Welcome to Australia. Except here it's not "odd" to hear such tales, it's "******* lunacy".

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

It is honestly a bit weird for Dollar store employees to attack a shoplifter. In almost all retail chains its against company policy to attack a shoplifter... and then theres the "why risk my ******* life over a near minimum wage job??". Certainly not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the guy even did shoplift.

Exactly. I have a friend who was recently involved in an altercation with a shoplifter, which was caused by a staff member going against company policy and confronting the 'lifter. It's a pair of pants! Let it go.

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

Meanwhile in "real 'merica" its not all that rare to see a guy wearing a camo plate carrier, Mulan Labe/come and take it decal, with an AR-15 on his back ordering ******* Arbys or some ****.

Molon labe. It's Greek, not Chinese!

Bob001 · 30th November 2022, 10:35 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

.....
I should add, I doubt the criminal didn't know that people carry in TX. He figured he could waltz into the store, steal, then assault two women, and not be held accountable. Well, he was dead wrong.

As I noted above, the original link says the two women chased him to the door with a stick and he was running away when he was killed. No one was in danger. No one was hurt. Random guy packing heat doesn't get to be judge, jury and executioner.

And I note again, there is no claim that the shooter tried to stop or detain or warn the thief before opening fire. Just bang! Do you really want that to become a routine practice?

Warp12 · 30th November 2022, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by Bob001

And I note again, there is no claim that the shooter tried to stop or detain or warn the thief before opening fire. Just bang! Do you really want that to become a routine practice?

Of course not. That's why I say it starts with choosing to not commit such crimes in the first place. Otherwise, you are exposing yourself to such things.

You mentioned the women chasing him with a stick. Well, somehow that turned into him throwing punches. I wouldn't shed a tear if they had clubbed him to death during the altercation. And it would have been mostly on him.

bruto · 30th November 2022, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Come on now, bruto.

Are you really equating getting shot during a theft and assault, with someone getting run over while crossing the street? Or a car randomly catching on fire?

As far as the "important aspect" of this event, well I consider that in dispute. I'm sure you know that I bring up personal responsibility a lot, and how it is ignored in today's society. Who really had the most control over the outcome of this situation? The dead, violent thief, that's who. In my view the lesson here is, "See kids, this is why we don't steal".

Remember, this guy didn't accidentally steal. He didn't accidentally assault people. He set out to commit crime. The fellow who shot him may have had a perfectly legal weapon, and simply been overwhelmed with a sudden stressful situation. But the thief put himself in a clear position of danger due to criminal activity.

I should add, I doubt the criminal didn't know that people carry in TX. He figured he could waltz into the store, steal, then assault two women, and not be held accountable. Well, he was dead wrong.

My point is that, contribution or not, it's fundamentally irrelevant to the issue here. Sure, we can look at this retrospectively, and say he was a fool to do what he did, and sure, it was a bad thing to do. But it still was not, by a very long shot, a crime deserving of being killed by a bystander, and the fact that he failed to appreciate the possible consequences of the event has little do do with the disproportion of it.

e.t.a. that said, however, based on the sketchy evidence we've seen so far, and the fact that the robber was, apparently, fighting with the store clerks, and given some ambiguity on whether the shot was meant to be fatal, I'd be inclined to consider it manslaughter more than outright murder. Unlike a cop, our good guy with a gun seems to have stopped after the first shot.

The Don · 1st December 2022, 01:13 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Using deadly force to prevent a low-level crime?

Crazy. Deadly force should only be used to save a life.

Meh!

A significant proportion of people seem to think that the value of any item in a dollar store is significantly greater than a shoplifter's (or any other petty criminal's) life.

bluesjnr · 1st December 2022, 01:43 AM

A bit more nuance from some talking heads.

https://news.yahoo.com/dallas-store-...030854182.html

Norman Alexander · 1st December 2022, 03:50 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

Meh!

A significant proportion of people seem to think that the value of any item in a dollar store is significantly greater than a shoplifter's (or any other petty criminal's) life.

They are not a criminal until they have been convicted in a court of law. Unfortunately this victim didn't make it that far. To be clear: I have no problem with them being convicted and punished appropriately - looked to be a clear case.

Warp12 · 1st December 2022, 03:56 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

Meh!

A significant proportion of people seem to think that the value of any item in a dollar store is significantly greater than a shoplifter's (or any other petty criminal's) life.

No, that's what the dead guy thought.

The Don · 1st December 2022, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by Warp12

No, that's what the dead guy thought.

I very much doubt that the person killed thought that his life was at risk.

Then again in such a situation, I think it's unreasonable for anyone to think that it was.

Warp12 · 1st December 2022, 04:26 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

I very much doubt that the person killed thought that his life was at risk.

Then again in such a situation, I think it's unreasonable for anyone to think that it was.

This guy was willing to risk his life over some stale Jolly Ranchers, or whatever. I'm sorry, but it is just too funny. Like, he's in TX...and stealing and assaulting people over these expired candies. That is high risk, bro.

Like, what is his other hobby? Base jumping with a homemade wingsuit?

3point14 · 1st December 2022, 04:28 AM

Originally Posted by bruto

My point is that, contribution or not, it's fundamentally irrelevant to the issue here. Sure, we can look at this retrospectively, and say he was a fool to do what he did, and sure, it was a bad thing to do. But it still was not, by a very long shot, a crime deserving of being killed by a bystander, and the fact that he failed to appreciate the possible consequences of the event has little do do with the disproportion of it.

I think some people don't get that Judge Dredd was dystopian, not utopian.

sarge · 1st December 2022, 05:19 AM

Originally Posted by Thermal

Wiki sums up neatly what has been my understanding since I was a teen regarding carry of handguns or long guns:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Jersey

I get that things are in flux with the NY ruling regarding handgun carry, but the powers that be seemed to have found a way around it. It seems that if you are denied (which seems to happen...pretty much all the time), you are not informed which agency denied you or on what grounds.

Per Wiki above, you should expect to be 'detained and questioned'. That is the understatement of the year. Per my experience, you are met with guns drawn and ordered to the ground, treated as if you were an active shooter.

The running guideline has been that pretty much anyone can get a long gun card, as long as you don't have a violent criminal history. I admit to being quite surprised that my fair state of 7 million has only 50K long gun cards issued. I would have assumed an order of magnitude more.

As far as carry goes, it is solidly law that you cannot carry a loaded long gun in public (see Wiki above). This has allowed for hunting use, which is pretty much everywhere in the non-suburban-New-York parts of the State (lots of woods here). But there is no straight out prohibition against carrying an unloaded long gun. Just expect to be...how did they put it?...'detained and questioned'. Looks pretty painful, the way they detain you, by the way.

I'm getting sympathetic to the idea of women carrying. I mean, a big guy can overpower a woman with ease. I would much prefer non-lethal alternatives be made more available to women, though. Bullet wounds can leave long lasting trauma to both parties.

It's lovely. Come visit! Bring about four times as much cash as you think you could possibly spend. Just come unarmed. We had a woman a little while back come in from the adjoining State of Pennsylvania, who carried a handgun in her glove box, which is perfectly legal in her home state. Here, it is a handful of felonies, as her arrest and conviction convinced her of.

There is contradictory information online that says carrying a long gun in public is legal and requires no permit…….but you certainly know your state better than I.

As for the ‘shall; issue’ portion, your local cops will not longer have discretion. Your legislature will have to craft laws which state exactly what circumstances allow the denial of a permit (indeed I believe NJ has such legislation pending).

Good luck with it. I would much rather live in NJs gun environment than in NCs. In my IANAL opinion, NJs laws were well within the actual intent of the 2nd amendment.

I will be visiting your state some time next summer. On foot while I complete the Appalachian Trail. I look forward to it.

ETA: This is a derail from the actual subject of the thread. I’ll bow out of it now and await the judgement of the mods should it come to their attention.

sarge · 1st December 2022, 05:28 AM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Of course not. That's why I say it starts with choosing to not commit such crimes in the first place. Otherwise, you are exposing yourself to such things.

You mentioned the women chasing him with a stick. Well, somehow that turned into him throwing punches. I wouldn't shed a tear if they had clubbed him to death during the altercation. And it would have been mostly on him.

You earlier incorrectly claimed that many posters were not assigning a fair share of the blame to the victim.

You are failing to assign a fair share of the blame for the victims death to the murderer. All of that belongs to him. He is the only one that, at the crucial moment, had any control over what happened to the victim. At the moment he was shot, the victim was given no opportunity to surrender, was presenting no credible threat to anyone, and the shooter had no real evidence that he had done anything wrong because he hadn’t investigated the claims of either side of the dispute. He literally walked into a store, saw two women with sticks fighting a man, and ordered the women to move away so that he could shoot the victim.

According to the information we have at the moment, that is exactly what happened. If the information changes, then it may be time to reapportion the blame. Right now, the shooter is 100% responsible for the victims death.

Warp12 · 1st December 2022, 06:25 AM

Originally Posted by sarge

Right now, the shooter is 100% responsible for the victims death.

I disagree, for reasons already mentioned.

Mike! · 1st December 2022, 06:32 AM

Just to clarify something, despite the name, "Family Dollar", isn't a dollar store like "Dollar Tree", where everything is a dollar*, is. Things at FD are close to regular retail prices, and some things are in fact, overpriced there.
Not that any of that justifies blasting a shoplifter that's taken nothing from you personally.

* not even 'Dollar Tree' is a dollar anymore, everything is now a $1.25, but don't expect a name change to reflect that.

sarge · 1st December 2022, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by Warp12

I disagree, for reasons already mentioned.

Your ‘reasons’ for assigning all the blame to the victim are not reasonable.

Given only the information we have at the moment, the shooter is solely responsible for the death of the victim.

What we know (assuming the story is accurate):
The victim was being attacked by two women with sticks. The women were claiming the victim was a shoplifter. A rando walks in, pulls a gun, orders the two women to back away, and then executes the victim.

What we must assume to believe the victim is responsible for his own death:
He was shoplifting. Instead of attempting to flee, he stuck around to attack the two employees. The rando witnessed the attack. The rando reasonably concluded that either he or the employees were in imminent danger of death. The rando reasonably concluded that once he had used his gun to separate the fighting parties, people were still at risk of death from the shoplifter. The rando then concluded that executing the shoplifter was the only reasonable course of action.

Warp12 · 1st December 2022, 06:41 AM

Originally Posted by sarge

Your ‘reasons’ for assigning all the blame to the victim are not reasonable.

I haven't assigned all of the blame to the dead, violent thief. I have stated that I feel that his role in the outcome has been downplayed, and that he had by far the most control over this result.

sarge · 1st December 2022, 07:01 AM

Originally Posted by Warp12

I haven't assigned all of the blame to the dead, violent thief. I have stated that I feel that his role in the outcome has been downplayed, and that he had by far the most control over this result.

Your terminal sentence is perfectly incorrect. No matter what else contributed to the victims death, the most control over the outcome was wielded by the person the fired the gun. He was unthreatened, in complete control of the situation, and made a conscious choice to shoot an unarmed man who at the moment he was executed presented risk of neither harm nor flight.

Absent additional information coming to light, the executioner will be held responsible under the law for the death of the victim.

plague311 · 1st December 2022, 07:11 AM

I love how it's "violent thief" and not "violent store clerks", because Warp12 just can't hide his bias, as is his SoP.

If the story is correct, at the time he was shot the man wasn't attacking anyone. The killer told the women to back off, which they must have done because the killer felt he was fine to shoot. At that point there was no one being attacked except the "violent thief". The killer had no reason to shoot, and the store clerks had sticks that they were beating the "violent thief" with while the "violent thief" was still unarmed. He was the only one unarmed, in fact.

lobosrul5 · 1st December 2022, 08:46 AM

Ohhh, I read the story wrong. It was updated at 7:30. Looks like the actual incident occurred around noon... so not after dark. Well buddy, you got to play out your "Dirty Harry" fantasies. He'll likely be charged with murder,* with a plea bargain of manslaughter. So his options are play jury roulette and hope their are some Warp12's on it, but possibly face up to 99 years, or take the plea and get likely 5 to 10.

*Texas doesn't have 2nd degree murder, its either murder or "capital murder" which this wouldn't qualify for

ZirconBlue · 1st December 2022, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by Mike!

* not even 'Dollar Tree' is a dollar anymore, everything is now a $1.25, but don't expect a name change to reflect that.

Ah, now I know where to pick up a buck-and-a-quarter quarterstaff.

mgidm86 · 1st December 2022, 06:46 PM

Originally Posted by Thermal

Guys guys guys...the shooter is a black man. Anyone care to reassess their shock over why he has been arrested and charged?

He was probably going to rob the same store but was too late. After all he had the gun. Apparently the store gets robbed all the time so maybe he jumped the queue.

Quote:

sarge
I learned something. I’ve never been anywhere where I don’t occasionally see someone with a gun on their belt.

I've never seen any non-LEO/security carrying a loaded gun in public in 55 years and I'm very okay with that. It would probably be shocking to most people to see one where I live.

arthwollipot · 1st December 2022, 07:35 PM

Originally Posted by mgidm86

I've never seen any non-LEO/security carrying a loaded gun in public in 55 years and I'm very okay with that. It would probably be shocking to most people to see one where I live.

Where I live, only uniformed law enforcement officers carry a gun in public.

I remember a school visit when I was quite young. We kids asked if we could see his gun, and he said "No. The gun doesn't come out of its holster unless I'm certain I'm going to need to fire it." Or something like that anyway. It was a long time ago.

marting · 1st December 2022, 08:55 PM

I live in California and the only time I encountered anyone with a firearm strapped on was an old gold panner out in the national forest. He came around and was showing us ( a few rockhounds) the nuggets he found. I've never carried firearms in public.

That said I was once out at an informal shooting area in the national forest plinking testing out assorted firearms shooting at tin cans and such. On the way back, being hungry and tired I stopped at a McDonalds drive through. Had my firearms on the front seat and ammo in the trunk. This because at the time you couldn't carry firearms in a vehicle conceiled and the ammo had to be not easily reachable. Got my food and tooled off but noticed several cop cars rushing in the direction I had just left.

Some time later I stopped at a sheriff's station and asked how to best cary firearms when I went out target shooting. They suggested putting them in the trunk, law be damned.

A few years after that California changed their laws and carrying them in the trunk was OK'ed.

plague311 · 1st December 2022, 09:08 PM

My last job has multiple guns in the business offices, and a few guys carried them in their work trucks. I've seen more than a few motorcyclists with guns on their hips during the summer but I rarely have seen them in the actual retail or grocery stores.

casebro · 2nd December 2022, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by marting

I live in California and the only time I encountered anyone with a firearm strapped on was an old gold panner out in the national forest. He came around and was showing us ( a few rockhounds) the nuggets he found. I've never carried firearms in public.

That said I was once out at an informal shooting area in the national forest plinking testing out assorted firearms shooting at tin cans and such. On the way back, being hungry and tired I stopped at a McDonalds drive through. Had my firearms on the front seat and ammo in the trunk. This because at the time you couldn't carry firearms in a vehicle conceiled and the ammo had to be not easily reachable. Got my food and tooled off but noticed several cop cars rushing in the direction I had just left.

Some time later I stopped at a sheriff's station and asked how to best cary firearms when I went out target shooting. They suggested putting them in the trunk, law be damned.

A few years after that California changed their laws and carrying them in the trunk was OK'ed.

I've been hauling guns in my trucks in California since I was 16. Trunks were always OK. Point is " locked compartment inaccessible to people, ammo in a separate container". Or you could open carry in a back window rifle rack. Or laying in the back of a station wagon, where they were when once stopped by a cop. NOW, California has eliminated any open carry. Transport rules got tighter. But there are myriad open carry exemptions, they really wrote the laws to cut down on road rage and drive bys.

marting · 2nd December 2022, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by casebro

I've been hauling guns in my trucks in California since I was 16. Trunks were always OK. Point is " locked compartment inaccessible to people, ammo in a separate container". Or you could open carry in a back window rifle rack. Or laying in the back of a station wagon, where they were when once stopped by a cop. NOW, California has eliminated any open carry. Transport rules got tighter. But there are myriad open carry exemptions, they really wrote the laws to cut down on road rage and drive bys.

Yeah, I was probably reading the law too literally. At the time guns in your posession had to be either in open sight or locked up. Trunk wasn't locked. Doubt anyone would have had a problem with it though.

The law change that specified you could carry guns in a trunk was passed probably close to 40 years ago.

As for the recent changes, I don't have a problem with them and they don't interfere with my uses. I've never felt the need to carry outside of one time where an amployee I had to fire was on crack and hallucinating that work was surrounded by people that were after him. As the owner, I had the right to carry conceiled in the business so I did just in case. But that was the only time in over 2 decades. Not sure if the law still allows that but doesn't matter since I've been retired 20 years. Agree about targetting road rage/drive bys not that they pay much attention to laws.

mgidm86 · 3rd December 2022, 04:21 PM

One good thing that came out of Covid is grocery curbside pickup. I will add "not getting shot inside a store" to the list of its benefits.

- Pick-up is free!
- Just wait in your car and we'll bring it to you!
- No waiting in line!
- Won't get shot inside our store!

Haven't been inside the store in months.

Skeptical Greg · 3rd December 2022, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Haven't been inside the store in months.

You let strangers pick out your groceries?

Samson · 3rd December 2022, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by Thermal

Or the stuff wasn't important to him at all and he just liked to steal stuff. Also a dose of not liking being told he has to own that **** when caught. This shoplifter need not be some Dickensian waif. He could simply be a pure hyper-entitled jerkwad.

Was just reading Barnaby Rudge where a woman, 17, with a baby was sleeping rough after her husband messed up their lives. She stole linen to keep the baby warm and was hanged.
This, however, was due process.
1777 true story that Dickens used as source.

It seems reasonable to establish first the circumstances of the shop lifter in this thread.

Skeptical Greg · 3rd December 2022, 05:45 PM

Was this recently?

30th November 2022, 04:13 PM	#41
Thermal Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: In the Troll Ignoring Section Posts: 21,164	Originally Posted by sarge I just looked, and from what I read, you can purchase a long gun in New Jersey and you may carry it in New Jersey without permit……the law at least allows it and does not seem to be overly restrictive as to where it is allowed. How it reads online, again, is deceptive. You don't technically need a permit to buy a long gun, but you do need a State firearms purchaser ID, which is a permit by any other name. It does not transfer carry privliges. There has been much debate about whether you can kinda sorta carry a long gun legally, but to the debaters, I say 'try it. I dare you'. I can personally vouch for police treatment of what they will do to you if you open carry out of hunting garb and season. It's not pretty. Quote: And New Jersey is now a ‘shall issue’ state, not a ‘may issue’ state. Instead of simply not issuing concealed carry licenses for pistols, officials must issue the permit unless they can demonstrate a compelling reason not to. 'Shall issue' to receive a permit to buy a handgun, good for one handgun within a 90 day window. You still can't carry. It's a wide open secret here that there is simply nothing you can do or say to justify to your local police chief that a CCW is warranted. My towns chief brags openly that it has never issued one, just like any other town in the county. Quote: You do seem to have (by US standards) fairly restrictive new legislation crafted after the Supremes stupidity this past June. When I was in the NRA over a quarter century ago (trying to be a responsible owner), they referred to NJ as being 'a gun owners Hell', even back then. But the not-being-shot-at angle is kind of nice.
	__________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain "Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

30th November 2022, 04:46 PM	#42
sarge Philosopher Moderator Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Fayetteville, NC Posts: 9,877	Originally Posted by Thermal How it reads online, again, is deceptive. You don't technically need a permit to buy a long gun, but you do need a State firearms purchaser ID, which is a permit by any other name. It does not transfer carry privliges. There has been much debate about whether you can kinda sorta carry a long gun legally, but to the debaters, I say 'try it. I dare you'. I can personally vouch for police treatment of what they will do to you if you open carry out of hunting garb and season. It's not pretty. For rifles, the State Firearms ID does confer open carry privileges, and you have 50,000 residents with a State Firearms ID. As you have a different license for handguns, that means you have 50,000 unique individuals that may carry a long gun in public without permission from the local authorities. What would your police do to someone that is legally carrying a firearm in public? I am all for a local police chief denying a permit for any reason he can think of in a ‘May issue’ state (if they existed, of course), but it is a different thing to have a local cop harassing citizens engaged in a constitutionally protected activity…however wrong I believe the courts have gotten it. Quote: 'Shall issue' to receive a permit to buy a handgun, good for one handgun within a 90 day window. You still can't carry. It's a wide open secret here that there is simply nothing you can do or say to justify to your local police chief that a CCW is warranted. My towns chief brags openly that it has never issued one, just like any other town in the county. Yes…for handguns. I get that it is extremely unlikely that you will encounter a person legally carrying a handgun, open or concealed. But long guns do not require a permit to carry. They require a permit to purchase, and the state (locals?) don’t seem to be all that reluctant to issue these permits in the past and no longer can just deny since you became a ‘shall issue’ state in June. Quote: When I was in the NRA over a quarter century ago (trying to be a responsible owner), they referred to NJ as being 'a gun owners Hell', even back then. But the not-being-shot-at angle is kind of nice. I agree. There is zero reason for the average person to carry a gun, concealed or otherwise. I don’t live there and have never really visited. I’m just going by what I can read online.
	__________________ My previous signature risked (unknowingly) violating the Hatch Act!

30th November 2022, 06:10 PM	#43
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 13,602	Originally Posted by lobosrul5 Sorta kinda. Its de factor legal in every state to open carry, at least a long gun, except in New Jersey. But, most municipalities have an ordnance outlawing open carry, so you can only legally open carry in rural areas. That was the status quo for a very long time, then the more "red" states started banning municipalities from banning open carry. ETA: that chart on wiki is kinda silly. I mean Florida says you can't, but look at all the exceptions: Open carry of firearms is generally banned except for certain protected places and activities, including in the home, place of work, hunting, fishing, camping, or while practice shooting and while traveling to and from those activities. That doesn't make things better overall.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

30th November 2022, 06:15 PM	#44
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 13,602	Originally Posted by Thermal Conversely, it's odd to me to hear these tales of open carry. All over my State, and in my haunts out to Philly and NYC, and visiting other cities or resorts, I never see them. Eta: we have visitors who never heard of this law either, and are quite offended at the treatment they receive by local police, which is replete with terms like 'under arrest' and 'multiple felonies' While I expressed surprise above, I have to admit that of the dozens of times I have been to the USA (admittedly only for a few weeks at a time), I have very rarely even seen a gun except on a policeman's hip. One exceptions was the raving prepper gun-nut and general weirdo I was forced to work with for a few days in Portland, OR. He had a pistol in his bottom drawer at work "in case the government came for him". Anyway, back to the topic!
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

30th November 2022, 07:22 PM	#45
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 33,760	Originally Posted by Warp12 I hate to say this, but I wonder if there is anything the violent thief could have done differently in order to prevent this? Of course, as always, there's a trivial truth in the fact that one cure for vastly excessive punishment for a small crime is, of course, to avoid committing any crimes. That works at least most of the time, just as it's true that just about anything that goes wrong could have been prevented by doing something else. Shot while shoplifting? Don't shoplift. Run over in the road? Stay off the road. Car burst into flames? Shoulda taken the bus. But aside from the trite truism, does it say anything of importance about the important aspect of this event?
	__________________ I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver) "There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)

30th November 2022, 08:04 PM	#46
casebro Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 19,671	Originally Posted by Warp12 https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/da...ted-shoplifter Sounds like this guy was really against men hitting women. But if this account is true, I don't see him walking. He didn't shoot a man for being a shoplifter, he shot a man who was assaulting two women. His lawyer may have a good argument, isn't assault mentioned as a reasonable cause? And the dead guy's criminal record? I suspect Sir Galahad will be a long time before breathing free air. Which states have "citizens arrest" laws? Pull a gun, arrest him for committing a felony, then shoot him in the back for trying to escape?
	__________________ Any sufficiently advanced idea is indistinguishable from idiocy to those who don't actually understanding the concept.

30th November 2022, 08:22 PM	#47
Thermal Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: In the Troll Ignoring Section Posts: 21,164	Originally Posted by sarge For rifles, the State Firearms ID does confer open carry privileges, and you have 50,000 residents with a State Firearms ID. As you have a different license for handguns, that means you have 50,000 unique individuals that may carry a long gun in public without permission from the local authorities. Wiki sums up neatly what has been my understanding since I was a teen regarding carry of handguns or long guns: Originally Posted by Wikipedia* Open carry is allowed only with a permit to carry a handgun and is generally not practiced except by security officers and others who carry firearms on duty. While it is technically legal to carry long guns with a valid Firearm Purchaser ID card, it is generally frowned upon by law enforcement, except when hunting. One can expect to be detained and questioned in most places if carrying in this manner. However, open carry of loaded long guns is not permitted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Jersey I get that things are in flux with the NY ruling regarding handgun carry, but the powers that be seemed to have found a way around it. It seems that if you are denied (which seems to happen...pretty much all the time), you are not informed which agency denied you or on what grounds. Quote: What would your police do to someone that is legally carrying a firearm in public? I am all for a local police chief denying a permit for any reason he can think of in a ‘May issue’ state (if they existed, of course), but it is a different thing to have a local cop harassing citizens engaged in a constitutionally protected activity…however wrong I believe the courts have gotten it. Per Wiki above, you should expect to be 'detained and questioned'. That is the understatement of the year. Per my experience, you are met with guns drawn and ordered to the ground, treated as if you were an active shooter. Quote: Yes…for handguns. I get that it is extremely unlikely that you will encounter a person legally carrying a handgun, open or concealed. But long guns do not require a permit to carry. They require a permit to purchase, and the state (locals?) don’t seem to be all that reluctant to issue these permits in the past and no longer can just deny since you became a ‘shall issue’ state in June. The running guideline has been that pretty much anyone can get a long gun card, as long as you don't have a violent criminal history. I admit to being quite surprised that my fair state of 7 million has only 50K long gun cards issued. I would have assumed an order of magnitude more. As far as carry goes, it is solidly law that you cannot carry a loaded long gun in public (see Wiki above). This has allowed for hunting use, which is pretty much everywhere in the non-suburban-New-York parts of the State (lots of woods here). But there is no straight out prohibition against carrying an unloaded long gun. Just expect to be...how did they put it?...'detained and questioned'. Looks pretty painful, the way they detain you, by the way. Quote: I agree. There is zero reason for the average person to carry a gun, concealed or otherwise. I'm getting sympathetic to the idea of women carrying. I mean, a big guy can overpower a woman with ease. I would much prefer non-lethal alternatives be made more available to women, though. Bullet wounds can leave long lasting trauma to both parties. Quote: *I don’t live there and have never really visited. I’m just going by what I can read online. It's lovely. Come visit! Bring about four times as much cash as you think you could possibly spend. Just come unarmed. We had a woman a little while back come in from the adjoining State of Pennsylvania, who carried a handgun in her glove box, which is perfectly legal in her home state. Here, it is a handful of felonies, as her arrest and conviction convinced her of.
	__________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain "Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

30th November 2022, 08:33 PM	#48
Warp12 Banned Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 7,583	Originally Posted by bruto Shot while shoplifting? Don't shoplift. Run over in the road? Stay off the road. Car burst into flames? Shoulda taken the bus. But aside from the trite truism, does it say anything of importance about the important aspect of this event? Come on now, bruto. Are you really equating getting shot during a theft and assault, with someone getting run over while crossing the street? Or a car randomly catching on fire? As far as the "important aspect" of this event, well I consider that in dispute. I'm sure you know that I bring up personal responsibility a lot, and how it is ignored in today's society. Who really had the most control over the outcome of this situation? The dead, violent thief, that's who. In my view the lesson here is, "See kids, this is why we don't steal". Remember, this guy didn't accidentally steal. He didn't accidentally assault people. He set out to commit crime. The fellow who shot him may have had a perfectly legal weapon, and simply been overwhelmed with a sudden stressful situation. But the thief put himself in a clear position of danger due to criminal activity. I should add, I doubt the criminal didn't know that people carry in TX. He figured he could waltz into the store, steal, then assault two women, and not be held accountable. Well, he was dead wrong.
	Last edited by Warp12; 30th November 2022 at 10:23 PM.

30th November 2022, 09:10 PM	#49
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 13,707	Originally Posted by Warp12 Come on now, bruto. Are you really equating getting shot during a theft and assault, with someone getting run over while crossing the street? Or a car randomly catching on fire? As far as the "important aspect" of this event, well I consider that in dispute. I'm sure you know that I bring up personal responsibility a lot, and how it is ignored in today's society. Who really had the most control over the outcome of this situation? The dead violent thief, that's who. In my view the lesson here is, "See kids, this is why we don't steal". Remember, this guy didn't accidentally steal. He didn't accidentally assault people. He set out to commit crime. The fellow who shot him may have had a perfectly legal weapon, and simply been overwhelmed with a sudden stressful situation. But the thief put himself in a clear position of danger due to criminal activity. I should add, I doubt the criminal didn't know that people carry in TX. He figured he could waltz into the store, steal, then assault two women, and not be held accountable. Well, he was dead wrong. Most thieves don't expect to get caught and have to use violence. I mean, again, "no **", right? Or are you seriously implying his thought process was, "I'm going to go in here, get caught shoplifting, throw hands at these two women, and waltz off", and during the whole thing he was thinking, "Yup, this is all going to plan." The killer had a thousand different options. He chose murder. Hopefully it costs him the rest of his life. I believe I read he was in his mid-40s. Anything over 20 years pretty much *** his life completely up. He should have thought twice.
	__________________ “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

30th November 2022, 10:21 PM	#50
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 79,898	Originally Posted by Thermal Conversely, it's odd to me to hear these tales of open carry. All over my State, and in my haunts out to Philly and NYC, and visiting other cities or resorts, I never see them. Welcome to Australia. Except here it's not "odd" to hear such tales, it's "***** lunacy". Originally Posted by lobosrul5 It is honestly a bit weird for Dollar store employees to attack a shoplifter. In almost all retail chains its against company policy to attack a shoplifter... and then theres the "why risk my *** life over a near minimum wage job??". Certainly not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the guy even did shoplift. Exactly. I have a friend who was recently involved in an altercation with a shoplifter, which was caused by a staff member going against company policy and confronting the 'lifter. It's a pair of pants! Let it go. Originally Posted by lobosrul5 Meanwhile in "real 'merica" its not all that rare to see a guy wearing a camo plate carrier, Mulan Labe/come and take it decal, with an AR-15 on his back ordering *** Arbys or some *. Molon* labe. It's Greek, not Chinese!
	__________________ The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.

30th November 2022, 10:35 PM	#51
Bob001 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: US of A Posts: 16,301	Originally Posted by Warp12 ..... I should add, I doubt the criminal didn't know that people carry in TX. He figured he could waltz into the store, steal, then assault two women, and not be held accountable. Well, he was dead wrong. As I noted above, the original link says the two women chased him to the door with a stick and he was running away when he was killed. No one was in danger. No one was hurt. Random guy packing heat doesn't get to be judge, jury and executioner. And I note again, there is no claim that the shooter tried to stop or detain or warn the thief before opening fire. Just bang! Do you really want that to become a routine practice?

30th November 2022, 10:39 PM	#52
Warp12 Banned Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 7,583	Originally Posted by Bob001 And I note again, there is no claim that the shooter tried to stop or detain or warn the thief before opening fire. Just bang! Do you really want that to become a routine practice? Of course not. That's why I say it starts with choosing to not commit such crimes in the first place. Otherwise, you are exposing yourself to such things. You mentioned the women chasing him with a stick. Well, somehow that turned into him throwing punches. I wouldn't shed a tear if they had clubbed him to death during the altercation. And it would have been mostly on him.

30th November 2022, 11:09 PM	#53
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 33,760	Originally Posted by Warp12 Come on now, bruto. Are you really equating getting shot during a theft and assault, with someone getting run over while crossing the street? Or a car randomly catching on fire? As far as the "important aspect" of this event, well I consider that in dispute. I'm sure you know that I bring up personal responsibility a lot, and how it is ignored in today's society. Who really had the most control over the outcome of this situation? The dead, violent thief, that's who. In my view the lesson here is, "See kids, this is why we don't steal". Remember, this guy didn't accidentally steal. He didn't accidentally assault people. He set out to commit crime. The fellow who shot him may have had a perfectly legal weapon, and simply been overwhelmed with a sudden stressful situation. But the thief put himself in a clear position of danger due to criminal activity. I should add, I doubt the criminal didn't know that people carry in TX. He figured he could waltz into the store, steal, then assault two women, and not be held accountable. Well, he was dead wrong. My point is that, contribution or not, it's fundamentally irrelevant to the issue here. Sure, we can look at this retrospectively, and say he was a fool to do what he did, and sure, it was a bad thing to do. But it still was not, by a very long shot, a crime deserving of being killed by a bystander, and the fact that he failed to appreciate the possible consequences of the event has little do do with the disproportion of it. e.t.a. that said, however, based on the sketchy evidence we've seen so far, and the fact that the robber was, apparently, fighting with the store clerks, and given some ambiguity on whether the shot was meant to be fatal, I'd be inclined to consider it manslaughter more than outright murder. Unlike a cop, our good guy with a gun seems to have stopped after the first shot.
	__________________ I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver) "There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard) Last edited by bruto; 30th November 2022 at 11:14 PM.

1st December 2022, 01:13 AM	#54
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 35,959	Originally Posted by Hercules56 Using deadly force to prevent a low-level crime? Crazy. Deadly force should only be used to save a life. Meh! A significant proportion of people seem to think that the value of any item in a dollar store is significantly greater than a shoplifter's (or any other petty criminal's) life.

1st December 2022, 01:43 AM	#55
bluesjnr Professional Nemesis for Hire Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Home. Posts: 10,802	A bit more nuance from some talking heads. https://news.yahoo.com/dallas-store-...030854182.html
	__________________ "OTP? I don' need no steenkin' OTP!"

1st December 2022, 03:50 AM	#56
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 13,602	Originally Posted by The Don Meh! A significant proportion of people seem to think that the value of any item in a dollar store is significantly greater than a shoplifter's (or any other petty criminal's) life. They are not a criminal until they have been convicted in a court of law. Unfortunately this victim didn't make it that far. To be clear: I have no problem with them being convicted and punished appropriately - looked to be a clear case.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

1st December 2022, 03:56 AM	#57
Warp12 Banned Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 7,583	Originally Posted by The Don Meh! A significant proportion of people seem to think that the value of any item in a dollar store is significantly greater than a shoplifter's (or any other petty criminal's) life. No, that's what the dead guy thought.

1st December 2022, 04:21 AM	#58
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 35,959	Originally Posted by Warp12 No, that's what the dead guy thought. I very much doubt that the person killed thought that his life was at risk. Then again in such a situation, I think it's unreasonable for anyone to think that it was.

1st December 2022, 04:26 AM	#59
Warp12 Banned Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 7,583	Originally Posted by The Don I very much doubt that the person killed thought that his life was at risk. Then again in such a situation, I think it's unreasonable for anyone to think that it was. This guy was willing to risk his life over some stale Jolly Ranchers, or whatever. I'm sorry, but it is just too funny. Like, he's in TX...and stealing and assaulting people over these expired candies. That is high risk, bro. Like, what is his other hobby? Base jumping with a homemade wingsuit?
	Last edited by Warp12; 1st December 2022 at 04:33 AM.

1st December 2022, 04:28 AM	#60
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,515	Originally Posted by bruto My point is that, contribution or not, it's fundamentally irrelevant to the issue here. Sure, we can look at this retrospectively, and say he was a fool to do what he did, and sure, it was a bad thing to do. But it still was not, by a very long shot, a crime deserving of being killed by a bystander, and the fact that he failed to appreciate the possible consequences of the event has little do do with the disproportion of it. I think some people don't get that Judge Dredd was dystopian, not utopian.
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,515	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

1st December 2022, 05:19 AM	#61
sarge Philosopher Moderator Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Fayetteville, NC Posts: 9,877	Originally Posted by Thermal Wiki sums up neatly what has been my understanding since I was a teen regarding carry of handguns or long guns: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Jersey I get that things are in flux with the NY ruling regarding handgun carry, but the powers that be seemed to have found a way around it. It seems that if you are denied (which seems to happen...pretty much all the time), you are not informed which agency denied you or on what grounds. Per Wiki above, you should expect to be 'detained and questioned'. That is the understatement of the year. Per my experience, you are met with guns drawn and ordered to the ground, treated as if you were an active shooter. The running guideline has been that pretty much anyone can get a long gun card, as long as you don't have a violent criminal history. I admit to being quite surprised that my fair state of 7 million has only 50K long gun cards issued. I would have assumed an order of magnitude more. As far as carry goes, it is solidly law that you cannot carry a loaded long gun in public (see Wiki above). This has allowed for hunting use, which is pretty much everywhere in the non-suburban-New-York parts of the State (lots of woods here). But there is no straight out prohibition against carrying an unloaded long gun. Just expect to be...how did they put it?...'detained and questioned'. Looks pretty painful, the way they detain you, by the way. I'm getting sympathetic to the idea of women carrying. I mean, a big guy can overpower a woman with ease. I would much prefer non-lethal alternatives be made more available to women, though. Bullet wounds can leave long lasting trauma to both parties. It's lovely. Come visit! Bring about four times as much cash as you think you could possibly spend. Just come unarmed. We had a woman a little while back come in from the adjoining State of Pennsylvania, who carried a handgun in her glove box, which is perfectly legal in her home state. Here, it is a handful of felonies, as her arrest and conviction convinced her of. There is contradictory information online that says carrying a long gun in public is legal and requires no permit…….but you certainly know your state better than I. As for the ‘shall; issue’ portion, your local cops will not longer have discretion. Your legislature will have to craft laws which state exactly what circumstances allow the denial of a permit (indeed I believe NJ has such legislation pending). Good luck with it. I would much rather live in NJs gun environment than in NCs. In my IANAL opinion, NJs laws were well within the actual intent of the 2nd amendment. I will be visiting your state some time next summer. On foot while I complete the Appalachian Trail. I look forward to it. ETA: This is a derail from the actual subject of the thread. I’ll bow out of it now and await the judgement of the mods should it come to their attention.
	__________________ My previous signature risked (unknowingly) violating the Hatch Act! Last edited by sarge; 1st December 2022 at 05:30 AM.

1st December 2022, 05:28 AM	#62
sarge Philosopher Moderator Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Fayetteville, NC Posts: 9,877	Originally Posted by Warp12 Of course not. That's why I say it starts with choosing to not commit such crimes in the first place. Otherwise, you are exposing yourself to such things. You mentioned the women chasing him with a stick. Well, somehow that turned into him throwing punches. I wouldn't shed a tear if they had clubbed him to death during the altercation. And it would have been mostly on him. You earlier incorrectly claimed that many posters were not assigning a fair share of the blame to the victim. You are failing to assign a fair share of the blame for the victims death to the murderer. All of that belongs to him. He is the only one that, at the crucial moment, had any control over what happened to the victim. At the moment he was shot, the victim was given no opportunity to surrender, was presenting no credible threat to anyone, and the shooter had no real evidence that he had done anything wrong because he hadn’t investigated the claims of either side of the dispute. He literally walked into a store, saw two women with sticks fighting a man, and ordered the women to move away so that he could shoot the victim. According to the information we have at the moment, that is exactly what happened. If the information changes, then it may be time to reapportion the blame. Right now, the shooter is 100% responsible for the victims death.
	__________________ My previous signature risked (unknowingly) violating the Hatch Act!

1st December 2022, 06:25 AM	#63
Warp12 Banned Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 7,583	Originally Posted by sarge Right now, the shooter is 100% responsible for the victims death. I disagree, for reasons already mentioned.

1st December 2022, 06:32 AM	#64
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 48,726	Just to clarify something, despite the name, "Family Dollar", isn't a dollar store like "Dollar Tree", where everything is a dollar, is. Things at FD are close to regular retail prices, and some things are in fact, overpriced there. Not that any of that justifies blasting a shoplifter that's taken nothing from you personally. not even 'Dollar Tree' is a dollar anymore, everything is now a $1.25, but don't expect a name change to reflect that.
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes." Last edited by Mike!; 1st December 2022 at 06:34 AM.

1st December 2022, 06:39 AM	#65
sarge Philosopher Moderator Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Fayetteville, NC Posts: 9,877	Originally Posted by Warp12 I disagree, for reasons already mentioned. Your ‘reasons’ for assigning all the blame to the victim are not reasonable. Given only the information we have at the moment, the shooter is solely responsible for the death of the victim. What we know (assuming the story is accurate): The victim was being attacked by two women with sticks. The women were claiming the victim was a shoplifter. A rando walks in, pulls a gun, orders the two women to back away, and then executes the victim. What we must assume to believe the victim is responsible for his own death: He was shoplifting. Instead of attempting to flee, he stuck around to attack the two employees. The rando witnessed the attack. The rando reasonably concluded that either he or the employees were in imminent danger of death. The rando reasonably concluded that once he had used his gun to separate the fighting parties, people were still at risk of death from the shoplifter. The rando then concluded that executing the shoplifter was the only reasonable course of action.
	__________________ My previous signature risked (unknowingly) violating the Hatch Act!

1st December 2022, 06:41 AM	#66
Warp12 Banned Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 7,583	Originally Posted by sarge Your ‘reasons’ for assigning all the blame to the victim are not reasonable. I haven't assigned all of the blame to the dead, violent thief. I have stated that I feel that his role in the outcome has been downplayed, and that he had by far the most control over this result.

1st December 2022, 07:01 AM	#67
sarge Philosopher Moderator Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Fayetteville, NC Posts: 9,877	Originally Posted by Warp12 I haven't assigned all of the blame to the dead, violent thief. I have stated that I feel that his role in the outcome has been downplayed, and that he had by far the most control over this result. Your terminal sentence is perfectly incorrect. No matter what else contributed to the victims death, the most control over the outcome was wielded by the person the fired the gun. He was unthreatened, in complete control of the situation, and made a conscious choice to shoot an unarmed man who at the moment he was executed presented risk of neither harm nor flight. Absent additional information coming to light, the executioner will be held responsible under the law for the death of the victim.
	__________________ My previous signature risked (unknowingly) violating the Hatch Act!

1st December 2022, 07:11 AM	#68
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 13,707	I love how it's "violent thief" and not "violent store clerks", because Warp12 just can't hide his bias, as is his SoP. If the story is correct, at the time he was shot the man wasn't attacking anyone. The killer told the women to back off, which they must have done because the killer felt he was fine to shoot. At that point there was no one being attacked except the "violent thief". The killer had no reason to shoot, and the store clerks had sticks that they were beating the "violent thief" with while the "violent thief" was still unarmed. He was the only one unarmed, in fact.
	__________________ “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

1st December 2022, 08:46 AM	#69
lobosrul5 Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 4,126	Ohhh, I read the story wrong. It was updated at 7:30. Looks like the actual incident occurred around noon... so not after dark. Well buddy, you got to play out your "Dirty Harry" fantasies. He'll likely be charged with murder,* with a plea bargain of manslaughter. So his options are play jury roulette and hope their are some Warp12's on it, but possibly face up to 99 years, or take the plea and get likely 5 to 10. *Texas doesn't have 2nd degree murder, its either murder or "capital murder" which this wouldn't qualify for
lobosrul5 Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 4,126

1st December 2022, 01:03 PM	#70
ZirconBlue Sole Survivor of L-Town Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Lexington, KY, USA, Earth Posts: 14,638	Originally Posted by Mike! * not even 'Dollar Tree' is a dollar anymore, everything is now a $1.25, but don't expect a name change to reflect that. Ah, now I know where to pick up a buck-and-a-quarter quarterstaff.
	__________________ Religion and sex are powerplays. Manipulate the people for the money they pay. Selling skin, selling God The numbers look the same on their credit cards.

1st December 2022, 06:46 PM	#71
mgidm86 Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 8,467	Originally Posted by Thermal Guys guys guys...the shooter is a black man. Anyone care to reassess their shock over why he has been arrested and charged? He was probably going to rob the same store but was too late. After all he had the gun. Apparently the store gets robbed all the time so maybe he jumped the queue. Quote: sarge I learned something. I’ve never been anywhere where I don’t occasionally see someone with a gun on their belt. I've never seen any non-LEO/security carrying a loaded gun in public in 55 years and I'm very okay with that. It would probably be shocking to most people to see one where I live.
mgidm86 Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 8,467

1st December 2022, 07:35 PM	#72
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 79,898	Originally Posted by mgidm86 I've never seen any non-LEO/security carrying a loaded gun in public in 55 years and I'm very okay with that. It would probably be shocking to most people to see one where I live. Where I live, only uniformed law enforcement officers carry a gun in public. I remember a school visit when I was quite young. We kids asked if we could see his gun, and he said "No. The gun doesn't come out of its holster unless I'm certain I'm going to need to fire it." Or something like that anyway. It was a long time ago.
	__________________ The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.

1st December 2022, 08:55 PM	#73
marting Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 3,621	I live in California and the only time I encountered anyone with a firearm strapped on was an old gold panner out in the national forest. He came around and was showing us ( a few rockhounds) the nuggets he found. I've never carried firearms in public. That said I was once out at an informal shooting area in the national forest plinking testing out assorted firearms shooting at tin cans and such. On the way back, being hungry and tired I stopped at a McDonalds drive through. Had my firearms on the front seat and ammo in the trunk. This because at the time you couldn't carry firearms in a vehicle conceiled and the ammo had to be not easily reachable. Got my food and tooled off but noticed several cop cars rushing in the direction I had just left. Some time later I stopped at a sheriff's station and asked how to best cary firearms when I went out target shooting. They suggested putting them in the trunk, law be damned. A few years after that California changed their laws and carrying them in the trunk was OK'ed.
marting Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 3,621	__________________ Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool. Last edited by marting; 1st December 2022 at 08:57 PM.

1st December 2022, 09:08 PM	#74
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 13,707	My last job has multiple guns in the business offices, and a few guys carried them in their work trucks. I've seen more than a few motorcyclists with guns on their hips during the summer but I rarely have seen them in the actual retail or grocery stores.
	__________________ “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

2nd December 2022, 09:22 AM	#75
casebro Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 19,671	Originally Posted by marting I live in California and the only time I encountered anyone with a firearm strapped on was an old gold panner out in the national forest. He came around and was showing us ( a few rockhounds) the nuggets he found. I've never carried firearms in public. That said I was once out at an informal shooting area in the national forest plinking testing out assorted firearms shooting at tin cans and such. On the way back, being hungry and tired I stopped at a McDonalds drive through. Had my firearms on the front seat and ammo in the trunk. This because at the time you couldn't carry firearms in a vehicle conceiled and the ammo had to be not easily reachable. Got my food and tooled off but noticed several cop cars rushing in the direction I had just left. Some time later I stopped at a sheriff's station and asked how to best cary firearms when I went out target shooting. They suggested putting them in the trunk, law be damned. A few years after that California changed their laws and carrying them in the trunk was OK'ed. I've been hauling guns in my trucks in California since I was 16. Trunks were always OK. Point is " locked compartment inaccessible to people, ammo in a separate container". Or you could open carry in a back window rifle rack. Or laying in the back of a station wagon, where they were when once stopped by a cop. NOW, California has eliminated any open carry. Transport rules got tighter. But there are myriad open carry exemptions, they really wrote the laws to cut down on road rage and drive bys.
	__________________ Any sufficiently advanced idea is indistinguishable from idiocy to those who don't actually understanding the concept.