Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Immediate(ly) - "occurring or done at once; instant." or "happening or done without delay"
You guys are brilliant. Hey, let's create a slippery slope, so something like this happens more often because people don't understand the definition of a word as basic as 'immediate'.
Maybe I'm confused on the details, but didn't the brothers immediately pursue the thieves after the vehicle was stolen? A situation brought to a close within 4-5 minutes seems pretty immediate; it takes longer for a cop to immediately write you a ticket.
Should they have shot the thief in their driveway instead?
To the people who need to Google search the definition of "Immediate" (you know who you are), this is a map of about where the incident took place and around where it ended.
From their subdivision into a dense retail corridor. Not immediate. Illegal.
Who cares. Who cares if a thieve is shot, legal or illegal. Good riddance, saves taxpayer money, and prevents them robbing elsewhere. Send flowers, if you care.
LOL, Is this a legal term? Fascinating that you mention "reckless endangerment" and focus on the victims instead of the criminals. Well no matter. This is the legal statute.
Texas Penal Code - Section 9.42. Deadly Force To Protect Property
§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable
if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
So in the meantime, let's let these two off the hook because no one else was injured, set a precedent moving forward, and then decide to bring down the hammer if someone innocent happens to get injured or killed in the process in the future.
Lol. You're focused on innocent civilians being slaughtered by stray bullets, but did that happen? I missed that part if so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MordinSolus
So having a gun gives you the authority to speed through city streets and shoot wildly at criminals? I wasn't aware of this. I guess I'll have to get my gun out and drive around Los Angeles looking for bad guys to shoot at from my moving car.
Not trying to be an ass, but that was a terrible analogy. Did the brothers go around looking for a car thief until they found one and then empty magazines into him? I think their actions were a little extreme, but come on now.
Maybe I'm confused on the details, but didn't the brothers immediately pursue the thieves after the vehicle was stolen? A situation brought to a close within 4-5 minutes seems pretty immediate; it takes longer for a cop to immediately write you a ticket.
Should they have shot the thief in their driveway instead?
*Sigh*
They didn't shoot and kill the assailant immediately after the crime was committed - they chased after him and put other people in danger with their reckless behavior (yes, speeding and shooting out of a moving vehicle is reckless). Having their truck stolen doesn't absolve them from every day, normal laws.
It's no different then when a security guard at a store is told to let a thief go if they get outside of the store, even if they're in the parking lot. If they cannot stop them immediately (in the store), then do not pursue them any further and just call the police. If that's told to security guards, then why wouldn't the same logic apply to civilians?
Hello, people ??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boris347
Who cares. Who cares if a thieve is shot, legal or illegal. Good riddance, saves taxpayer money, and prevents them robbing elsewhere. Send flowers, if you care.
Well, I don't know what a thieve is, but I care about innocent people who could've been killed - which is the point I've been discussing for the last two hours.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
