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.
If as you say the "two white hicks" ..."were of some other race then the two white hicks would have reacted differently" is a statement that is pure racism.
Seeing a person of another race and acting in a violent manner is an act no one needs. Then he took the law into his own hands! ! !..There is absolutely no excuse for this to happen and we should try to help adjust the racism behavior and consistent negative attitude of those that still believe there is a difference.
A man is a man; a woman is a woman and a human being is a human being. That’s it....What really cries out for help is our society in general. If one person believes that racism is not found here then we have failed to teach the real facts on why we should never treat another person on a higher or lower plain than another person.
..
What racism do you see in this event? Two men called the police & held at gunpoint a couple. One of the couple happened to be black. There is no indication that the calling of police & holding at gunpoint were done BECAUSE one of the couple was black. This is NOT a racist action. Over reaction, sure. Stupid even. Yep. But where do you see evidence that it was in any way related to anyone's race?
Breaking and entry into foreclosed homes is happening everywhere. That some may not be aware, does not mean it's not happening. Squatting is increasingly common, too.
Good for the neighbors to be concerned. Bad, bad call on the neighbors' part to approach with guns.
The race of the gun wielding neighbors and/or the sheriffs who arrested these people was not mentioned. Jumping to conclusions as it relates to limited information is prejudice in action.
Until the new owners could demonstrate their ownership, there was no factual basis to think they were not intruders.
Why don't the neighbors mind their own business and call the cops instead. No need to be a hero. what if the other party had a licensed machine gun.....what would happen then.......
Until the new owners could demonstrate their ownership, there was no factual basis to think they were not intruders.
Not dealing at all with the race issue - but here's the thing: one has the right to protect one's OWN property or to call the police for someone ELSE's property needing protection.
On that basis alone, the neighbors should have been arrested. They didn't ask any questions, just detained the new homeowners and threatened their lives.
So, even if the police take everyone down to the station, at some point, based on a quick investigation and a call to the realtor, the ownership of that home could have been established before putting them under arrest. You see, the police have the right to detain someone; the neighbors do not.
So yeah, I'm going to have to concede that it really does sound like at the least a civil rights violation.
Why don't the neighbors mind their own business and call the cops instead. No need to be a hero. what if the other party had a licensed machine gun.....what would happen then.......
Class 3 license! ! Excellent point tigerclaws. 1,000 stars for you. A gun battle because some fool raciest, civil rights violator neighbor wanted to take the law in his own hands..
When the intruders entered someone’s home making demands while yielding a gun they should have been shot and probably killed...No ifs ands or buts... No aiming just shoot the intruder to kill! ! ! Now the fellow would be severely wounded or dead and should be charged with home invasion.
I live on the water in a very safe area but if someone came in my home threatening me or my family while yielding a weapon I would shoot the prick in each of the intruder’s legs
Not dealing at all with the race issue - but here's the thing: one has the right to protect one's OWN property or to call the police for someone ELSE's property needing protection.
On that basis alone, the neighbors should have been arrested. They didn't ask any questions, just detained the new homeowners and threatened their lives.
So, even if the police take everyone down to the station, at some point, based on a quick investigation and a call to the realtor, the ownership of that home could have been established before putting them under arrest. You see, the police have the right to detain someone; the neighbors do not.
So yeah, I'm going to have to concede that it really does sound like at the least a civil rights violation.
I disagree. It may be stupid over zealousness, but it's not a civil rights violation. Civil rights revolve around a persons rights to equal treatment free from unfairness or discrimination. There is nothing in this case to suggest that the neighbors acted in any way that was discriminatory or racially motivated, or motivated by anything other than a desire to protect the neighborhood & that particular property.
That's not to say I think what they did was right. I understand wanting to be sure that no one was breaking in, and calling the police when the people trying to open the door were unable to provide a shred of evidence they belonged there was the right thing to do. Holding them at gunpoint seems over the line to me.
A charge of unlawful detainment might be warranted but even that might not hold up. Despite your belief that only the police have the right to detain someone, every state in the nation recognizes the rights of citizens to effect an arrest and detain a person if they have significant reason to believe that the person they are arresting has committed a crime.
so, even if the police take everyone down to the station, at some point, based on a quick investigation and a call to the realtor, the ownership of that home could have been established before putting them under arrest. You see, the police have the right to detain someone; the neighbors do not.
So yeah, i'm going to have to concede that it really does sound like at the least a civil rights violation.
Look there is blame all around 9some more so but all around none the less)
The couple was at fault bacause they technically are not the owners and had no proof of ownership. Their son was the legal owner and since he was not there at the time, he shoulders some blame. The couple was released with no charges after their story was confirmed.
The neigbors (sorry folks a bunch of hicks) reacted as vigilantes and had no authority on someone elses property to act as the law. They were stupid, over reacted, and race probably had something to do with it. However, since they have now been arrested and charged for their illegal act, we'll heare the story of their thinking in the courts.
The sheriff officers are also partialy at fault because not only did they arrest the couple based on no real evidence, they actually praised the neighbors for capturing these dangerious prowlers even though there was sufficient evidence to raise question if the neighbors were the real criminals in this case. Since they are now the subject of department and state investigations, they could get reprimands, suspension or even loss their police certification over this.
So what was it that forest gump said about stupid?????
So what was it that forest gump said about stupid?????
Life is like a box of chocolates?
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.
