Skip to content

Robbers shot and killed, Families want to sue

Political Discussion
63 11 1.9k
  • I googled it. This story happened in November and the DA already ruled they couldn't sue.

  • "He's not no thug or nothing like that...he's a good boy" - well...I kinda disagree. Good boys don't commit armed robbery.

    That being said, they surely didn't deserve to die for their crimes.

    Also, I love the completely unbiased write up in "USConcealedCarry.com" - I wonder which side of the argument they're coming down on!

  • If you google "robber's family sue" the sites this story pops up on include TheArmedCitizen, EagleRising, GunsNFreedom.... lol. Let all their readers get a boner over the vigilanty justice they hope to deliver some day. Just like Clint Eastwood and John Wayne!

    But yeah, it looks like this story is a few months old. No dates were given in the OPs article though...

    The dude shouldn't be sued, clearly.

  • If you google "robber's family sue" the sites this story pops up on include TheArmedCitizen, EagleRising, GunsNFreedom.... lol. Let all their readers get a boner over the vigilanty justice they hope to deliver some day. Just like Clint Eastwood and John Wayne!

    But yeah, it looks like this story is a few months old. No dates were given in the OPs article though...

    The dude shouldn't be sued, clearly.

    @mld-woody said:

    If you google "robber's family sue" the sites this story pops up on include TheArmedCitizen, EagleRising, GunsNFreedom.... lol. Let all their readers get a boner over the vigilanty justice they hope to deliver some day. Just like Clint Eastwood and John Wayne!

    But yeah, it looks like this story is a few months old. No dates were given in the OPs article though...

    The dude shouldn't be sued, clearly.

    I didn't see any dates either. I just got an email about the story.

    And the dude who shot them should not be sued. They pointed guns at him, he had every right to drop them

  • "Drop them?" Was he a 12 year-old playing call of duty? He had every right to defend himself using reasonable and sufficient force.

  • That's basically the terminology you'll see in the comments on these sites. Like they're action movie stars, removing thugs from the world.

  • Ok "shoot them in self defense"

    Does that make you feel better?

  • Idc how it makes me feel, but it sounds better, yeah. He wasn't some action movie cop. He took two lives in self defense.

  • Ok "shoot them in self defense"

    Does that make you feel better?

    @browns149 said:

    Ok "shoot them in self defense"

    Does that make you feel better?

    What it does is add credence to your point - when you talk about dropping, wasting, blasting or whatever else you care to call it, you come across as a wannabe gangster, 12 year-old in his bedroom or waiting-for-my-moment-to-shine vigilante. When you use the right words, people will take your points a lot more seriously.

  • My point was he had every right to do what he did. And that point got across, regardless of how it was said

  • The robbers absolutely deserved to die for their actions. In the olden days there wouldn't even be a question of this.

  • My point was he had every right to do what he did. And that point got across, regardless of how it was said

    @browns149 said:

    My point was he had every right to do what he did. And that point got across, regardless of how it was said

    I'll keep that in mind the next time I get called out by certain people on here for my wording in posts.

  • The robbers absolutely deserved to die for their actions. In the olden days there wouldn't even be a question of this.

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    The robbers absolutely deserved to die for their actions. In the olden days there wouldn't even be a question of this.

    I hope you are being sarcastic. If not, I disagree completely.

  • @the-cysko-kid said:

    The robbers absolutely deserved to die for their actions. In the olden days there wouldn't even be a question of this.

    I hope you are being sarcastic. If not, I disagree completely.

    @mld-woody said:

    I hope you are being sarcastic. If not, I disagree completely.

    I am not and you are entitled to your opinion but criminals don't deserve to live out their lives on the taxpayer dime. That is a much bigger expenditure than, say, welfare fraud, and these people are of no value to society. Harsh? Maybe, but what attachment do you have to armed robbers?

  • None.

    But I don't think every criminal deserves to die.

    Also, idc what they did in "olden times". They're olden times for a reason. We've progressed as a society since then.

  • That's the risk they take and Fuck them

  • If you mean by progress that criminals should now be allowed to rob rape murder et cetera without the fear of being resisted I would imagine that that's not a form of progress we should cheer.

    WSS

  • Actually it would be kind of cool if the guards beat the living s*** out of the guy every few months and he won every lawsuit and every nickel was given to the victims families.

    WSS

  • If you mean by progress that criminals should now be allowed to rob rape murder et cetera without the fear of being resisted I would imagine that that's not a form of progress we should cheer.

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    If you mean by progress that criminals should now be allowed to rob rape murder et cetera without the fear of being resisted I would imagine that that's not a form of progress we should cheer.

    WSS

    I read this and sighed