Shoot Looters

[southwest88]

Looters, police, National Guard

Whoa Nellie!!! Necessary to do so? Reality Check!!! Exactly who's life is endangered here when some is running off with a TV or a load of bottled water and hot pockets? We're talking about looters, not carjackers.

The police are allowed to shoot (to kill) in self-defense, & in defense of others in imminent danger. Carjackers are not excepted - unless they steer for & attempt to hit or run over the police or someone else. For property crimes - not allowed.

Now, if there's a declaration of martial law, or some other emergency, the rules of engagement might change. That would be up to each local jurisdiction, & normally the governor of the state gets involved along with the state attorney general, the state National Guard, & so on. Even so, if there's a state of emergency declared, like the hurricanes in Houston & Florida lately, the police & other first responders have their hands full. The National Guard would be more likely to enforce a curfew, if a state of military law or other enabling condition were declared. Which means the governor would have to call out the state National Guard & declare a state of emergency - unless there's a federal declaration. Then the federal government (in consultation with the state governor) could federalize the National Guard for that state & post them to the disaster area(s).

 

[ashurbanipal]

My argument has nothing to do with the morality of shooting people for the sake of shooting people and everything to do with a consequence to an action.

Irrelevant.

I don't feel good giving my kid a time out... but I do it anyway because it is the consequence to an action that is deemed unacceptable.

Are you talking about giving looters time out? Or do you kill your kid when you put him in time out? Because if the answer to both of those is "no," then this is also irrelevant. Presumably you don't cut off one of your child's appendages for an infraction that merits merely a time-out. Similarly, it is wrong to shoot someone for an offense that doesn't merit shooting. If you think it does merit shooting, see my original post in this thread--the not-so-subtle point of which is that you may one day have cause to regret thinking so, because thinking so is incorrect.

Consequently... your attempt to factor in how one would feel about shooting a person is irrelevant and a Straw Man.

Doesn't follow from anything you've written here.

 

[devildavid]

Correct. So what?



Shooting the looters is not an attempt to create a moral society. It is to punish looters...

And restore the moral society that the looters are destroying. That was your very own justification. If it is only for punishment it will not necessarily change the behavior any more than putting a kid in time out actually changes behavior.

 

[southwest88]

High & wide

The question is "should they be shot," and doesn't say killed. .22 rifle and shoot them in the legs. Collect them up as convenience allows.
/

Neither the police nor National Guard carry .22s, nor are they trained to shoot to wound. They're trained to shoot for the center of mass - to kill or incapacitate, in other words. & the police may carry Tasers & other non-lethal tools - the NG, TMK, doesn't. I don't know that the NG actually trains for curfew/looter operations - Does anybody out there know? If martial law is declared, the fire/ambulance crews may not be on call - they'll certainly be prioritized to life-threatening calls - they likely wouldn't respond @ all to police wounding a suspected looter. A NG platoon might have some rudimentary first aid training - but a .223 high-velocity round leaves a very messy wound.

Without organic transport or a medic on hand, the outlook for a suspected looter shot with an M16 or variant wouldn't be good @ all. & in a real disaster, even the police paddy wagon & Humvees & jeeps & buses would probably be pressed into evacuation/rescue work, as we saw in Houston & Florida. Shooting looters @ random would just add to the chaos - & the point of deploying NG units is to tamp down the chaos & violence, not to add to it.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Why not?

The death penalty is reserved for the most egregious of crimes, such as murder. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth - this is not so much the philosophy of revenge as it is of proportional punishment. A life should not be taken over an armful of food, or a $100 appliance. Fine them, jail them for a few days, but a life is not the price for such petty crime.

 

[Bodi]

Irrelevant.



Are you talking about giving looters time out? Or do you kill your kid when you put him in time out? Because if the answer to both of those is "no," then this is also irrelevant. Presumably you don't cut off one of your child's appendages for an infraction that merits merely a time-out. Similarly, it is wrong to shoot someone for an offense that doesn't merit shooting. If you think it does merit shooting, see my original post in this thread--the not-so-subtle point of which is that you may one day have cause to regret thinking so, because thinking so is incorrect.



Doesn't follow from anything you've written here.

Ok then... :2wave:

 

[Bodi]

If it is only for punishment it will not necessarily change the behavior any more than putting a kid in time out actually changes behavior.

Time out does change behaviour. Any parent that does them effectively knows this fact.

Shooting looters will not change their behaviour but it will stop it. I don't care one bit of **** about changing their behaviour. That is a sociologists wet, but retarded, dream.

 

[Bodi]

The death penalty is reserved for the most egregious of crimes, such as murder. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth - this is not so much the philosophy of revenge as it is of proportional punishment. A life should not be taken over an armful of food, or a $100 appliance. Fine them, jail them for a few days, but a life is not the price for such petty crime.

During times of natural disaster, life and death, national emergency, etc... it is worth it.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

During times of natural disaster, life and death, national emergency, etc... it is worth it.

How so?

 

[joG]

How so?

When the bullets are flying you need every hand and can loose the battle for lack of the hands guarding the prisoners.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

When the bullets are flying you need every hand and can loose the battle for lack of the hands guarding the prisoners.

What prisoners are being guarded in a natural disaster, and what bullets are flying? Besides the ones being used to execute people over property crimes, that is.

 

[joG]

What prisoners are being guarded in a natural disaster, and what bullets are flying? Besides the ones being used to execute people over property crimes, that is.

Same game structure with an additional aggravating factor of discouraging imitation.
The proper structure of rules under changing circumstances and environments is a fascinating subject. In situations of rule of law and reliable general enforcement the robustness of enforcement needn't be as great as when it is less convincing that violence and crime don't pay. When rule of law breaks down the certainty and speed of punishment must be increased. So at least the theory.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Same game structure with an additional aggravating factor of discouraging imitation.
The proper structure of rules under changing circumstances and environments is a fascinating subject. In situations of rule of law and reliable general enforcement the robustness of enforcement needn't be as great as when it is less convincing that violence and crime don't pay. When rule of law breaks down the certainty and speed of punishment must be increased. So at least the theory.

Theory is all well and good, but I'm not a fan of ****ting on the 8th Amendment so John will think twice about stealing a pair of shoes, especially when ****ting on the 8th Amendment includes extrajudicial executions of Americans over petty offenses.

 

[Bodi]

How so?

Because they crossed the line.

 

[joG]

What prisoners are being guarded in a natural disaster, and what bullets are flying? Besides the ones being used to execute people over property crimes, that is.

Actually, I had seen an interview of some sheriff od chief of police or something saying they were reacting swiftly to arrest the looters.

 

[joG]

Theory is all well and good, but I'm not a fan of ****ting on the 8th Amendment so John will think twice about stealing a pair of shoes, especially when ****ting on the 8th Amendment includes extrajudicial executions of Americans over petty offenses.

Wait till the guy steals your last pair.

 

[iliveonramen]

Hmmm.. interesting. Didnt know that. Do you have a source?

Florida police arrest looters during Irma | Fox News

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/prison-...ns-arrested-for-looting-during-irma-1.3584194

Here are two news stories. They focus on the people stealing the sneakers which is what you are seeing played pretty much everywhere all the time. Beyond that, there wasn't wide spread looting taking place.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Actually, I had seen an interview of some sheriff od chief of police or something saying they were reacting swiftly to arrest the looters.

Oh good, they aren't making the streets run red over misdemeanors. I still don't see where the bullets come in, save for in Bodhisattva's head.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Because they crossed the line.

With a misdemeanor crime? That's what makes it worth taking their lives?

 

[MrShangles]

Martial law doesn't mean that the cops get to shoot whoever they want or engage in summary executions. They are still bound by protocol and paperwork. Every bullet fired has to be justified. Your idea of martial law is a tyrannical fantasy land that doesn't exist. Martial law is about freeing up resources and rapid mobilization without the usual red tape to slow down the process. It means rapid response. It does not mean lawless government where human rights no longer exist.

I err on the side of the freedoms and liberties of the individual, which means I value the Constitution. A cop who kills someone during martial law is just as liable as under standard conditions. Murder is murder. Sorry to break it to you.

It sounds like all your life belongings haven't been looted, what is your house number, maybe looters should visit it cause they need your belongings.
Would you still fill the same?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MrShangles]

What are you even talking about now?

Martial law does not mean summary executions by police. Do you understand?

There is no scenario in the United States, apart from total anarchy and collapse of society, where police can summarily shoot people that they see looting stores. If looters are attacking police, threatening the public, resisting arrest, etc... these are all potential justifications for shooting them. But you don't get to shoot and kill people just because you see them committing a crime. That's a violation of the 4th Amendment and NOT what law enforcement is used for.

How many times does it have to be explained to you? Do you understand the Constitution? There is no scenario wherein your fantasy of killing looters gets a free pass. You may want it to be real, or wish it could be possible, but it's not.

Property owners in high risk areas are responsible for having something called INSURANCE. If you want to talk about property owners shooting looters, under Castle Law, then that's a totally different story. My issue with you is that you're promoting something that police CANNOT and SHOULD NOT do. You are wrong.

Isn't there small print in your insurance policies that says they don't pay for looting, I don't remember the exact wording but that's what I got from reading it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[joG]

Oh good, they aren't making the streets run red over misdemeanors. I still don't see where the bullets come in, save for in Bodhisattva's head.

He would be very angry with your proposal.

 

[SSGT Bags]

Moral breakdown of society is not a legal term.

It is a temporary situation brought on by a natural disaster and will always happen as long as our society has people who take advantage of these situations. After things return to normal the moral breakdown of society will magically disappear. Letting law enforcement shoot suspects on sight will not create a moral society.

And this is the prime example of why socialism will not work on a large scale.
You will always have the takers.

 

[Evilroddy]

Shoot the looters with cameras, cell phones or cam-corners if you, as a civilian, feel you must act, but not with lethal weapons unless you have been formally deputised by legitimate law enforcement agencies. The police or military troops acting as an aid to the civil power in an emergency should only be authorised to shoot in response to a reasonable and proportional threat from the alleged looters.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Bodi]

. I still don't see where the bullets come in, save for in Bodhisattva's head.

That isn't a nice thing to say...