Current Events > Texas man tracks down alleged truck thief and holds him at gunpoint..

(+) Yeah! (+)

This is what happens when you champion vigilante justice and also allow everyone to have a gun without any form of training.

And goddamn some of you need to chill the fuck out with your bloodlust

As much as I too would enjoy shooting a man in Reno just to watch him die, I'm not keen on that.

Also the law does matter here because it's a statutory scheme that absolves culpability.

Chillscream123 posted...

Another man was driving his truck

again i ask what if that was not his truck what if in his blind anger he mistook it for his truck

RuneterranSnap posted...

Fuck the law. The law doesn't matter here because it isn't reliable.

Youre a lost cause lol.

I think anyone in this situation should get some kind of punishment for vigilantism, but I wouldn't want the guy charged with anything else, if the details of the story are accurate.

Chillscream123 posted...

Knowing that car thieves are usually armed, it was reasonable for he himself to be armed.

Are they? Does anyone have stats on that?

ThePieReborn posted...

the law does matter

Nope. If im.in this situation and a cop tries to press charges, I'll make it clear I'm not going to be victimized further.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Nope I'm just tired of self righteous assholes acting like victims should continue to be victimized because they can wait for an inept system to MAYBE help them eventually.

He had a right to confront. He couldn't safely confront a likely armed criminal without arming himself, and in fact given how it played out he likely would've been killed if he hadnt. He only shot when shot at. Those are the indisputable facts.

There's a lot to be upset over with this, but none of it should be directed at the man trying to get his truck back.

How is he any better off through his actions?

I guess he's got his truck back, maybe?

But now he has taken a life and injured an innocent woman. Whatever the circumstances, unless you are a violent sociopath, that is an awful experience that will fuck you up.

Could have called the police and filed some insurance paperwork.

AceMos posted...

again i ask what if that was not his truck what if in his blind anger he mistook it for his truck

Then he would be liable for murder. But it's a moot point because it was his truck and he knew it was his truck. I guess he memorized the license plate.

Well, good luck in that hypothetical. It's not really your call to make to evade criminal charges.

DnDer posted...

But did he have a right to do it with the immediate and explicit threat of lethal force?

For the hypothetical parallel: does that right extend to getting his property back or does he have to have called the police in order to have the right to threaten deadly force.

he has the right to detain the thief with the threat of lethal force because he is the victim of an ongoing felony. he did call the police and didn't use force until the thief opened fire on him. he wouldn't have been justified in just showing up and opening fire unprovoked, but he is definitely in the clear legally since he didn't use lethal force until he was shot.

ThePieReborn posted...

Well, good luck in that hypothetical. It's not really your call to make to evade criminal charges.

It really, really is.

Chillscream123 posted...

But it's a moot point

no no it is not

its a very likely scenario to happen when going off half cocked like that

andel posted...

he has the right to detain the thief with the threat of lethal force because he is the victim of an ongoing felony.

Didn't someone else establish the felony was over when transfer of possession was complete?

RuneterranSnap posted...

Nope. If im.in this situation and a cop tries to press charges, I'll make it clear I'm not going to be victimized further.

yeah, no, that's not how it works and the cop would laugh at you and haul you to jail.

in this case though the car owner didn't commit any crime and isn't being charged.

If the guy who took the Truck was Latino or Black. The shooter would give off, if he was white.

If the shooter was Black or Latino, and the guy who took the car was white he is going to jail.

All other combos are up in the air .

AceMos posted...

make an example of him life in prison no possibility of parole

every thing he owns is given tot he victims family

fuck vigilante justice a truck is not worth more than a life

So you want that guy's own kids to starve to death.

andel posted...

yeah, no, that's not how it works and the cop would laugh at you and haul you to jail.

He can try.

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Correct. Its surprising though that youre defending someone using a gun as a first instinct.

Excuse me aren't you defending the guy who confronted people with his weapon drawn? Completely unprompted? Jfc.

This is probably how it went down.

https://youtu.be/wv2MXb9oRkY&t=01m23s

Unknown5uspect posted...

Excuse me aren't you defending the guy who confronted people with his weapon drawn? Completely unprompted? Jfc.

It wasn't unprompted.

AceMos posted...

no no it is not

its a very likely scenario to happen when going off half cocked like that

But it didn't happen. What are you trying to argue? That trying to retrieve your own truck shouldn't be encouraged lest some people are unable to memorize their own license plates like the guy in this story?

I'd have to see some heavy stats before that line of argument is given any weight. Restricting people's freedoms and property rights requires more justification than mere hypotheticals that a person MAY or COULD be harmed wrongly.

How often have non-criminals been shot to death by a person mistakenly believing them to be car thieves because he was incapable of reliably recognizing his own car?

andel posted...

he has the right to detain the thief with the threat of lethal force because he is the victim of an ongoing felony. he did call the police and didn't use force until the thief opened fire on him. he wouldn't have been justified in just showing up and opening fire unprovoked, but he is definitely in the clear legally since he didn't use lethal force until he was shot.

Drawing his gun on the thief was a use of force.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Exactly. Car owner is explicitly the victim here.

--Zero- posted...

People defending this really think its okay to confront someone with a gun?

As long as they get to post fair next, f around and find out, and the other memes stuck in their brains.

BuzzKilljoy posted...

Drawing his gun on the thief was a use of force.

It was a justified threat of force.

Fascinating to see people in favor of murder being justified over a truck.

Meanwhile billionaires steal countless dollars from workers in the various forms of wage theft and the same people defend that or at best don't care.

Torgo posted...

Fascinating to see people in favor of murder being justified over a truck.

Meanwhile billionaires steal countless dollars from workers in the various forms of wage theft and the same people defend that or at best don't care.

It was self defense, not murder.

Ans I call out billionaires and megacorps all the time.

Torgo posted...

Fascinating to see people in favor of murder being justified over a truck.

Meanwhile billionaires steal countless dollars from workers in the various forms of wage theft and the same people defend that or at best don't care.

In their fantasies, they are both the violent vigilante and the sociopathic billionaire.

RuneterranSnap posted...

It was a justified threat of force.

I agree, and legal in Texas in most cases by my understanding of the law here. Just pointing out that statement wasn't accurate.

BuzzKilljoy posted...

Drawing his gun on the thief was a use of force.

it was a legally justified threat of using lethal force.

Torgo posted...

Fascinating to see people in favor of murder being justified over a truck.

Meanwhile billionaires steal countless dollars from workers in the various forms of wage theft and the same people defend that or at best don't care.

murder absolutely wouldn't be justified. if he had just showed up and started shooting he would be guilty as hell of some kinda murder. detaining the truck thief while calling the cops is ok though, the guy shooting him escalated the situation to a life or death situation.

ai123 posted...

How is he any better off through his actions?

He's arguably worse off considering he got himself shot lmao

andel posted...

murder absolutely wouldn't be justified. if he had just showed up and started shooting he would be guilty as hell of some kinda murder. detaining the truck thief while calling the cops is ok though, the guy shooting him escalated the situation to a life or death situation.

Stated perfectly.

The average person has $1k or less in the bank. Getting your car stolen is gonna do significant damage or ruin your life for those people.

This shouldn't be promoted but the "do you really value stupid property over life?" Comments are really detached from reality

Why should I value an armed robber's life over my house or car or family?

Only way I see this going horribly wrong is the truck could have been driven by someone else at the time.

Maybe the thief sold it for a quick buck, maybe he lent it to a friend who was ignorant of the theft.

The guy who was killed could be under the impression that he's the one being carjacked and drew his gun because he (thought he) was defending himself.

The article did mention "alleged car thief" .

WizardPowers posted...

The average person has $1k or less in the bank. Getting your car stolen is gonna do significant damage or ruin your life for those people.

This shouldn't be promoted but the "do you really value stupid property over life?" Comments are really detached from reality

Why should I value a car thieves life over my house or car or family?

And it's not like the owner went in with intent to kill or even harm.

WizardPowers posted...

The average person has $1k or less in the bank. Getting your car stolen is gonna do significant damage or ruin your life for those people.

This shouldn't be promoted but the "do you really value stupid property over life?" Comments are really detached from reality

Why should I value an armed robber's life over my house or car or family?

something something they need it more than you blah blah

St0rmFury posted...

Only way I see this going horribly wrong is the truck could have been driven by someone else at the time.

Maybe the thief sold it for a quick buck, maybe he lent it to a friend who was ignorant of the theft.

The guy who was killed could be under the impression that he's the one being carjacked and drew his gun because he (thought he) was defending himself.

The article did mention "alleged car thief" .

Doesn't change anything in my mind. He had enough justification to confront them and when they opened fire he had justification to shoot back.

Bio1590 posted...

He's arguably worse off considering he got himself shot lmao

he is definitely worse off and i wouldn't personally do that, i would just call the cops while following the vehicle until they show up.

the point is that the vehicle owner didn't commit a crime.

WizardPowers posted...

The average person has $1k or less in the bank. Getting your car stolen is gonna do significant damage or ruin your life for those people.

This shouldn't be promoted but the "do you really value stupid property over life?" Comments are really detached from reality

Why should I value an armed robber's life over my house or car or family?

If you value your property, insure it.

I'll ask again, how is this guy better off through his actions? He could just have filed some paperwork and got another truck.

Now he's been shot, and he's killed and injured people. Did he even get his bloodstained truck back?

It doesn't even make sense from the practical perspective you are trying to push.

ai123 posted...

If you value your property, insure it.

That's still a massive blow that can absolutely ruin lives.

And you're right, he's worse off now and his medical expenses and therapy should be paid for by the state because their ineptitude caused this situation.

ai123 posted...

If you value your property, insure it.

This is the "detached from reality" part I was talking about

"Just insure it" has to be a meme at this point. Basic car insurance, which most people have (and can barely afford) doesn't even cover it being stolen. You typically need more expensive comprehensive coverage. Which again, a lot of people might not be able to afford.

And you know even if you DO get it, those companies are going to do their damndest to rate your car's value the lowest they can.

Bare minimum you're losing 5 figures of value out of this unless your car was a junker

ai123 posted...

If you value your property, insure it.

I'll ask again, how is this guy better off through his actions? He could just have filed some paperwork and got another truck.

Now he's been shot, and he's killed and injured people. Did he even get his bloodstained truck back?

It doesn't even make sense from the practical perspective you are trying to push.

he isn't better off at all. he obviously didn't intend to shoot the guy or he would have just showed up and shot him instead of detaining him. he probably should have just waited on the cops but he wasn't legally obligated to do so and there are plenty of reasons why someone would confront the thief and try to recover their stolen car. filing insurance claims takes time and this guy may have needed his vehicle to continue working and not end up on the street without a job. regardless, he didn't commit a crime and the car thief who shot his victim after being detained at gunpoint may deserve a darwin award.

WizardPowers posted...

This is the "detached from reality" part I was talking about

"Just insure it" has to be a meme at this point. Basic car insurance, which most people have (and can barely afford) doesn't even cover it being stolen. You typically need more expensive comprehensive coverage. Which again, a lot of people might not be able to afford.

And you know even if you DO get it, those companies are going to do their damndest to rate your car's value the lowest they can.

Bare minimum you're losing 5 figures of value out of this unless your car was a junker

Not to mention your insurance will either drop you after the payout or massively increase your premiums.

Why are people pretending car thieves' lives have any significant value?

St0rmFury posted...

Not to mention your insurance will either drop you after the payout or massively increase your premiums.

Also you may still be on the hook for car payments, or insurance might try and weasel out of paying through a loophole.

Antifar posted...

Are you allowed to shoot first when you and someone else are being held at gunpoint?

It seems like he was trying to hold them until cops showed up but it's hard to say.

I wouldn't have risked my life if someone stole my car, personally.

Comfy_Pillow posted...

Why are people pretending car thieves' lives have any significant value?

This is the consequence of capitalism convincing some people that property literally has more value than human life.

Once they convince you a truck is more valuable than a human, its easy to convince a population that all manner of atrocity can be justified.

Chillscream123 posted...

How often have non-criminals been shot to death by a person mistakenly believing them to be car thieves because he was incapable of reliably recognizing his own car?

There are a couple of notorious cases about "heroic" bystanders opening fire on alleged shoplifters as they fled on foot or in a car.

One almost killed an Ace Hardware employee in Arizona.

Drawing guns on thieves who already got away with the crime because you wanted to play vigilante... is a bad idea.