Walmart rent-a-cop shoots and kills shoplifter.

Originally posted by smurfy

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by gladtobehere

 

'She was just a perfect mom', sure she was. Another moron off the street who tried to run this guy down while fleeing, even if she didn't she broke the law and if he said stop and she didn't I think shooting is warranted. Tell shop lifters they'll be shot on sight then people won't be trying to rob things very much now will they? I have no sympathy for a shop lifter I think it says a lot about your moral compass and clearly this woman wasn't starving for her next meal.

edit on 10-12-2012 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)

A rubbish piece of work from you, she wasn't the driver..... hey man shoot down that Jumbo jet, there are shoplifters in it, it amounts to the same thing, you don't even want to comprehend how it got to the supposed circustances in the first place.

HUH??
Does one have to be the driver to be the ringleader?
What does driving have to do with it?
The driver moved the vehicle as the officer was attempting to save his life by stopping the person in control of the vehicle, this is most probably the reason his aim did not hit the true target.
If the driver had listened to the lawful order given her and stopped the vehicle, then the dead criminal in question would most probably still be breathing.
But alot ....err an overwhelming amount of stupid decisions on that day by the criminals ended up with a dead criminal.
If you are killed in the commision of a crime involving bodily harm, unless there is some serious evidence that points towards officer malice, generally the courts will rightfully side with the officer involved.
It is truly a bummer that on the day she died that she decided to be a criminal.
Like i said before, if on the day in question, she had stayed home with her kids, they wouldn't have a Darwin award winner for a Mommy.
Sometimes stupid hurts.

reply to post by smurfy

Besides you miss the point entirely, you do not have armed security on a shopping mall, unless there is a co-ordinated chain of command who are all responsible, be they regular police or not. You do not have unarmed security unless there is a co-ordinated chain of command and all are responsible.

Clearly you do not own or run a retail sales establishment.

An off duty police officer is the best security you can get and afford. This is not operation Overlord. You don't have big chains of command.
You steal the cop knows the laws and put you in cuffs.
You assault someone on the premises and he takes you down and puts you in cuffs.
You attempt man slaughter and he takes you out.
No need to check in with the manager and see if it's OK.

Originally posted by g146541

Originally posted by smurfy

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by gladtobehere

 

'She was just a perfect mom', sure she was. Another moron off the street who tried to run this guy down while fleeing, even if she didn't she broke the law and if he said stop and she didn't I think shooting is warranted. Tell shop lifters they'll be shot on sight then people won't be trying to rob things very much now will they? I have no sympathy for a shop lifter I think it says a lot about your moral compass and clearly this woman wasn't starving for her next meal.

edit on 10-12-2012 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)

A rubbish piece of work from you, she wasn't the driver..... hey man shoot down that Jumbo jet, there are shoplifters in it, it amounts to the same thing, you don't even want to comprehend how it got to the supposed circustances in the first place.

HUH??
Does one have to be the driver to be the ringleader?
What does driving have to do with it?
The driver moved the vehicle as the officer was attempting to save his life by stopping the person in control of the vehicle, this is most probably the reason his aim did not hit the true target.
If the driver had listened to the lawful order given her and stopped the vehicle, then the dead criminal in question would most probably still be breathing.
But alot ....err an overwhelming amount of stupid decisions on that day by the criminals ended up with a dead criminal.
If you are killed in the commision of a crime involving bodily harm, unless there is some serious evidence that points towards officer malice, generally the courts will rightfully side with the officer involved.
It is truly a bummer that on the day she died that she decided to be a criminal.
Like i said before, if on the day in question, she had stayed home with her kids, they wouldn't have a Darwin award winner for a Mommy.
Sometimes stupid hurts.

First sentence makes no sense, his life was not in danger until the vehicle moved, you need to rephrase that.
Again you miss the point, ultimately, there should be no regular officer off duty, dressed in regular officer uniform without a chain of command from the uniform he represents, and which also should be the first choice of payment.

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by Chargeit

 

Here's the real story...

Campbell chased the women to the parking lot, where they tried driving off. At one point, he said he was between the car door and the driver’s seat and feared for his safety.

Article

Sound like he severely overstepped his boundaries based on the crime and then bailed himself out of a sticky situation with his gun.... sad.

You can tell he's an ex Cop, that pretty much sums their behavior. Pretend like you felt your life was in danger.

Somebody should step in and support the OObama voters rights to be what they want to be. Come on it was just a little theft not the first time probably but definately the last.

In regards to all who condemn this officers actions...
If the newest Darwin recipient in said case had not decided to be a stupid criminal on the day in question, her children would not have been orphaned.
Bummer ehh?
Bad life decisions at their finest I say.

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by smurfy

 

Besides you miss the point entirely, you do not have armed security on a shopping mall, unless there is a co-ordinated chain of command who are all responsible, be they regular police or not. You do not have unarmed security unless there is a co-ordinated chain of command and all are responsible.

Clearly you do not own or run a retail sales establishment.

An off duty police officer is the best security you can get and afford. This is not operation Overlord. You don't have big chains of command.
You steal the cop knows the laws and put you in cuffs.
You assault someone on the premises and he takes you down and puts you in cuffs.
You attempt man slaughter and he takes you out.
No need to check in with the manager and see if it's OK.

Circumstances were what exactly? address that, the 'security guard' was in Harris county uniform, address that, a Harris county police officer being an associate of Walmart, and being allowed to carry out that departments mo, (their words not mine) address that.

So what you are actually saying, is in this case the best security killed someone by mistake, (that is not in question, and according to the officer involved, only the circumstance) and that Walmart are cosy with the police local, or otherwise, all done with a wink or a nod.

reply to post by smurfy


Regardless let me ask you a question... if you committed a crime, would you expect to be shot? If not then your not fully grasping the reality of the situation. Case closed.

Also your quote about the jumbo jet was absolutely moronic. That would imply that the whole jet had shop lifters in it and if it did then go ahead and shoot it down. But the way you worded it was that they were among innocents, they weren't, the police officer was also not aware of the children, so again the car was full of criminals. Perfectly acceptable to shoot at.

reply to post by NoJoker13

That would imply that the whole jet had shop lifters in it and if it did then go ahead and shoot it down.

Are you trying to complete with g146541 for the most ignorant and stupid post award?

By your logic, why do we even need to accuse someone of a crime.

Heck, let's just line up people we don't like and shoot 'em all.

Excuse me, Nazi Germany just called and they want their idiots back.

he feared for his safety so shot the passenger .....

he says he failed to notice children in the car.....

surely this was caught on CCTV right ?.......


i think you know where i stand .........

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by smurfy

 

Regardless let me ask you a question... if you committed a crime, would you expect to be shot? If not then your not fully grasping the reality of the situation. Case closed.

Also your quote about the jumbo jet was absolutely moronic. That would imply that the whole jet had shop lifters in it and if it did then go ahead and shoot it down. But the way you worded it was that they were among innocents, they weren't, the police officer was also not aware of the children, so again the car was full of criminals. Perfectly acceptable to shoot at.

edit on 10-12-2012 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)

Regardless of what? commit a crime like petty theft, as acknowledged by Walmart themselves as not worthy of someone being killed before this happened? expect then to be be shot, man you've just opened a whole new world to me. As to the children, why was he not aware?

Originally posted by rickymouse
Make a mental note

Never screw up and walk out of Walmart without paying for everything.

That is a stupid thing today and has no bearing on what happened.

You comparing apples to oranges.

So, the murderer claims that someone was trying to run him over, so he shot someone else, not noticing the nearby tots?

So, if I want to kill someone all I have to do is claim I 'felt my life was in danger" and then I can just blaze away?

reply to post by MagicWand67


Um are you a moron for taking my post out of context? Since I was replying to someone else's awful analogy. But regardless you can be sure that if something is full of criminals I don't care what happens to it, as I said before being able to shoplift in the first place says a lot about someones moral compass, and I wouldn't ever be able to trust them... so what good are they?

reply to post by CaptChaos


Yes that's how it works, especially since the camera's will back his statement up. Also the officer wasn't aware of the children in the car. But keep grasping at those straws. Another moron off the street.

reply to post by smurfy


So you think you can commit a crime, in this shoot first society, without even expecting to be shot? Clearly the perception of the world is that if your committing a crime or being shady good things don't happen. Anything can be preceived as a threat and if your naive, stupid, and childish enough to not think you COULD be shot while committing even the smallest crime your not living in reality and again aren't fully grasping the seriousness of the situation.

Ok...the officer was out of line and should be dealt with, no question. But, and yes there is always a but, the whole situation could be avoided by said "VICTIM" not being a useless member of society and shoplifting.

reply to post by NoJoker13


Absolutely my friend....

reply to post by crkking


My thoughts as well, could it have been avoided... maybe. Is it his fault this dumb ass broke the law and got herself shot in the process? No.

reply to post by NoJoker13

Is it his fault this dumb ass broke the law and got herself shot in the process? No

Umm ...... reality check.

Yes, it is his fault she got shot. He's the one who pulled the trigger.

Talk about dumbass.