Poor Grandma

Meh in both cases the reasoning was valid. I suspect things would have turned out differently had grandma been a teenager instead, same deal with the homeless guy. Grandma even tossed out some shit about god in her defence, like that matters, but whoever wrote the article felt it was of such importance as to include it. Sorry, I dont think being raised a certain way stopped those catholic priests or most criminals for that matter.

Both cases are an attempt to pull at peoples heart strings, and I just wont be fooled by this non-sense. If cops think you steal stuff, they are not being dicks for arresting you. If cops think you are comming at them with a knife in such a manor they believe you intend to hurt them, they have are not being dicks for shooting you. Mentally stable people move in a predictable mannor and can be dissarmed easily enough, the same can't be said for a mentally unstable, desperate homeless person.
 
I obviously do not have the details, but it sure seems like the DA backed down in the grandma case cause they didn't want to put an old black woman on trial during this time of unrest.

On the other hand, if you look food from a store after a huge natural disaster, you may be breaking the law, but at the time that certainly doesn't matter to you, you just want to eat. Not like she could have bought the stuff at that time anyway. I don't see anything wrong with looting to survive, looting to accumulate wealth is where there troubles start.
 
Sculli said:
I obviously do not have the details, but it sure seems like the DA backed down in the grandma case cause they didn't want to put an old black woman on trial during this time of unrest.

On the other hand, if you look food from a store after a huge natural disaster, you may be breaking the law, but at the time that certainly doesn't matter to you, you just want to eat. Not like she could have bought the stuff at that time anyway. I don't see anything wrong with looting to survive, looting to accumulate wealth is where there troubles start.
Click to expand...

I agree to a certain extent.

however stealing is stealing, and people are acountable for thei actions, no ?

I do not like how people looted everything out of all the walmarts in New Orleans then complained when they did not contribute to the aid, because they felt they contributed enough by haveing their entire stock in all their store looted. For some people it's just never enough.
 
however stealing is stealing, and people are acountable for thei actions, no ?
Click to expand...

Agreed.
There may be mitigating factors.

But you can't just pick and choose when to follow the law.
You can't just ignore consequences when you want to.

Do what you have to in order to survive.
But don't get too upset when you get caught breaking the law.

As for grandma.. I dunno, sounds like a normal "we think she's looting lets arrest" deal except... Oh noes.. she's a grandma. lol.
The elderly can do no wrong, eh?
 
isnt there an allowance for disaster situations?

Looting new Sterio? Bad. Looting bread, Juice, and Meats simply because its impossible to buy them (since every store is closed due to the disaster)? Not so bad.

While technicly both are stealing, you'd need to be crazy, or a total jackass to prosecute a case like that.
 
Honestly, i watch all your American cop shows and the amount of force they use is completely un neccessary. To top it all of a lot of your police are the most arrogant s o bs who would do anything to get an arrest. I mean i saw one guy who said he had a gun license and gave the gun to the police when they got to his place on some call yet he still got arrested for carrying a sidearm. Long story short, i wouldnt like to be living in America with police running about thinking they can do anything they want
 
Yeah, mitigating factors. Stealing food during a disaster is definately something that's atleast forgivable if nothing else. Grandma stealing a couple bucks worth of sausage isn't really anything noteworthy. Other than ohmygod they arrested grandma. lol.
I love how indignant she got. I'm glad god's keeping grandma in line. =p

As for cops, their supposed overzealousness, and cop shows. Well, I won't refute any of that. Not that I could.
But just keep in mind that if it wasn't interesting it wouldn't have made air.
In other words, it's hardly a fair slice of american police and how they work in general. Or I would think atleast.
 
Yoshindor said:
I do not like how people looted everything out of all the walmarts in New Orleans then complained when they did not contribute to the aid, because they felt they contributed enough by haveing their entire stock in all their store looted. For some people it's just never enough.
Click to expand...
Dunno where you get that from. Walmart was one of the, if not the, first company to actually send aid. 13 trucks the morning after, way ahead of anyone else, including FEMA, state and local officials, and the Red Cross.

See: The Only Life-Line Was The Wal-Mart @ Fortune Magazine
 
Marajade said:
isnt there an allowance for disaster situations?

Looting new Sterio? Bad. Looting bread, Juice, and Meats simply because its impossible to buy them (since every store is closed due to the disaster)? Not so bad.

While technicly both are stealing, you'd need to be crazy, or a total jackass to prosecute a case like that.
Click to expand...

The common law defense of Justification applies to these situations in most common law states (Louisiana is a civil law state). For example, in New York:
...(C)onduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when:
...Such conduct is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no fault of the actor, and which is of such gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding such injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the injury sought to be prevented by the statute defining the offense in issue.
Click to expand...

In other words, if the harm prevented by the criminal act is greater than the harm caused by the criminal act, the jury can acquit.
The problem is, the police are not required to take these things into consideration since it is a matter for the court to decide.
 
Flymop said:
Honestly, i watch all your American cop shows and the amount of force they use is completely un neccessary. To top it all of a lot of your police are the most arrogant s o bs who would do anything to get an arrest. I mean i saw one guy who said he had a gun license and gave the gun to the police when they got to his place on some call yet he still got arrested for carrying a sidearm. Long story short, i wouldnt like to be living in America with police running about thinking they can do anything they want
Click to expand...


It's a safety measure. Arrested doesn't mean sent to jail. And really, you don't know what the hell people have on them and what they'll do with it in this age, hence why cops usually always have enough back up to double the amount of people they're after.

Public Servants are paid dick. My fathers a fire fighter, and brings home $28k after taxes. Granted, all benefits are included, but thats not a whole lot of income.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top