Another story posted by another news source says he exited the truck and saw the suspect slashing his tires, Saintlouis fired a warning shot, then chased the suspect..
I couldn't find the affidavit in there. That would have the most info.
The trucker was arrested and will face aggravated assault charges.
Police said there were multiple 18-wheelers with flat tires outside of that apartment complex.
Despite the apparent vandalism, deputies said the district attorney's office has no plans to press charges against the vandal.
Wait, what???
So it's ok to slash tires now but not ok to defend against the destruction of your property?
Things that make you go hmmmm....
Inversely is it ok to kill a man for slashing your tires? I hope they're good tires...
To play devils advocate, what point is it ok to kill a man for slashing your tires. How about if it costs you thousands of dollars to repair? If it were theft of your property for thousands would that be ok? How about if you lost the ability to earn an income? If someone commits a crime and therefore you have loss of money (or income) has that not been money stolen from you? Vandals spray graffiti on your walls and you spend thousands to fix ( or the city fines you for not fixing). I know that legally the individual did not have the right to shoot for vandalism but how much financial loss does one have to put up with before one takes action? Having been the victim of vandalism at a time that I was broke and I had to spend a considerable money to get my car back in action it meant that the family did not have money for food or rent just so that I had wheels to go to work. Who knows what I would have done if I had cought the vandal.
The trucker was arrested and will face aggravated assault charges.
Police said there were multiple 18-wheelers with flat tires outside of that apartment complex.
Despite the apparent vandalism, deputies said the district attorney's office has no plans to press charges against the vandal.
Wait, what???
So it's ok to slash tires now but not ok to defend against the destruction of your property?
Things that make you go hmmmm....
Inversely is it ok to kill a man for slashing your tires? I hope they're good tires...
To play devils advocate, what point is it ok to kill a man for slashing your tires. How about if it costs you thousands of dollars to repair? If it were theft of your property for thousands would that be ok? How about if you lost the ability to earn an income? If someone commits a crime and therefore you have loss of money (or income) has that not been money stolen from you? Vandals spray graffiti on your walls and you spend thousands to fix ( or the city fines you for not fixing). I know that legally the individual did not have the right to shoot for vandalism but how much financial loss does one have to put up with before one takes action? Having been the victim of vandalism at a time that I was broke and I had to spend a considerable money to get my car back in action it meant that the family did not have money for food or rent just so that I had wheels to go to work. Who knows what I would have done if I had cought the vandal.
To play devil's advocate, how many thousands of dollars are you willing to pay to an attorney to defend you for shooting a person who is vandalizing your property?
That is what bothers me the most about the story. The shooting will be sorted out by the justice system, by people with access to more information than the reporter. However, if the alleged vandal is not arrested and charged, there is no opportunity for the justice system to sort out this specific crime. Even worse, when there isn't justice for crime victims, it creates an environment that encourages vigilante behavior.
That is what bothers me the most about the story. The shooting will be sorted out by the justice system, by people with access to more information than the reporter. However, if the alleged vandal is not arrested and charged, there is no opportunity for the justice system to sort out this specific crime. Even worse, when there isn't justice for crime victims, it creates an environment that encourages vigilante behavior.
It may be that the DA is not charging the vandal because he needs him to testify against the shooter. Unless the DA gives the vandal immunity, he would be forced to incriminate himself if he testified against the shooter.
Last edited by WildBill on Thu Oct 24, 2013 1:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
To play devil's advocate, how many thousands of dollars are you willing to pay to an attorney to defend you for shooting a person who is vandalizing your property?
That is what bothers me the most about the story. The shooting will be sorted out by the justice system, by people with access to more information than the reporter. However, if the alleged vandal is not arrested and charged, there is no opportunity for the justice system to sort out this specific crime. Even worse, when there isn't justice for crime victims, it creates an environment that encourages vigilante behavior.
To play devil's advocate, how many thousands of dollars are you willing to pay to an attorney to defend you for shooting a person who is vandalizing your property?
An excellent point.
That's why it's devils advocate. But vandalism is not without it's consequences. The kids that remove stop signs and people die at an intersection. No, I am not advocating shooting for vandalism. Or hanging horse thieves. But some would. But if I were on the jury in this case because of my personal experience with vandalism I would let the shooter walk.
Purplehood wrote:Are you implying that it may be okay to shoot someone for spray-painting graffiti on your property due to the $$$ damage incurred?
I find it difficult to grasp the concept of shooting someone for destruction of property that does not threaten my life or that of another.
My chl instructor taught you could shoot somebody for what you are saying. I argued heavily and endured his wrath. However, I hope others in the class heard another side that just because it may be legal, it is not the right thing to do.
Purplehood wrote:Are you implying that it may be okay to shoot someone for spray-painting graffiti on your property due to the $$$ damage incurred?
I find it difficult to grasp the concept of shooting someone for destruction of property that does not threaten my life or that of another.
My chl instructor taught you could shoot somebody for what you are saying. I argued heavily and endured his wrath. However, I hope others in the class heard another side that just because it may be legal, it is not the right thing to do.
Also juries sometimes convict when you don't think they will. As noted by the poster above, once they get in there, they do what they do.
[/quote]To play devils advocate, what point is it ok to kill a man for slashing your tires. How about if it costs you thousands of dollars to repair? If it were theft of your property for thousands would that be ok? How about if you lost the ability to earn an income? If someone commits a crime and therefore you have loss of money (or income) has that not been money stolen from you? Vandals spray graffiti on your walls and you spend thousands to fix ( or the city fines you for not fixing). I know that legally the individual did not have the right to shoot for vandalism but how much financial loss does one have to put up with before one takes action? Having been the victim of vandalism at a time that I was broke and I had to spend a considerable money to get my car back in action it meant that the family did not have money for food or rent just so that I had wheels to go to work. Who knows what I would have done if I had cought the vandal.[/quote]
Also an excellent point. I will never say I would shoot someone over property, but do I understand those who do? You betcha...I have said this many times, some folks won't protect themselves or their loved one, others won't protect their property, and others...on and on. I think that while one's belly is full and one has shelter, one can be more lenient and forgiving. But start taking these items away and one often becomes more elemental.
Unless we keep the barbarian virtues, gaining the civilized ones will be of little avail. Oversentimentality, oversoftness, washiness, and mushiness are the great dangers of this age and of this people." Teddy Roosevelt"
DEB=Daniel E Bertram
U.S. Army Retired, (Sapper). VFW Life Member.
Was the slasher cutting all the tires... or one or two of the rear tires on the rig? Was he setting it up where the truck could still move, only for a now-overloaded tire to blow later on down the road because its brother was flat and not taking the weight? Was he hoping for a flat tire to have tread separation and throw dangerous debris on the road? Was he hoping for the flat tire to throw the tread and go through a windshield?
I've had vehicle damage from dodging "road gators." I've nearly been hit by them, in vehicles and on a motorcycle. I've had tires blow out at 65 mph. I've seen others wreck out due to tires blowing at speed.
If you're reaching past the outer tires on the back of a rig to the inner, don't you also have opportunity to cut the brake lines or damage other stuff and endanger the driver, as well as anyone else on the road when he loses control?
I'm not saying the tire slasher -should- have been shot. I am saying that, dependent on exactly how this went down, I would be -very- leery of charging the trucker with anything, or convicting were I on the jury. It's somewhat arguable that an attack on the rig's tires and braking/stopping systems (which tires are part of) can be perceived as an attempted attack on the trucker's life, or on the lives of those around him.
Purplehood wrote:Are you implying that it may be okay to shoot someone for spray-painting graffiti on your property due to the $$$ damage incurred?
I find it difficult to grasp the concept of shooting someone for destruction of property that does not threaten my life or that of another.
20 or more years ago, the police chief in one of the San Antonio area towns (Leon Valley?) shot a kid for spray painting his wall and was no-billed because it was "criminal mischief during the nighttime".
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams
