Justice, Wal-Mart style

[HumblePie]

Originally posted by: timosyy
Everyone who said shoplifting = burglary just got owned.

How so? There is no such thing as shoplifting in the state of Texas. There is Theft which runsthe gambit of the misdemeanors, there is robbery and there is burglary. The latter are the felony forms of theft. What this guy did wasn't petty theft as he was on private property when it occured. That makes it a felony.

You forgot, things are different from state to state. Just because your state defines shoplifting, that doesn't hold true for every state.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: HumblePie

Originally posted by: timosyy
Everyone who said shoplifting = burglary just got owned.

How so? There is no such thing as shoplifting in the state of Texas. There is Theft which runsthe gambit of the misdemeanors, there is robbery and there is burglary. The latter are the felony forms of theft. What this guy did wasn't petty theft as he was on private property when it occured. That makes it a felony.

You forgot, things are different from state to state. Just because your state defines shoplifting, that doesn't hold true for every state.

Are you completely illiterate? You just got severely pwned, section 3 of the relevant TEXAS statute clearly states less than $1500 = class A misdemeanor.

 

Originally posted by: HumblePie

Originally posted by: timosyy
Everyone who said shoplifting = burglary just got owned.

How so? There is no such thing as shoplifting in the state of Texas. There is Theft which runsthe gambit of the misdemeanors, there is robbery and there is burglary. The latter are the felony forms of theft. What this guy did wasn't petty theft as he was on private property when it occured. That makes it a felony.

You forgot, things are different from state to state. Just because your state defines shoplifting, that doesn't hold true for every state.

A burglary can be committed without anything being stolen.

bur·gla·ry Audio pronunciation of "burglary" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (bûrgl-r)
n. pl. bur·gla·ries

The act of entering a building or other premises with the intent to commit theft.

Intent != the act itself.

Burglary IS NOT the same thing as theft. I'm sorry, you lose. Burlary is the act of breaking and entering. Theft is the act of removing items from a premises without permission.

They are NOT one and the same.

 

[LeiZaK]

shoplifting != burglary

A retail store is understood to welcome in all potential customers. He obviously had the owner's "consent" to be in Wal-Mart as he was one of these potentials. The only instances where this would not apply is if

A) The store was closed to the public
B) There are legal documents or other binding instruction from the owner prohibiting him from the property

Apparently neither of these conditions are met in this case...

 

[alphatarget1]

Humblepie pwned.

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: HumblePie
GAH, there is no legal definition for the term "shoplifting" in the state of Texas. There is THEFT, and then there is Burglary. All forms of burglary = THEFT. Not all forms of theft = burglary. Got that? Theft is defined as taking property without consent of the owner basically. Or click on that link for the more legal mumbo jumbo. Here's an example.

Yes, there is. Section 31.02.Shoplifting has been consolidated into Theft. That's the "legal" definition of shoplifiting.

§ 31.02. CONSOLIDATION OF THEFT OFFENSES. Theft as
defined in Section 31.03 constitutes a single offense superseding
the separate offenses previously known as theft, theft by false
pretext, conversion by a bailee, theft from the person,
shoplifting, acquisition of property by threat, swindling,
swindling by worthless check, embezzlement, extortion, receiving
or concealing embezzled property, and receiving or concealing
stolen property.

does it say consolidation of burglary offenses? NO, you dumbass.

Now, If that rake was in my garage and you walked on my property and took it out of my garagage. You just commited burglary. I can use deadly force in this instance.

what the fvck does this have to do with the walmart case? NOTHING! walmart is open to the general public. this guy is a member of the general public. there's implied consent. it can't be burglary. it's THEFT. and based on the value of the goods stolen, it's a MISDEMEANOR. which means: no deadly force. jesus, you are stupid.

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Humblepie pwned.

and his mom the "lawyer" :laugh:

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Humblepie pwned.

and his mom the "lawyer" :laugh:

:laugh:

 

[HonkeyDonk]

Woah, I live in Houston and I didn't hear about this till now...have I been living under a rock?

That sucks, those employees made me angry. Can you imagine being burned like that on hot black asphalt pavement? And then have 2-3 guys choke holding you and cutting air off from you?

Even if he was stealing, he does not deserve that kind of brutality. I hope those employees get punished.

 

Originally posted by: HonkeyDonk
Woah, I live in Houston and I didn't hear about this till now...have I been living under a rock?

That sucks, those employees made me angry. Can you imagine being burned like that on hot black asphalt pavement? And then have 2-3 guys choke holding you and cutting air off from you?

Even if he was stealing, he does not deserve that kind of brutality. I hope those employees get punished.

This post is sooooooooo 15 minutes ago. Right now we're in the middle of pwning HumblePie.

 

[shuan24]

Originally posted by: kinev
Sec. 30.02. BURGLARY. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, he:
~ ~ (1) enters a habitation, or a building (or any portion of a building) not then open to the public, with intent to commit a felony or theft; or
~ ~ (2) remains concealed, with intent to commit a felony or theft, in a building or habitation; or
~ ~ (3) enters a building or habitation and commits or attempts to commit a felony or theft.

Does he have the ownes permission to enter WalMart? Yes. Once he commits a theft, does he have permission? No. Did he commit a theft? Yes. Was he attempting to commit a theft? Yes. Is it a burglary, then? Yes. Does burglary fall under the deadly force provision? Yes. Will WalMart and these employees get sued? You betcha.

Also, you could make a case for robbery if the guy resisted. The article said that he resisted to the point that his shirt came off. All he had to do was make one of the guys stopping him fear bodily injury while stopping him and BOOM robbery and deadly force justification.

Sec. 29.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
~ ~ (1) "In the course of committing theft" means conduct that occurs in an attempt to commit, during the commission, or in immediate flight after the attempt or commission of theft.
~ ~ (2) "Property" means:
~ ~ ~ (A) tangible or intangible personal property including anything severed from land; or
~ ~ ~ (B) a document, including money, that represents or embodies anything of value.

Sec. 29.02. ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if, in the course of committing theft as defined in Chapter 31 and with intent to obtain or maintain control of the property, he:
~ ~ (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or
~ ~ (2) intentionally or knowingly threatens or places another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death.
~ (b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.

There are a lot of unkowns here, but Texas tends to side against the criminals.

Hold on there. I'd like to join in the owning of HumblePie, but I don't understand the connection. If shoplifting = theft, and theft = burglary, then doesn't shoplifting = burglary? (under Sec. 30.02. (a)(3))

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: HonkeyDonk
Woah, I live in Houston and I didn't hear about this till now...have I been living under a rock?

That sucks, those employees made me angry. Can you imagine being burned like that on hot black asphalt pavement? And then have 2-3 guys choke holding you and cutting air off from you?

Even if he was stealing, he does not deserve that kind of brutality. I hope those employees get punished.

This post is sooooooooo 15 minutes ago. Right now we're in the middle of pwning HumblePie.

and don't forget kinev and HumblePie's Mom.

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: shuan24

Originally posted by: kinev
Sec. 30.02. BURGLARY. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, he:
~ ~ (1) enters a habitation, or a building (or any portion of a building) not then open to the public, with intent to commit a felony or theft; or
~ ~ (2) remains concealed, with intent to commit a felony or theft, in a building or habitation; or
~ ~ (3) enters a building or habitation and commits or attempts to commit a felony or theft.

Does he have the ownes permission to enter WalMart? Yes. Once he commits a theft, does he have permission? No. Did he commit a theft? Yes. Was he attempting to commit a theft? Yes. Is it a burglary, then? Yes. Does burglary fall under the deadly force provision? Yes. Will WalMart and these employees get sued? You betcha.

Also, you could make a case for robbery if the guy resisted. The article said that he resisted to the point that his shirt came off. All he had to do was make one of the guys stopping him fear bodily injury while stopping him and BOOM robbery and deadly force justification.

Sec. 29.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
~ ~ (1) "In the course of committing theft" means conduct that occurs in an attempt to commit, during the commission, or in immediate flight after the attempt or commission of theft.
~ ~ (2) "Property" means:
~ ~ ~ (A) tangible or intangible personal property including anything severed from land; or
~ ~ ~ (B) a document, including money, that represents or embodies anything of value.

Sec. 29.02. ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if, in the course of committing theft as defined in Chapter 31 and with intent to obtain or maintain control of the property, he:
~ ~ (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or
~ ~ (2) intentionally or knowingly threatens or places another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death.
~ (b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.

There are a lot of unkowns here, but Texas tends to side against the criminals.

Hold on there. I'd like to join in the owning of HumblePie, but I don't understand the connection. If shoplifting = theft, and theft = burglary, then doesn't shoplifting = burglary? (under Sec. 30.02. (a)(3))

theft is not = burglary.

oh and in general: post hoc ergo propter hoc. learn it.

 

[timosyy]

Or in english, "after this therefore because of this".

Umm.. all burglary = theft, but not all theft = burglary. As I understand it.

 

Originally posted by: timosyy
Or in english, "after this therefore because of this".

Umm.. all burglary = theft, but not all theft = burglary. As I understand it.

NOOOOOOOOOO

Burglary is the act of breaking and entering a dwelling or other structure with the INTENT to commit theft.

You don't have to steal anything to commit burglary. If you break into someone's house and they catch you before you steal anything, you committed the crime of burglary. You did NOT commit the crime of theft.

 

[timosyy]

Hey, I can admit when I'm wrong

 

[1sikbITCH]

Humble Pie's point is irrelevant in any case. Even if you could legally shoot someone to stop them from shoplifting, it doesn't say you are allowed to stop them from shoplifting, handcuff them, and once you've already stopped them from shoplifting, go ahead and step on their neck, pin them to the burning asphalt, and then refuse medical treatment while you let them die. It doesn't help their case that a crowd of bystanders was warning them that they were killing the guy and they still wouldn't let him up.

That's going to bring charges of manslaughter:

MANSLAUGHTER - The unlawful killing of a human being without malice or premeditation, either express or implied; distinguished from murder, which requires malicious intent....

The cases of manslaughter may be classed as follows those which take place in consequence of: 1. Provocation. 2. Mutual combat. 3. Resistance to public officers, etc. 4. Killing in the prosecution of an unlawful or wanton act. 5. Killing in the prosecution of a lawful act, improperly performed, or performed without lawful authority.

Do they execute you for manslaughter in Texas?

 

[frankgomez75]

ATOT.... some guys here seem to be potential lawyers :laugh:

Seems clear now that this was a misdemeanor and that deadly force should have not been used.

However, had this been someones house..... it would have been a different story. Deadly force would have been acceptable.

 

[LeiZaK]

Originally posted by: timosyy
Or in english, "after this therefore because of this".

Umm.. all burglary = theft, but not all theft = burglary. As I understand it.

no burglary does not always = theft. Theft does not have to be committed for a burglary to take place, just the perceived intent.

edit: jumpr already illustrated this concept

 

[1sikbITCH]

Actually, I just slept at a Holiday Inn Express!

 

[frankgomez75]

I just save a bunch of money switching to GEICO!

 

[LeiZaK]

Originally posted by: 1sikbITCH
Actually, I just slept at a Holiday Inn Express!

and I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance by switching to geico

edit: damn you, frankgomez75

 

[kinev]

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: shuan24

Originally posted by: kinev
Sec. 30.02. BURGLARY. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, he:
~ ~ (1) enters a habitation, or a building (or any portion of a building) not then open to the public, with intent to commit a felony or theft; or
~ ~ (2) remains concealed, with intent to commit a felony or theft, in a building or habitation; or
~ ~ (3) enters a building or habitation and commits or attempts to commit a felony or theft.

Does he have the ownes permission to enter WalMart? Yes. Once he commits a theft, does he have permission? No. Did he commit a theft? Yes. Was he attempting to commit a theft? Yes. Is it a burglary, then? Yes. Does burglary fall under the deadly force provision? Yes. Will WalMart and these employees get sued? You betcha.

Also, you could make a case for robbery if the guy resisted. The article said that he resisted to the point that his shirt came off. All he had to do was make one of the guys stopping him fear bodily injury while stopping him and BOOM robbery and deadly force justification.

Sec. 29.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
~ ~ (1) "In the course of committing theft" means conduct that occurs in an attempt to commit, during the commission, or in immediate flight after the attempt or commission of theft.
~ ~ (2) "Property" means:
~ ~ ~ (A) tangible or intangible personal property including anything severed from land; or
~ ~ ~ (B) a document, including money, that represents or embodies anything of value.

Sec. 29.02. ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if, in the course of committing theft as defined in Chapter 31 and with intent to obtain or maintain control of the property, he:
~ ~ (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or
~ ~ (2) intentionally or knowingly threatens or places another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death.
~ (b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.

There are a lot of unkowns here, but Texas tends to side against the criminals.

Hold on there. I'd like to join in the owning of HumblePie, but I don't understand the connection. If shoplifting = theft, and theft = burglary, then doesn't shoplifting = burglary? (under Sec. 30.02. (a)(3))

theft is not = burglary.

oh and in general: post hoc ergo propter hoc. learn it.

Quite a discussion. No, theft |= burglary. If this goes to a criminal trial, you can bet that the defendant's lawyer will argue either
1) Does he have the owners permission to enter WalMart? Yes. Once he commits a theft, does he have permission? No. Did he commit a theft? Yes. Was he attempting to commit a theft? Yes. Is it a burglary, then? Yes. Does burglary fall under the deadly force provision? Yes.
-or-
2)Also, you could make a case for robbery if the guy resisted. The article said that he resisted to the point that his shirt came off. All he had to do was make one of the guys stopping him fear bodily injury while stopping him and BOOM robbery and deadly force justification.

Again, I am not sure if this applies to employees at a business or not, but it does apply to private citizens. Also, there are a lot of unkowns here, but Texas tends to side against the criminals.

If this guy really didn't steal anything, then I feel sorry for his family's loss. If he did, one thing is for sure, he will not steal anything else from anybody.

 

[CrazyShiz]

Originally posted by: JohnCU
I'm unsure about how to feel about this.

You're a Moron.

 

[txrandom]

This happened Sat 6th near where I live. I think Driver should of thought about the consequences before stealing.