Discussion Man Tracks Down His Stolen Truck, Kills Alleged Thief In Gunfight Outside Mall

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,309
2,338
136
Also that his brother wouldn't have bothered to bring up that the alleged thief owned nearly the same truck and was just honestly mistaken when complaining that his brother didn't deserve to get shot for shooting a guy reclaiming his property.
The brother didn't have to say that, because the family always insists the decedent was a law-abiding citizen and couldn't possibly commit any misdemeanor, let alone a felony.

</ sarcasm>

He put himself in that situation when he didn't have to, then killed a guy. He even brought a fucking gun which means he thought he might have to use it. Why are you defending him?
IMO I've never seen @SteveGrabowski behave "unreasonably" in other threads. I shouldn't speak for him, but I don't believe he's saying that property rights trump a person's life. Outside of the OP, very few people are cheering an alleged car thief's death. The consensus is that most of us would have handled this differently, but bear in mind that we are not a proverbial "good guy (Texan) with a gun."
 
Reactions: Perknose

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
9,345
12,682
146
AFAIK, OnStar is a GM only thing...
Yeah I used the OnStar as a generic, I know there are others and they all have GPS tracking ability. Someone's suggestion that the manufacturer will only supply the info to law enforcement was a good point though.

Might've been an Apple AirTag or something similar (is there anything else like that?) if the truck was a bit older.
 
Reactions: Leeea

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,654
6,190
126
He has a right to take his property back and losing a car isn't something most people can easily swallow.
The truck belongs to its rightful owner. The fact that you own something does not give you the right to take it from a tow yard that has removed it because you parked illegally. Plenty of people have pretended to themselves they can.

That you own something does not make you judge jury and executioner over sentencing somebody you believe stole it. Because the death penalty is excessive for car theft, no person interested in impartial justice should attempt be using a gun to make a personal arrest. But you don’t care and because you should you keep making excuses here to avoid the moral vacuousness of your opinion. The victim chose to escalate the situation creating an easily anticipatable result.

Of course it is only an issue if you have a conscience and can feel organic shame. A thief became and died as an attempted murder by the victims actions and at his hands and without any awareness as to how many others might also die as a result.

But it’s all OK because he owned the truck.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,654
6,190
126
The brother didn't have to say that, because the family always insists the decedent was a law-abiding citizen and couldn't possibly commit any misdemeanor, let alone a felony.

</ sarcasm>


IMO I've never seen @SteveGrabowski behave "unreasonably" in other threads. I shouldn't speak for him, but I don't believe he's saying that property rights trump a person's life. Outside of the OP, very few people are cheering an alleged car thief's death. The consensus is that most of us would have handled this differently, but bear in mind that we are not a proverbial "good guy (Texan) with a gun."
This is no surprise to me. I believe we all hate ourselves and when the right buttons get pushed that hate will surface. The only value I see in this conversation is the potential for practice at self awareness. If somebody stole my statement of self importance to the world, owning an old Ford F-150 in Lexus Tesla Mercedes land, I would want them exterminated out to 7th cousins. I’m the only real man around for miles.

This thread tells me how not to act. Perhaps I might remember if the shit hits the fan.
 

mindless1

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2001
8,178
1,488
126
You must have missed where I explained that it happened to a friend of mine with his Subaru huh? You can't argue that something isn't impossible when it is possible no matter the odds.
I didn't miss it, yes in a different situation, different car, different security (If any) there were far different odds.

I'm fairly aware of Ford's PATS security back then, are you?

This is why, as a society we have to have a few examples die every now and then, because of airheads who pose one in a quadrillion "what ifs", as if nothing can be certain. It's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. What you posed, simply is not reasonable. At all. Plus even if the odds of it happening were still fair, he still took someone else's property and shot him.

What Ifs are why you don't steal, and why when caught, you surrender not shoot the owner. You man up and have your day in court.

We see what the thief did. How'd that work out for him?
 
Last edited:

NWRMidnight

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,965
2,571
136
I didn't miss it, yes in a different situation, different car, different security (If any) there were far different odds.

I'm fairly aware of Ford's PATS security back then, are you?

This is why, as a society we have to have a few examples die every now and then, because of airheads who pose one in a quadrillion "what ifs", as if nothing can be certain. It's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. What you posed, simply is not reasonable. At all. Plus even if the odds of it happening were still fair, he still took someone else's property and shot him.

What Ifs are why you don't steal, and why when caught, you surrender not shoot the owner. You man up and have your day in court.

We see what the thief did. How'd that work out for him?
Yes, I am very aware of Fords PATS back then.. I've owned fords for the past 3 decades, up till 2 months ago. Not all Ford vehicles of that era had Pats. Their heavy duty line didn't have them until 2008, and I have a feeling the truck here is a 2005. But I can't be sure if it's a heavy-duty or not. Their F-150's started getting them in 1999.
 
Last edited:

mindless1

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2001
8,178
1,488
126
Yes, I am very aware of Fords PATS back then.. I've owned fords for the past 3 decades, up till 2 months ago. Not all Ford vehicles of that era had Pats. Their heavy duty line didn't have them until 2008, and I have a feeling the truck here is a 2005. But I can't be sure if it's a heavy-duty or not. Their F-150's started getting them in 1999.

You yourself stated, quote "it looks to be a white, plain jane, double cab, 10 to 15 year old ford truck". If it's a super duty that's 10 y/o it has pats, and if it's 15... that makes it 2008, so it has pats.

It still seems like a math problem... Unless you want to claim it "might' be a very late manufactured 2007, but then the odds of that in combination with all the other astronomical odds... it's still unreasonable to pretend we should consider all that as plausible instead of seeing it for what it is, a simple theft.

You want to make a believable argument but want to assume someone can't recognize the interior of their own vehicle? Fleet vehicle maybe but the daily driver you take to the mall? Just no. After that many years, even the smell of the vehicle would be different, the seat cushion wear, the seat adjustment, the radio stations tuned, scuff marks, etc, etc.

If you want to rely on that nebulous excuse to steal vehicles, have fun with that. It won't stop you from ending up dead, apparently.

Are you a fan of vehicle thieves? It is incomprehensible to even pose your argument unless it's just a desperate excuse to try to argue away gun violence. If that is what it is, I can agree with that, but it needs to center on that argument, not the nonsense that it might be some one in a quadrillion situation because even then, if the accused thief is so innocent, he could have simply waited for police to arrive instead of shooting the owner.

Facts seem to get in the way of your argument.
 
Last edited:

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,307
136
Back on topic, the actual problem is that people have no choice but to take the law into their hands because the police are too busy pointlessly harrassing poor people and minorities and collecting roadside taxes.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,307
136
I didn't miss it, yes in a different situation, different car, different security (If any) there were far different odds.

I'm fairly aware of Ford's PATS security back then, are you?

This is why, as a society we have to have a few examples die every now and then, because of airheads who pose one in a quadrillion "what ifs", as if nothing can be certain. It's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. What you posed, simply is not reasonable. At all. Plus even if the odds of it happening were still fair, he still took someone else's property and shot him.

What Ifs are why you don't steal, and why when caught, you surrender not shoot the owner. You man up and have your day in court.

We see what the thief did. How'd that work out for him?
It's so weird that some people will argue that a 0.001% probability outcome (if that) acts as a deterrent because of the severity of that outcome.
The reality is that law enforcement in the US barely manages a 10% clearance rate on average and that to most people, not just criminals, 90% odds are practically a sure thing.
Deterrence in law enforcement is the failed idea that the only solution to societies' problems is punishment and the threat of punishment.
 
Last edited:

NWRMidnight

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,965
2,571
136
You yourself stated, quote "it looks to be a white, plain jane, double cab, 10 to 15 year old ford truck". If it's a super duty that's 10 y/o it has pats, and if it's 15... that makes it 2008, so it has pats.

It still seems like a math problem... Unless you want to claim it "might' be a very late manufactured 2007, but then the odds of that in combination with all the other astronomical odds... it's still unreasonable to pretend we should consider all that as plausible instead of seeing it for what it is, a simple theft.

You want to make a believable argument but want to assume someone can't recognize the interior of their own vehicle? Fleet vehicle maybe but the daily driver you take to the mall? Just no. After that many years, even the smell of the vehicle would be different, the seat cushion wear, the seat adjustment, the radio stations tuned, scuff marks, etc, etc.

If you want to rely on that nebulous excuse to steal vehicles, have fun with that. It won't stop you from ending up dead, apparently.

Are you a fan of vehicle thieves? It is incomprehensible to even pose your argument unless it's just a desperate excuse to try to argue away gun violence. If that is what it is, I can agree with that, but it needs to center on that argument, not the nonsense that it might be some one in a quadrillion situation because even then, if the accused thief is so innocent, he could have simply waited for police to arrive instead of shooting the owner.

Facts seem to get in the way of your argument.
First off all 2008 models, are released in the fall of 2007, which means they are manufactured in late 2006 and 2007. That means that it was the 2009 models, which where manufactured in 2008, that first got the Pats for heavy duty. It's like the 2024 models will be released and start being sold this fall, and have already been in production for months now. However, I said 10 to 15 years old, before I went and took another look at the body style of the truck, which is why I said it looks to be a 2005, in a separate post. (I could be very wrong about the year, but you are missing the point, so it doesn't really matter) You are trying to argue something that I have explained HAS ALREADY happened to someone I actually know. So you can argue that it's nearly impossible till you your fingers fall off, it doesn't change the fact that it can and has happened, which could have been one of many possibility, when the truck owner approached the people in his truck.

I don't know where you are getting off thinking I am a fan of vehicle thieves.. But a truck or any vehicle isn't worth someone's life. All i did was put up possibilities of what could have happened.. specially since the details are not clear. I even gave a personal experience, that if it played out like it did in this situation in Texas, an innocent man would be dead because the guy that took my car, was repossessing it.. Not because of my lack of payment. Even the facts you speak of, we are learning AFTER the fact, and where not known at the time when the owner of the truck approached the couple in the vehicle.

See that's the problem with people like you who run thru life with blinders on, who can't think past their one view point, can't see the possibility of it being different, because you approve of the outcome. You are ignoring the fact that if any of the different possibilities I presented ended up being true, an innocent man would have been killed. That doesn't mean the facts will support those possibilities, which means you and other's will gloat and say "see, he was the thief, he deserved it"... you are to stupid to understand the problem with that kind of ideology, specially when a truck should never out weight a person's life. People with your mentality is why innocent people die, or get injured all the time.

You See, I don't jump to conclusions until I know all the facts. which is why I can step back and see other possibilities. At the time of the "shoot out" non of those facts where know, it was only assumed the man was the thief by the owner. Yet, you and other's with a hard on because the "suspected" thief was shot and killed, you are dancing around with glee, happy as a lark of the outcome, unable to see past the problem with the truck driver's actions.. Even now, you spend post after post, trying to pick apart any other possible reason the man could have been in that truck, because you don't want to consider that the truck owner could have been in the wrong and could have possibly killed an innocent man if any of them turned out to be true.
 
Last edited:

mindless1

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2001
8,178
1,488
126
First off all 2008 models, are released in the fall of 2007, which means they are manufactured in late 2006 and 2007.

You don't know wtf you're talking about. Complete nonsense.

They are manufactured JIT and have the manufacture date tied to the vin.

The overlap is when they have surplus of last year parts and just keep using those until depleted.

2008 models are manufactured in late 2007, just as I wrote, until late 2008.

What idiot thinks they are making 2008 in 2006? Sorry but your pretend lies don't sway anyone. The model year date is based on the completion date. You really think they sit around on vehicles over a year? Not until the covid related chip shortagates.

Another page of BS doesn't change that. This is the beauty of reality, that it gets the job done despite idiots who pretend to know otherwise.

Sometimes human intervention gets it wrong, as you have done, but on average, when someone is stupid enough to steal then shoot the owner, this is what happens.

If you want to try to argue away reality, have fun with that. I'm not a sucker to your nonsense. You're the only idiot that tries to pretend that we don't know what happened, when all evidence points to knowing what happened.
 
Last edited:

DaaQ

Golden Member
Dec 8, 2018
1,358
966
136
IDK what the last half plus one page says, but it was somewhere around 2003 or 4 where the F150 and Super-Duty diverged, different body styles. I am sure Fleet and Consumer would have different PATS implementations. That being said.

I drive a fleet vehicle, F-350 super duty. The 2015 one I had I could start with my worn 2003 Explorer chip key. The Fleet key was not chipped.

My only real point other than it is possible to jump in an older vehicle and turn the key and start it, is the 150 and super duty diverged around 2000 to 2003 ish I want to sat, I worked in a stamping plant until 12/06. And the reason I know about my personal key is that I out of habit started up the work truck with my 03 Expo key by habit. It wouldn't unlock the doors but would start the ignition.
 
Reactions: Leeea

NWRMidnight

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,965
2,571
136
You don't know wtf you're talking about. Complete nonsense.

They are manufactured JIT and have the manufacture date tied to the vin.

The overlap is when they have surplus of last year parts and just keep using those until depleted.

2008 models are manufactured in late 2007, just as I wrote, until late 2008.

What idiot thinks they are making 2008 in 2006? Sorry but your pretend lies don't sway anyone. The model year date is based on the completion date. You really think they sit around on vehicles over a year? Not until the covid related chip shortagates.

Another page of BS doesn't change that. This is the beauty of reality, that it gets the job done despite idiots who pretend to know otherwise.

Sometimes human intervention gets it wrong, as you have done, but on average, when someone is stupid enough to steal then shoot the owner, this is what happens.

If you want to try to argue away reality, have fun with that. I'm not a sucker to your nonsense. You're the only idiot that tries to pretend that we don't know what happened, when all evidence points to knowing what happened.
Really, nonsense? You are a fucking idiot that doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about. First, I said late 2006. You are talking over 15+ years ago when the auto industry was even less efficient as they are today. But that really isn't why they start building them 2 years ahead of the actual model year as the quote below should enlighten you, as well as the article, if you are man enough to fucking read it. But lets just go to current times.. 2024 vehicles have been being demonstrated, tested, and reviewed by variously car media outlets, since the beginning months of this year, 2023. They could actually start selling them as soon as January 2, of 2023.. a year earlier than their model year, which means... Manufacturing started in 2022 at the latest, 2 years before the model year. It actually takes 2 to 5 years from design to production, where mass production starts 2 years before the model year.


Under Environmental Protection Agency rules, manufacturers can introduce a next-model-year vehicle for public sale as early as January 2 of the preceding calendar year—for example, a 2024-model-year vehicle can be sold starting on January 2, 2023. Conversely, manufacturers can introduce and release a new vehicle for sale as late as December 31 of the corresponding calendar year, so a 2024-model-year vehicle can be introduced up to and including December 31, 2024.
the reasons a vehicle's model year often fails to sync with today's calendar year are fourfold: historical precedent, regulatory rules, marketing considerations, and, as of late, supply-chain issues.


That's just one article on the subject.. How the fuck can they sell car's a year before the model year, if they are not building them in 2 years before the model year? Which has been going on for the past couple decades.

Here, read this as well.. educate yourself you ignorant fuck:

 
Last edited:

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,683
5,419
136
You don't know wtf you're talking about. Complete nonsense.

They are manufactured JIT and have the manufacture date tied to the vin.

The overlap is when they have surplus of last year parts and just keep using those until depleted.

2008 models are manufactured in late 2007, just as I wrote, until late 2008.

What idiot thinks they are making 2008 in 2006? Sorry but your pretend lies don't sway anyone. The model year date is based on the completion date. You really think they sit around on vehicles over a year? Not until the covid related chip shortagates.

Another page of BS doesn't change that. This is the beauty of reality, that it gets the job done despite idiots who pretend to know otherwise.

Sometimes human intervention gets it wrong, as you have done, but on average, when someone is stupid enough to steal then shoot the owner, this is what happens.

If you want to try to argue away reality, have fun with that. I'm not a sucker to your nonsense. You're the only idiot that tries to pretend that we don't know what happened, when all evidence points to knowing what happened.
Actually, NWRMidnight has it right.

Vehicle made in 2006. Final manufacture can then be finished second half of 2007, mainly cosmetic addons, tires, wipers, soft things that do not age well. Then the vechile can be sold as the 2008 model. This is very common in certain model lines.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Pens1566

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,309
2,338
136
All this thin conjecture is nonsense. If we want to do "anything is possible," then perhaps aliens mind-controlled the decedent into stealing a truck.

Go back to the OP/article and the police chief clearly said:
“The bad guy is the one dead, yes,” McManus told reporters. “The driver of the stolen vehicle is deceased, shot by the owner of the stolen vehicle.”

I'm not saying law enforcement doesn't sometimes have it wrong, but the chief is highly unlikely to say what he said if they had doubts.

It's fine to argue that the truck owner opted for self defense/vigilante justice by choosing a risky path. But based on the reporting so far, let's not sit around and pretend the dead guy was innocent.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,534
12,658
146
It's fine to argue that the truck owner opted for self defense/vigilante justice by choosing a risky path. But based on the reporting so far, let's not sit around and pretend the dead guy was innocent.
The trouble with defending human rights is you always find yourself defending scoundrels. He didn't deserve to die for his accused crime, and he deserved to stand trial for what he was accused of.
 
Reactions: repoman0 and Pohemi

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
9,345
12,682
146
The trouble with defending human rights is you always find yourself defending scoundrels. He didn't deserve to die for his accused crime, and he deserved to stand trial for what he was accused of.
While I agree with this, it's worth noting as others have already, that this would have been the (most likely) outcome if the alleged thief hadn't pulled a gun and shot the owner. If he were innocent, would he not have just waited for the cops to arrive instead of risking his own life in a shootout?

I still think the owner should NOT have taken it into his own hands.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,534
12,658
146
While I agree with this, it's worth noting as others have already, that this would have been the (most likely) outcome if the alleged thief hadn't pulled a gun and shot the owner. If he were innocent, would he not have just waited for the cops to arrive instead of risking his own life in a shootout?

I still think the owner should NOT have taken it into his own hands.
And would he have pulled the gun if the accuser hadn't pulled a gun on him? By all accounts his life and the life of his GF were in danger, he was within his rights to defend himself with equal force.
 

eelw

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 1999
9,274
4,566
136
All this thin conjecture is nonsense. If we want to do "anything is possible," then perhaps aliens mind-controlled the decedent into stealing a truck.

Go back to the OP/article and the police chief clearly said:


I'm not saying law enforcement doesn't sometimes have it wrong, but the chief is highly unlikely to say what he said if they had doubts.

It's fine to argue that the truck owner opted for self defense/vigilante justice by choosing a risky path. But based on the reporting so far, let's not sit around and pretend the dead guy was innocent.
Yes some decided to add irrelevant stuff to the discussion. But point still stands in the “vigilante” and “dead” is why many of us our disgusted in the praise the truck owner is getting.
 
Reactions: Pohemi

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
Soft on crime for some is a gift they may apply having tasted bad consequences and said to themselves that's enough of that. Others will see it as a sign of weakness in the law and take advantage of it. Hard on crime will mean that some will kill every possible witness to their crime to keep from being caught and the same when there is an attempt to apprehend them. Others will live a life full of lust and hatred for others but act out only when they sense it's safe to do so.

Harsher punishments are not more effective deterrents unless they are extremely severe. As you point out, a conscientious person need only face a reasonable consequence in order to change their behavior. For such a person, facing an unjustly harsh punishment may actually backfire. What actually matters is consistency in which a consequence is faced.

Punishment and leniency and their balance isn't the real issue in my opinion. The issue I believe is that people commit crimes because they were taught to hate themselves as children and grew up feeling so worthless they believed a productive life is not possible for them. That is what we need to change to move the dial on crime.

I'm not going to hold my breath and believe that we are going to have mass personal enlightenment in society which transcends the need for a criminal justice system. Maybe my attention to it serves as some impediment to my own personal enlightenment. Do you think so?
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,610
3,454
136
Yeah I used the OnStar as a generic, I know there are others and they all have GPS tracking ability. Someone's suggestion that the manufacturer will only supply the info to law enforcement was a good point though.

Might've been an Apple AirTag or something similar (is there anything else like that?) if the truck was a bit older.

I had a Viper remote start/alarm put on my truck and it has a feature where I can track the location from my phone.
 
Reactions: Pohemi

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,309
2,338
136
While I agree with this, it's worth noting as others have already, that this would have been the (most likely) outcome if the alleged thief hadn't pulled a gun and shot the owner. If he were innocent, would he not have just waited for the cops to arrive instead of risking his own life in a shootout?

I still think the owner should NOT have taken it into his own hands.
Exactly, only the OP was cheering the dude's death. A few here are basically saying "play stupid games, win stupid prizes." Not going to shed many tears because the truck thief decided to escalate the situation to a shootout. Most of us would have chosen not to recover our vehicle by gunpoint. I certainly never would, but I sense a part of this story is the normalcy of guns in Texas and similar states.

To be clear, I'm not saying he deserved to die. If the alleged thief wanted to face legal charges and defend himself, he wouldn't have pulled his gun and fired. You can apportion blame however you want to, but this isn't very complicated. If you want to have sympathy for the decedent's family, that's perfectly human.

Comparing this to George Zimmerman and citing "human rights" is pretty laughable IMHO.
 
Reactions: Pohemi

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,654
6,190
126
Harsher punishments are not more effective deterrents unless they are extremely severe. As you point out, a conscientious person need only face a reasonable consequence in order to change their behavior. For such a person, facing an unjustly harsh punishment may actually backfire. What actually matters is consistency in which a consequence is faced.



I'm not going to hold my breath and believe that we are going to have mass personal enlightenment in society which transcends the need for a criminal justice system. Maybe my attention to it serves as some impediment to my own personal enlightenment. Do you think so?
I think your point about consistency is very important and to children especially because the motivation for living an empathetic life that is driven by the love of others is what cruelty and fear destroy early on.

But the kind of parents that can apply that and will are the kind of people, I think, who despite all they may have experienced negatively themselves, have held onto something within them that mitigates against brutality and facilitates conscientious parenting.

As to your question….. I am not qualified to judge your state of enlightenment or make any comparisons to my own. I have no idea. I believe my cats are more enlightened than I am.

All I can do is address you as best as I can, that is to say, to express what is only my opinion. You should keep in mind that I am a nobody:

I also do not believe we are going to experience some mass enlightenment. I think it is the hearts greatest desire, but the last thing we would do because it requires the loss of everything that we so profoundly needed as children to survive what would otherwise have been seemingly endless misery.

We live by breathing tube holding on to enough to survive in the world, some more effectively, some less, based on factors having little to do with our true worth and more a matter of circumstance, or so I believe.

So I would say that, yes, our impediment to enlightenment is vast but connects very directly to our attitude toward punishment and the moral implications it raises. I believe that we were made to behave as children by fear of the loss of the love of those who raised us, but who all had limits as to what they could give.

At the point where the demands of children rub up against the capacity of parents to give, their, the parents, own inner sense of worthlessness is triggered. Then we learn what happens if we need what they cannot give. I think it turns out it was decided it was your fault for asking and you best stop.

You are not a child anymore but you carry a lesson with a message, perhaps, you just never need and those who allow their needs to disregard the needs of others can be constrained only by punishment.

There is a Sufi saying that goes something like this:

New organs of perception develop with need so, seeker, increase your need.

I think the desire to punish is a reflection of self hate. The solution to that I would say is balance in attitude toward the requirements of moral restraint and even more importantly feeling what you feel. Are there feelings somewhere regarding punishment that we deserved what we got?

In the film Red Beard you will see two related things, I think. One is a woman who destroys love because she is too happy and feels she does not deserve it, and what can happen to an enlightened man who must survive in a world where the government does not serve justice. A doctor should never act like that and would not if he hadn’t have to.

Maybe justice just happens sometimes, sort of like grace, out of the blue. I see in that film a profound love of live based on the deepest intimacy with suffering.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |