Huh? You mean, if thieves know their health and life are in danger when stealing, it will have no effect on the theft rates?
Really? So, how do you explain that theft happens a lot less in areas/cities/states where people are allowed to conceal and open carry? In other words, when faced with a threat of injuring or killing themselves, thieves become a lot less encouraged to steal. Who would have thought... but, I guess, there is no logic... smh
In what state is the use of deadly force justified for unarmed thieves stealing an iPhone?
Easy... I'm walking down the street, minding my own business when some miscreant points a knife at me and demands my iPhone. Should I give him the iPhone, and place my trust and hope that this degenerate will spare my life, or since my life is being threatened... then any state will allow me to do whatever it takes to defend my life. If I happen to reside in a that allows a concealed firearm, well it's a no-brainer than.
Buy go right ahead and continue pushing the best defense is to be a victim.
And the OP poster is correct... it has been PROVEN that jurisdictions with conceal and open-carry, heck even those that are very pro-2nd amendment, crime is nowhere near as bad. All one needs to do is look at Detroit with some of the most restrictive gun-control laws in the country to realize that the ones doing all the shooting apparently don't care about gun laws, and know with relative safety that they can rob someone's house without fear of the homeowner brandishing a firearm since the law only strips guns from law-abiding people.
The scenario you’ve described with the armed robber knife is clearly a case where deadly force is fully justified in every state. In the Apple Store scenario, if the people committing the robbery had threatened the people in the store with bodily harm, deadly force may be justified by those who were directly threatened and by those directly witnessing the threat, depending on the state, and even if the robbers were not armed. I have no issues at all with CCW and trust that the vast majority of those who have such permits are sensible and knowledgeable in the proper use of deadly force.
Since this discussion is no longer in the purview of Apple related topics that add value to AppleInsider I apologize for adding too much to the discussion.
Huh? You mean, if thieves know their health and life are in danger when stealing, it will have no effect on the theft rates?
Really? So, how do you explain that theft happens a lot less in areas/cities/states where people are allowed to conceal and open carry? In other words, when faced with a threat of injuring or killing themselves, thieves become a lot less encouraged to steal. Who would have thought... but, I guess, there is no logic... smh
In what state is the use of deadly force justified for unarmed thieves stealing an iPhone?
Deadly force is not justified if you shoot a thief for simply stealing... But you can try arresting those thieving m___ons. And if they start attacking you for that, because you decided to step in, that is where deadly force application will be justified. You are in the clear because you were trying to prevent a crime from happening, and later, were defending your life, which is also legal.
And no, you did not provoke their attack, because everything you did was legal and justified.
But I like your stance and attention to the most important matter at hand, which is for you - criminals have more rights than normal citizens. That is kinda sad, if you consider who pays and for whom, and who is the producer vs who is the consumer, but I guess, I am probably expecting too much...
Huh? You mean, if thieves know their health and life are in danger when stealing, it will have no effect on the theft rates?
Really? So, how do you explain that theft happens a lot less in areas/cities/states where people are allowed to conceal and open carry? In other words, when faced with a threat of injuring or killing themselves, thieves become a lot less encouraged to steal. Who would have thought... but, I guess, there is no logic... smh
In what state is the use of deadly force justified for unarmed thieves stealing an iPhone?
All one needs to do is look at Detroit with some of the most restrictive gun-control laws in the country to realize that the ones doing all the shooting apparently don't care about gun laws, and know with relative safety that they can rob someone's house without fear of the homeowner brandishing a firearm since the law only strips guns from law-abiding people.
Ahh, but they will tell you that that is because every other state does not have such restrictive laws, which jeopardizes Detroit's best efforts...which is of course nonsensical, sinceit is not clear at all why guns from the rest of gun-allowed zones in america will end up precisely in the most gun-restricted zones.... unless, you factor in the group who ends up using such guns, but that is by the by.
Maybe Apple should develop a small but very loud piezo-electric siren tag that can be affixed to store model units, with geofencing capability. You run out of the store with a few iPhones and they begin loudly screeching, for about 6 hours. Affixed such that the iPhones/iPads/Macs they are affixed to would be damaged in any attempt to remove them. Apple could then also market such tags to other high-end goods retailers.
In the Apple stores in NYC, I believe at least some of the display models do have some kind of alarm system because I remember sales people having to come over to the table to disarm them whenever they went off. But the alarm itself is not attached to the device, but the table. But I don't see how Apple can't shut down a device the first time it's connected to the internet. And it seems to me that Macs could be locked down to the table. In NYC (and I suppose elsewhere), car radio theft used to be rampant (especially after market radios) - I lost a few myself. But once they started coding radios so that you need to plug in a code if power was cut to the radio, radio theft pretty much ended.
I don't like the look of a big, burly security guard standing at the entrance of retail stores (it's uninviting), but maybe it's time at least in the areas that have experienced such robberies.
I like Apple, but I don't think I would risk myself to tackle a thief in a retail environment. Those people deserve something special from Apple, IMO.
Security guards aren’t uncommon in high-value retail locations and Apple is nothing if not high-value.
Comments
Since this discussion is no longer in the purview of Apple related topics that add value to AppleInsider I apologize for adding too much to the discussion.
Ahh, but they will tell you that that is because every other state does not have such restrictive laws, which jeopardizes Detroit's best efforts...which is of course nonsensical, sinceit is not clear at all why guns from the rest of gun-allowed zones in america will end up precisely in the most gun-restricted zones.... unless, you factor in the group who ends up using such guns, but that is by the by.