Posted on 01/19/2023 3:25:44 PM PST by grundle
So did he also get charged for grand auto theft as well?
Deceptive, no poorly written
With all due respect, this is the silliest thing I have seen in some time. You can literally justify killing anyone at any time using this logic. "Anyone could have been doing anything at any time. So I shot them."
Justifiable defense of property > IMO.
We agree, but I believe there should be a defense of property statute.
If I’m making what used to be house payments on a car for five or
six years, I’m not going to smile and wave good-bye as some vile
sub-human starts to drive off in it.
Chasing him as he drives off. And then shooting him in the act,
good shoot > IMO.
To heck with the legislation governing such matters.
Right, the way it was explained to me, the system they had was harsh, but widely considered fair.
The first thing to realize, and this is important, they didn’t have a way to lock anything up. Your house, your cabin, barn, wagon, equipment, livestock, tools, everything. The West is wide open, it was even more so back then. There was no formal law enforcement available, some areas weren’t even states, just territories.
There was no 911, there were no good roads, it took weeks to mail a letter. You can see where this was going, right? Hanging someone for stealing a horse sounds like overkill, but they didn’t have the luxury of doing anything else. Life was pretty sketchy without the added load of rustlers and bank robbers and there was no ID or fingerprinting or even photographs for most people.
While I can’t speak authoritatively because I wasn’t there, even in a rough and ready mining town, one either tread very very carefully in the course of day to day business and activities, or ended up getting strung up. Even towns with a Sheriff, would have been overwhelmed if a necktie party was organized. Just pray that there isn’t a case of mistaken identity, things like that.
Well, no. If you stole a man's horse in the Old West, he might die in the desert before he could walk to civilization. Thus, stealing his transport was sometimes the equivalent of murder. He couldn't just as easily call for an Uber.
Whatever the justification for defending your car with force, it's not equivalent to stealing a horse in the Old West.
I worked in St Joseph, MO when that happened. I had a buddy whose attorney was Richard McFadden who was officed in Southern Platte County at the time. I met the trooper that was trying to rein him in with little success and knew people in that area around Skidmore. When he was killed there was quiet satisfaction but no back slapping — no one was happy that it had to be done with a killing.
His attorney was well connected to all the judges and prosecutors in NW Missouri and was a smart, wiley fixer. My buddy that used him was a truck driver and described him as the rare attorney that could make a DUI just disappear.
If you consider that both the shooter and the shootee both consider the value of the car was worth more that more than the shootee’s life. The shootee knew he was risking his life to steal the car. And it turns out that it was.
The shooter converted his time (his life) for money to purchase the car and he was confronted with having to convert more of his life to acquire another car. felt his property was worth more than the shootee life.
All in all, I believe that the shooter and the shootee made a reasonable agreement, and it was settled, which would be considered an amicable way.
Shootee paid with his life. He thought it was worth the risk.
No police, no investigation, no trial, no appeals, no prison time or cost. The shooter has saved, until this idiocy of being arrested, the state of MO a lot of money.
“Missouri law states that a person can use deadly force for self-defense but not to protect one’s property.”
When I lived in Texas I went to a firearm self defense seminar held by an expert attorney to learn what you could and could not do in such situations. One of the things I learned was that it was legal to shoot to kill someone who was stealing ANYTHING on your property. Someone asked if that was the case if someone was stealing the Sunday paper off your front porch? The answer was yes. That was several decades ago so things may have changed.
I Guess MO has been overrun with californicators and Soros acolytes...
As I read the story, the thief tried and failed to steal Kress’s car. Kress ran after the thief and shot and killed him. If he’s running away from you, he’s no longer a threat and you shoot under those circumstances, you’re likely have trouble with the law. Had Kress shot him during a struggle for the car, he’d likely be OK.
But for his own criminal actions, Lopez would still be living.
I would throw a monkey wrench into the system if I were to be a juror on this case.
Trying to get away with the ‘criminal mischief at night’ in TX which I believe you’re talking about is a very, very risky thing. Depends on where you are. It’s intentionally vague so if the cops/judge/jury don’t like you, not much can be done to save you.
Much of Texas criminal law is that way.
Yes, it is, under current laws.
It should not be. Time to change the laws.
That is a perfectly reasonable question.
If we are going to change the laws, I would suggest one minute as the time limit.
We do need to change the laws. What we are doing now protects criminals and punishes victims.
Maybe Lopez was going to use Kress’s car to kill someone.
If the people of Missouri (or any other State) want to elect representatives who make it legal for citizens to shoot a fleeing felon in the back, they are of course free to do so.
Yes it does matter. You attempt to steal and or kill my family...You are dead.
What's your time limit for shooting at someone who tried and failed to steal your property? Ten seconds? Ten minutes? What if the thief got away and you saw him the next day? Would you shoot him then?
A life time.
I certainly don't shed a tear for the dead criminal, but if the facts are what this article say they are, this is murder.
Missouri law is wrong.
He was running away from the car. Or so the story makes it seem that was the case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.