Alleged thief shot on Okotoks property

[Big Racks]

Just read this, anybody else see it? Is it new news or did Apple spam my feed with old news? Homeowner in custody.

[Big Racks]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...pect-1.4551008

Guess it is new.

[Rustynail21]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...pect-1.4551008

[CaberTosser]

I would prefer if the RCMP simply noted that judicious marksmanship is appreciated!

If they're up at 5:30 and are rifling through other peoples vehicles then that's their primary means of support, most likely for their drug habits. If they've been caught and released more than 4 times for the same crime then they ought not to be doing that and reminders such as this set great precedent. Thieves should start to expect things such as this, or at the very least Louisville Slugger welcoming committee's.

The courts have fallen flat on their faces with the current catch & release program for recidivists, how do they really expect the public to react when they're not fulfilling their duties? The sad irony is that they'll come down harder on decent people defending themselves than they ever have on the actual criminals.

[NinjaHunter]

"Police are cautioning property owners to call them rather than "pursue or engage with suspicious individuals."

pretty much means "You're not allowed to defend yourself! Take the pounding until we take our sweet time there! (if we ever get there)"

[Newview01]

You have got to be kidding me.

The police have prioritized charging people defending their property over actual criminals.

How has it come to this?

Is there a GoFundMe? There should be.

[R3illy]

Good. If a property owner is going to ignore our laws they deserve to be charged... lets see how this plays out. Whos starting the go fund me?? Or is that only for specific cases.

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by Newview01

You have got to be kidding me.

The police have prioritized charging people defending their property over actual criminals.

How has it come to this?

Is there a GoFundMe? There should be.

Im sorry but do you not know the laws we all abide by with our guns?

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Good. If a property owner is going to ignore our laws they deserve to be charged... lets see how this plays out. Whos starting the go fund me?? Or is that only for specific cases.

Ignore this trolls comments he sides with criminals and anti gun boneheads for attention only, nothing more. IGNORE HIM.

[Zuludog]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

I would prefer if the RCMP simply noted that judicious marksmanship is appreciated!

If they're up at 5:30 and are rifling through other peoples vehicles then that's their primary means of support, most likely for their drug habits. If they've been caught and released more than 4 times for the same crime then they ought not to be doing that and reminders such as this set great precedent. Thieves should start to expect things such as this, or at the very least Louisville Slugger welcoming committee's.

The courts have fallen flat on their faces with the current catch & release program for recidivists, how do they really expect the public to react when they're not fulfilling their duties? The sad irony is that they'll come down harder on decent people defending themselves than they ever have on the actual criminals.

Exactly!!

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Ignore this trolls comments he sides with criminals and anti gun boneheads for attention only, nothing more. IGNORE HIM.

Theres lots of laws i dont agree with does that mean i should be able to do as i please just because i want to? Some of us can respect the laws..

What are the odds the shooter is known around here? My guess not very likely.

[trophybook]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Theres lots of laws i dont agree with does that mean i should be able to do as i please just because i want to? Some of us can respect the laws..

What are the odds the shooter is known around here? My guess not very likely.

Didn't you get banned a couple months ago?

[New Hunter Okotoks]

The article said that the Police were on scene in minutes, it didn't say how many minutes though. One thing is absolutely for certain though, Rural Crime is on the rise and the criminals know that even if they do get caught, the penalty will be very minimal. For criminals right now in Canada who intend on stealing from Rural property owners, the Risk vs. Reward ration is in their favor. Rural property owners can often have large dollar items that can be moved on the black market very easy.

I really hope not, but my guess is that the orders will come down to: "set an example" of the Property Owner so that other people don't think of doing the same. Hopefully the Property Owner thought he saw a gun in the guy's hand
and feared for his life.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by New Hunter Okotoks

The article said that the Police were on scene in minutes, it didn't say how many minutes though. One thing is absolutely for certain though, Rural Crime is on the rise and the criminals know that even if they do get caught, the penalty will be very minimal. For criminals right now in Canada who intend on stealing from Rural property owners, the Risk vs. Reward ration is in their favor. Rural property owners can often have large dollar items that can be moved on the black market very easy.

I really hope not, but my guess is that the orders will come down to: "set an example" of the Property Owner so that other people don't think of doing the same. Hopefully the Property Owner thought he saw a gun in the guy's hand
and feared for his life.

It would be more appropriate to make an example of the thieves, instead of having the police and the courts waste their time, and the thieves ending up with a slap on the wrist. If this rural crime keeps up, the courts may have a tough time finding a jury that will convict a property owner. Perhaps that is what needs to happen, what can the courts do if the jury finds the property owner not guilty every tiime? It would certainly make the criminals think twice if the courts were no longer able to protect them.

[New Hunter Okotoks]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

It would be more appropriate to make an example of the thieves, instead of having the police and the courts waste their time, and the thieves ending up with a slap on the wrist. If this rural crime keeps up, the courts may have a tough time finding a jury that will convict a property owner. Perhaps that is what needs to happen, what can the courts do if the jury finds the property owner not guilty every tiime? It would certainly make the criminals think twice if the courts were no longer able to protect them.

Completely agree. In that news article they said that he was in jail while they figured out what charges they are going to lay against him. Interesting, I didn't read anything about the thief going to jail once treated at the Hospital.

[zabbo]

Obviously the property owner needs a little more time at the range. The shot in the arm could have been a little more to the center and more speed would have got the second varmint!

[.257Weatherby]

Originally Posted by NinjaHunter

"Police are cautioning property owners to call them rather than "pursue or engage with suspicious individuals."

pretty much means "You're not allowed to defend yourself! Take the pounding until we take our sweet time there! (if we ever get there)"

How is shooting someone running away from you 'Defending' yourself ?

As per the story.
The guy found someone ( 2 peoples ) rummaging through his car and he fired upon them while they where: 1) rummaging inside his vehicle for Md Dees Coffee stamps.
2) looking for their lost puppy.
3) threatening the Land Owner with Grave Physical Violence with holding
a Weapon ?

Don't get me wrong, I will defend myself and my family , but the bad guys will not be detained running away from the situation.
Rob

[Norwest Alta]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

It would be more appropriate to make an example of the thieves, instead of having the police and the courts waste their time, and the thieves ending up with a slap on the wrist. If this rural crime keeps up, the courts may have a tough time finding a jury that will convict a property owner. Perhaps that is what needs to happen, what can the courts do if the jury finds the property owner not guilty every tiime? It would certainly make the criminals think twice if the courts were no longer able to protect them.

Agree but I'm not so sure that the criminal element will receive the message. Unfortunately they are born everyday and I think that things aren't going to change no matter how many are shot.

[Norwest Alta]

Originally Posted by .257Weatherby

How is shooting someone running away from you 'Defending' yourself ?

As per the story.
The guy found someone ( 2 peoples ) rummaging through his car and he fired upon them while they where: 1) rummaging inside his vehicle for Md Dees Coffee stamps.
2) looking for their lost puppy.
3) threatening the Land Owner with Grave Physical Violence with holding
a Weapon ?

Don't get me wrong, I will defend myself and my family , but the bad guys will not be detained running away from the situation.
Rob

Maybe he was shot prior to running away. Don't know I wasn't there but I do believe it's time Joe public takes a stand and stops being a victim.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Good. If a property owner is going to ignore our laws they deserve to be charged... lets see how this plays out. Whos starting the go fund me?? Or is that only for specific cases.

So in this case do you believe that the property owner deserves charges ahead of the thief?

[.257Weatherby]

Originally Posted by Norwest Alta

Maybe he was shot prior to running away. Don't know I wasn't there but I do believe it's time Joe public takes a stand and stops being a victim.

Then again maybe the the alleged thief was shot by his buddy who was scared when confronted?

I too was not there and the news reports credibility isn't what it should be either.

I'm not going to stick my foot or risk sticking it in my mouth with further comment, but things have to change and shooting someone in the back center of mass for simple theft is a bit over kill in my books.

Thats just me though and my thoughts are what was already said in previous comments and threads.

Best Regards,
Rob

[Norwest Alta]

Originally Posted by .257Weatherby

Then again maybe the the alleged thief was shot by his buddy who was scared when confronted?

I too was not there and the news reports credibility isn't what it should be either.

I'm not going to stick my foot or risk sticking it in my mouth with further comment, but things have to change and shooting someone in the back center of mass for simple theft is a bit over kill in my books.

Thats just me though and my thoughts are what was already said in previous comments and threads.

Best Regards,
Rob

After having a very close family member being a victim of a home invasion I'm all for center of mass and believe a good defence is a better offence. Sometimes it is to late to wait for the criminal to show his hand.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by .257Weatherby

Then again maybe the the alleged thief was shot by his buddy who was scared when confronted?

I too was not there and the news reports credibility isn't what it should be either.

I'm not going to stick my foot or risk sticking it in my mouth with further comment, but things have to change and shooting someone in the back center of mass for simple theft is a bit over kill in my books.

Thats just me though and my thoughts are what was already said in previous comments and threads.

Best Regards,
Rob

Was the suspect shot in the back or was he facing the shooter? Was he running away, or was he coming at the property owner? Without more details, we can only speculate. I can say though, that after the 79 year old was recently shot at by a thief, while in his own home, property owners may have a good reason to feel threatened, and this type of thing is likely going to happen more and more often.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

I would prefer if the RCMP simply noted that judicious marksmanship is appreciated!

If they're up at 5:30 and are rifling through other peoples vehicles then that's their primary means of support, most likely for their drug habits. If they've been caught and released more than 4 times for the same crime then they ought not to be doing that and reminders such as this set great precedent. Thieves should start to expect things such as this, or at the very least Louisville Slugger welcoming committee's.

The courts have fallen flat on their faces with the current catch & release program for recidivists, how do they really expect the public to react when they're not fulfilling their duties? The sad irony is that they'll come down harder on decent people defending themselves than they ever have on the actual criminals.

Exactly....the fix chop off the hand of a thief....second offence....hang'em....if they are fortunate to get caught by the police if not then the owner of the property has the right to protect thier property with what ever means they want and will not be prosecuted for doing so.
Criminal acts should be immediate lost of rights and treated as a rogue animal.

[Hunter guy]

Originally Posted by Newview01

You have got to be kidding me.

The police have prioritized charging people defending their property over actual criminals.

How has it come to this?

Is there a GoFundMe? There should be.

Our prime minister is defending the thief over the person defending his stuff!!

[vcmm]

Unfortunately this landowner is going to pay for it. The turd and others lost last time. They are going to set an example of him.

[Hunter guy]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Exactly....the fix chop off the hand of a thief....second offence....hang'em....if they are fortunate to get caught by the police if not then the owner of the property has the right to protect thier property with what ever means they want and will not be prosecuted for doing so.
Criminal acts should be immediate lost of rights and treated as a rogue animal.

X2, I thought I was the only one on here with that kind of thinking.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by vcmm

Unfortunately this landowner is going to pay for it. The turd and others lost last time. They are going to set an example of him.

Can you imagine the reaction if the jury refuses to find him guilty?

[Newellknik]

Remember this is gun grab country ....not much love for the horsemen
around here . Alleged what , that is definitely CBC commie crap ...
We all know what the cure is for any trespass crime .... That's right
a good wrist slapping ....bring back the paddle !
I believe that is the only cure taking into account our current judicial
system .

[Grizzly Adams]

Police are cautioning property owners to call them rather than "pursue or engage with suspicious individuals."

Yeah, Right. It's inevitable that there are going to be more of these. They tell me about the only way to get prompt response is to inform the cops you have a gun and will shoot if the situation in your judgement, demands it. Let them play that tape in court.

Grizz