Skip to comments.
Family of electrocuted thief gets $75,000
Chicago Sun-Times ^
| 2-25-2003
| DAN ROZEK
Posted on 02/25/2003 7:16:34 AM PST by Cagey
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
To: Cagey
Winters contends there was little evidence linking Harris to the earlier break-ins and said it wasn't clear why Harris was entering the bar through the window around 2 a.m. "We're never going to know Larry's intent..." Probably just looking to borrow a flashlight so he could help an elderly woman across the street.
And, firefighters don't look for alarm signs when answering a call.
Um... If they have any sense, they do.
21
posted on
02/25/2003 7:43:50 AM PST
by
Sloth
(I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!)
To: goldstategop
The owner of this bar is lucky he's not going to jail... creation of a "Man Trap" even if it is clearly labeled is a felony criminal offense. The owner of this bar is getting off easy.
To: Cagey
"Jurors weren't allowed to be told that Harris was drunk and on cocaine, nor that he had served time in prison for two burglary convictions."
this is always tough. the last jury I was on a man was on trial for agg. assualt w/deadly weapon. the defense was decent utilizing self defense if I recall correctly. After the trial the judge told us how the guy had a rap sheet a mile long that included assault. what was presented to us as an isolated incident turned out to be par for the course.
To: tesshu
By law its considered a TRAP even if its labeled. If it wasn't illegal don't you think there would be products on the market that used electrocution as a security device for auto theft or home invasion? The reason this guy had to rig his own, is because he couldn't buy one on the market, because they are illegal and are considered Man Traps... even if you put up warning signs.
To: SquirrelKing
One of the first thing that happens in a fire is that the power goes out. Are you saying that someone 'pulls the meter'?
THAT IS the *only* way to be safe ...
25
posted on
02/25/2003 7:48:30 AM PST
by
_Jim
(//NASA has a better safety record than NASCAR\\)
To: SquirrelKing; ECM
I was a firefighter for close to 10 years and it's not true that the electricity is always out during a fire.
And when pulling up to the scene of a fire, firefighters don't walk around the building in the dark with flashlights reading signs. The scene is assesed and if an entry is advisable, firefighters will enter the building. Who knows what these warning signs looked like? They could have been written on a cocktail napkin.
26
posted on
02/25/2003 7:49:31 AM PST
by
Cagey
To: Cagey
The verdict sends a message that property owners can't use lethal security systems to defend their homes and businesses, so if you want to pilpher, steal, break in, threaten, go ahead because harm comming to an out and out criminal with no respect for humans or their property won't be tolerated.
27
posted on
02/25/2003 7:50:12 AM PST
by
EGPWS
To: scholar
Say Scholar??
It's
Chicago.
Again.
Wheels are wobblin' real good, now.
...they're just about off completely, kid.
28
posted on
02/25/2003 7:52:12 AM PST
by
Landru
To: Cagey; ECM
Cagey:
"...not true..." Just checked and you're right. Mainly what got Pappy riled was TV shows and movies where firefighters dashed from room to room making meaningful eye contact with one another.
ECM: 'pulls the meter'
SOP with both departments.
29
posted on
02/25/2003 7:56:00 AM PST
by
SquirrelKing
(Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public. - H. L. Mencken)
Comment #30 Removed by Moderator
To: Lee Heggy
99% of the time, an armed guard serves as deterrent, because of what happens 1% of the time. No one has to be shot.
Booby traps are different.
To: HamiltonJay
"The reason this guy had to rig his own, is because he couldn't buy one on the market, because they are illegal and are considered Man Traps... even if you put up warning signs."I don't dispute the traps being illegal as our various government agencies have passed many laws designed at protecting the criminal and the victim can just suck wind.
The laws vary from state to state as to what type of force, how much force, what direction the piece of human debris was headed when the victim used force etc. etc.
Governments tend to be more trouble then they are worth. They tell us they only LEOs may use force but they know fully well that LEOs are a reactive solution at best and only in rare occasions can LEOs be pro-active in preventing crime. Then the same pieces of communist s#$% tell us we cannot protect ourselves.
Time has long passed when we should have used our 2nd Amendment rights to bring our government under control and now I believe it is too late. We have lost the protection of our constitution and the government is free to impose any unconstitutional law it can sneak past the less than supreme (political) court.
To: You Dirty Rats
Lethal security systems are flat-out wrong. No, stealing is "flat-out wrong." My life is a stretch of time from point A to point B. I willingly exchange a portion of that time in labor to create goods. Anyone trying to lay claim to the goods I have created is trying to lay claim to a portion of my labor, indeed a portion of my life. He can go straight to hell...
If he wants me to respect his rights to life, liberty, and property he'd best start by respecting mine. Once he takes the gloves off, the gloves are off...
To: Texas_Jarhead
"Jurors weren't allowed to be told that Harris was drunk and on cocaine, nor that he had served time in prison for two burglary convictions."The last jury i sat on was weighing the case of a man who was found to be in possession of a few grains of cocaine at a car wash. After careful deliberation, we came back with a guilty verdict. After the trial was over, the judge came in the jury room and told us that the defendant had numerous priors and had the tracks in the arms to prove current use. We all breathed a sigh of relief, as none of us were told anything prior to our decision
To: Wurlitzer
They tell us they only LEOs may use forceNot true. You are allowed the use of 'force' in self defense. Here in the great state of Tejas you are allowed to shoot burglars should they enter your dweling ...
35
posted on
02/25/2003 8:15:12 AM PST
by
_Jim
(//NASA has a better safety record than NASCAR\\)
To: Cagey
"..There comes a time in the history of every people when they become so pathologically soft and tender that they actually side with those elements of their society that harms them i.e. criminals..."-A Great Historian 1888
36
posted on
02/25/2003 8:18:41 AM PST
by
AEMILIUS PAULUS
(Further, the statement assumed)
To: Cagey
"Family of electrocuted thief gets $75,000""The verdict sends a message that property owners can't use lethal security systems to defend their homes and businesses, said John Winters, the Chicago lawyer who represented Harris' mother and brother in the civil case."
[Shaking my head] American lawyers prove day after day that Shakespeare was right. Please, please Freepers, vote for Republicans at all levels, from the Presidency down to the dog catcher, until we rid the vermin we call lawyers from our judicial system through tort reform.
37
posted on
02/25/2003 8:23:25 AM PST
by
tom h
To: Cagey
There is a case for penalizing the setting of dumb "booby traps", because they could endanger legitimate emergency entries (e.g. the fire department).
However, the fact that this crook or his survivors got one red cent is an outrageous travesty.
38
posted on
02/25/2003 8:27:35 AM PST
by
steve-b
To: Cagey
Rights to private property are vanishing into the mists of time. Our society is too affluent when thieves are not dealt with by the police powers of the state and criminals' wasted, predatory lives are valued more than owners' rights of self-defense of life and earned property.
Once we're under the Sharia, such matters will be handled with Devine justice as there will no bar owners remaining.
To: Lee Heggy
"property isn't worth a human life,"
This is true if there are traps set but if there is an armed guard or home owner with a shotgun does it still apply? Depending on the jurisdiction, yes. The general rule is that property is not worth a human life. You can use deadly force only if the perp is threatening the safety of you or another, but some states, notably Texas, have differing baseline rules. The issue is whether the existence of the bad guy in your home can safely be assumed to be a threat to safety, and not just property. Different states (and courts, and legislatures) have different opinions on the answer, and rule accordingly.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson