Finally!

[OldWiseGuy]

How is that even related?

You're kidding, right?

 

[hollyda]

So bank employees are never killed by robbers?

Want to show me where I said that?

 

[morningstar2651]

You're kidding, right?

No. I don't see a connection there. Can you explain it?

 

[quatona]

It would be helpful if you would consider what I actually said rather than reinterpreting my comments into a strawman arguement.

The main thrust of my comment was the frequent unprovoked and thus unpredictable deadly violence inflicted on robbery victims. Note that my 'excuse' comment was in parenthesis and aimed at young black men.

Well, here´s your post:

Have you ever heard of criminals (mostly young black men) using a 'robbery' as an excuse to shoot someone. Happens all the time. Also Jacksonville, Fl has a major crime problem. That's why this guy was armed. He walked in on the robbery and was told by the clerk what was happening. I'm guessing (got that JGG?) that he said to himself, "I'm not going to die today."

Just so everyone can check what you said.

That this happens 'all the time', refers to the frequency, not the number of such incidents.

Not sure what the significant difference would be. Care to explain?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Want to show me where I said that?

You seemed to rule out the possibility.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No. I don't see a connection there. Can you explain it?

'Pick 'em out, knock 'em out' is violence for the sake of violence alone. No motive or provocation.

Many robbers steal a few dollars and maybe some liquor and cigarettes, then kill the clerk. Ya gotta wonder.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Not sure what the significant difference would be. Care to explain?

Sure. If the event happened just once a week somewhere in the country it would validate my assertion, although it would be statistically insignificant.

 

[quatona]

Sure. If the event happened just once a week somewhere in the country it would validate my assertion, although it would be statistically insignificant.

So this would be frequent as opposed to high in number?
And it would validate the assertion that it "happens all the time" although being statistically insignificant?

What however I have been asking for and which would validate your assertion (which was meant to substantiate your claim there was a significant risk of being shot in spite of handing out the money): a statistic that showed the percentage of all robberies that were committed as an "excuse for murder".

 

[hollyda]

You seemed to rule out the possibility.

Where, exactly? I honestly have no idea how you came to this conclusion. I'll even provide the quote.

I worked for a bank for two years. We discussed robbery scenarios all the time. The most prevalent factor that kept coming up was most average robbers wanted to be in and out, and the few armed robberies that occur around town (and we do get quite a few) have done nothing but support that hypothesis.

What I said was in our bank-robbery discussions, it was established the average robber wants to be in and out. And those robberies that have occurred around town seem to be in accordance with what was discussed in robbery-prevention and preparation.

Where did I rule out the possibility?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Where, exactly? I honestly have no idea how you came to this conclusion. I'll even provide the quote.



What I said was in our bank-robbery discussions, it was established the average robber wants to be in and out. And those robberies that have occurred around town seem to be in accordance with what was discussed in robbery-prevention and preparation.

Where did I rule out the possibility?

Your limited subjective experience and the fact that you are arguing against my assertion, which is simply this: When confronted with an armed robber, it is a life-threatening situation, regardless of the robber's reassurance.

I'll bet that your training as a bank employee addressed the very real possibility that someone could be injured or killed. That no one was during your employment doesn't invalidate that possibility.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

So this would be frequent as opposed to high in number?
And it would validate the assertion that it "happens all the time" although being statistically insignificant?

What however I have been asking for and which would validate your assertion (which was meant to substantiate your claim there was a significant risk of being shot in spite of handing out the money): a statistic that showed the percentage of all robberies that were committed as an "excuse for murder".

I think you're stumblng over the phrase 'happens all the time', which is of course a figure of speech, meaning that the event happens with enough frequency that the phrase can properly be use in that regard, and that it is a characteristic of many robberies involving murder.

Remember that the number of poison mushrooms is statistically insignificant compared to the edible ones, however................

 

[hollyda]

Your limited subjective experience and the fact that you are arguing against my assertion, which is simply this: When confronted with an armed robber, it is a life-threatening situation, regardless of the robber's reassurance.

I'll bet that your training as a bank employee addressed the very real possibility that someone could be injured or killed.

I freely admit my experience is limited -- and my examples were limited to my hometown, so I didn't try to disguise this. Still, my experience is no more or less subjective than yours. I am merely offering what instructions were given to someone who worked in an industry particularly well-known for being a robbery target. And my counter assertion would be just because a situation is life-threatening doesn't mean deadly force should be applauded. I certainly don't fault the man in this particular story who shot the robber, but the reaction the perpetrator's death has garnered is rather troubling.

Again, yes, my training itself is subjective. And while we acknowledged the possibility of someone being hurt or killed, our instructions relied on keeping people safe...which included getting the robber off premises ASAP.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I freely admit my experience is limited -- and my examples were limited to my hometown, so I didn't try to disguise this. Still, my experience is no more or less subjective than yours. I am merely offering what instructions were given to someone who worked in an industry particularly well-known for being a robbery target. And my counter assertion would be just because a situation is life-threatening doesn't mean deadly force should be applauded. I certainly don't fault the man in this particular story who shot the robber, but the reaction the perpetrator's death has garnered is rather troubling.

Again, yes, my training itself is subjective. And while we acknowledged the possibility of someone being hurt or killed, our instructions relied on keeping people safe...which included getting the robber off premises ASAP.

I have no problem with your experience or position on the matter, but, a bank robbery in broad daylight is going to be safer for you than a robbery of a liquor store in a bad neighborhood late in the evening is for that clerk.

And the 'applause' isn't for the death of the robber, it's for the justice of the whole event. What liberals and athiests don't understand is that if you don't 'take out' the (human) trash eventually you will be buried in it. We are close to that. This event give us at least one breathe of breathing room.

This should be reassuring to everyone. We have these crime related problems in our society:

Too many repeat offenders.

Overloaded court system.

Overcrowded prisons.

This brave fellow solved all three with just two bullets.

But wait, there's more.

Every knowledgable Christian (those who disagree with me aren't) believes in the resurrection. When this robber comes up Jesus might say to him, "Well, did you learn anything back there?" He'll have his chance to repent and go into the kingdom, along with his brave killer.

Hope this helps.

 

[hollyda]

I have no problem with your experience or position on the matter, but, a bank robbery in broad daylight is going to be safer for you than a robbery of a liquor store in a bad neighborhood late in the evening is for that clerk.

I would agree. I just think the same principle applies. Get the robber off premises as soon as you can.

Like I said, I don't have any problem with the man in this story reacting to what he perceived to be a very real threat. Still, I think a fatality could have been avoided.

 

[quatona]

I think you're stumblng over the phrase 'happens all the time', which is of course a figure of speech, meaning that the event happens with enough frequency that the phrase can properly be use in that regard, and that it is a characteristic of many robberies involving murder.

In order to tell whether it´s "enough" or "many" knowledge of the figures would be a prerequisite.

Remember that the number of poison mushrooms is statistically insignificant compared to the edible ones, however................

So?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I would agree. I just think the same principle applies. Get the robber off premises as soon as you can.

Like I said, I don't have any problem with the man in this story reacting to what he perceived to be a very real threat. Still, I think a fatality could have been avoided.

I added more stuff to this last post. You should read it again.

 

[hollyda]

I added more stuff to this last post. You should read it again.

This should be reassuring to everyone. We have these crime related problems in our society:

Too many repeat offenders.

Overloaded court system.

Overcrowned prisons.

This brave fellow solved all three with just two bullets.

And a man is dead now, so...hurrah?

I can't get behind that. I'm rather horrified anyone could.

 

[morningstar2651]

I have no problem with your experience or position on the matter, but, a bank robbery in broad daylight is going to be safer for you than a robbery of a liquor store in a bad neighborhood late in the evening is for that clerk.

And the 'applause' isn't for the death of the robber, it's for the justice of the whole event. What liberals and athiests don't understand is that if you don't 'take out' the (human) trash eventually you will be buried in it. We are close to that. This event give us at least one breathe of breathing room.

This should be reassuring to everyone. We have these crime related problems in our society:

Too many repeat offenders.

Overloaded court system.

Overcrowned prisons.

This brave fellow solved all three with just two bullets.

But wait, there's more.

Every knowledgable Christian (those who disagree with me aren't) believes in the resurrection. When this robber comes up Jesus might say to him, "Well, did you learn anything back there?" He'll have his chance to repent and go into the kingdom, along with his brave killer.

Hope this helps.

Indeed. We should execute all felons. Let us turn our prisons into death camps and put a bullet in the head of every criminal! Let's take it further and allow deadly force against all levels of crime. Steal a keychain from Spencer's Gifts? Too bad.

That'll remedy our overloaded court systems!

That's right, we should kill them all and let God sort them out.

 

[JGG]

And the 'applause' isn't for the death of the robber, it's for the justice of the whole event. What liberals and athiests don't understand is that if you don't 'take out' the (human) trash eventually you will be buried in it. We are close to that. This event give us at least one breathe of breathing room.

So, what you're saying is that for justice to be done, we should take every petty thief, and execute them? What a warped concept of justice Christianity has.

On what basis are you judging which humans are trash that should be executed? How is that justice?

You're saying the world would be a better place if we started killing more people, yes?

By the way, when you say that "athiests"[sic] don't understand, are you suggesting that executing people for petty crime is Christian? I suppose Christ may have said "Don't just throw the first stone, chuck it!"

This should be reassuring to everyone. We have these crime related problems in our society:

Too many repeat offenders.

Overloaded court system.

Overcrowned prisons.

This brave fellow solved all three with just two bullets.

What about white collar criminals? Executing all of them, especially without a trial would certainly ease the strain on the court and prison systems. Heck, we wouldn't even need a prison system. What about shoplifters? Execution, or do we just chop off their hands? Tax evasion? Execution. Failure to pay child support? Execution. Jaywalking? Execution.

But wait, there's more.

Every knowledgable Christian (those who disagree with me aren't) believes in the resurrection. When this robber comes up Jesus might say to him, "Well, did you learn anything back there?" He'll have his chance to repent and go into the kingdom, along with his brave killer.

This is the best part. While the "those who disagree with me aren't Christian" is very telling, the "his brave killer" really brings out the Jesus.

Hope this helps.

So much, you don't even know. But let me ask this: What religion is the shooter, and what religion was the robber?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

This is the best part. While the "those who disagree with me aren't Christian" is very telling, the "his brave killer" really brings out the Jesus.

I said that those Christians who disagree with the following statement aren't knowledgable concerning this event and the resurrection. Sorry that you weren't able to understand what I plainly said.