OT: Don't forget to lock your bins!

"SawDust" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Agreed. My business got broken into one night. Theif broke the
> glass pane in the door. Just chatting with the cop afterwards, he
> advised me to make sure it was replaced with tempered glass, not
> simple plate glass.
>
> If the theif came back and tried again, and get's hurt breaking the
> glass, to break into my business, I was liable for his injuries.
>
> Too me, there's just something totally wrong about that....
>
> Pat
>
Several years ago, elderly lady in rural Arizona answers the door at night.
Two men push their way past her into the house (home invasion). Her husband
grabs his .38 off the end table next to him and gets off one shot killing
one of the invaders, but at the same time they get off a shot killing him.
Surviving invader flees. Employee of homeowners insurance company told me
that wife of dead invader was entitled to claim a loss against the
homeowners insurance. Insurance company, however, didn't intend to inform
her of her rights. Apparently, the death occurring while engaged in an act
of crime was not relevant. I'll bet, however, the dead invader had no
insurance that would have helped the widow of the dead homeowner.

"Puff Griffis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution states
that all citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary to
stop a felony in progress. Like the fellow that shot, in the back, a 19 year
old doing a beer run and was not charged. I don't remember the year but it
was the gas station caddy corner to Alhambra high school on Camelback and
39th ave in Phx.
Puff

Lived in AZ for 17 years and I agree with what you say. But apparently
terms of insurance policies would still make the homeowner financially
liable for the death of the invader even though he was committing a felony
by breaking in. I assume the difference between legal penalties and civil
penalties. I suspect that the kin of the 19 year old would have been able
to collect on the convenience store's insurance policy.
By the way, do you remember the guy who shot to death the homeless man he
caught going through his refrigerator. He said the guy pointed a gun owned
by the homeowner at him so he shot him. Supposedly found the gun before
going to the refrig. I always wondered if perhaps that gun was put in his
hand after he was shot. No charges were filed in this case, either. It
would pay to always keep a second gun around to give to the intruder after
you shoot him, I guess. Just so you know where I stand...I have no sympathy
for anyone who gets hurt while committing a crime. I work for what I have
and I expect others to do the same, although if you or your family are
starving, ask and I'll be happy to share what food I have. I could go on
and on citing incidents of stupid people who got killed while committing
crimes in AZ in the 17 years we were there.

There is something similar out there from the MN point of view regarding
weather.

John

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:35:41 -0500, Kevin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Grandparents lived in a little town in New Mexico - Miami. I remember
> visiting in the late 60s and driving in to Springer. There I saw guys
> walking around town with revolvers strapped on, just like in Gunsmoke. I
> asked one of these guys about it and he said they were used mainly for
> shooting varous predators. Seemed a normal thing to me at the time.

...and I bet they didn't have much if any petty pilferage going on of
stuff in other peoples' trucks, did they?

Living in Idaho has some advantages, if hes in my house and not on his way
out the door, you can use any force necessary to defend your life, home and
property until the threat is removed. all you hat to say it looked like he
was holding a weapon. there was a home owner in Twin Falls a couple of
years ago who came home to find a some teen agers just finishing a burglary
of his home, he graped the shotgun from his Truck and chased one into a
neighborers yard, the neighborers yard was fenced the the kid turned on him
with a baseball bat and charged at him, so he shot and killed him. because
the other guy didn't have a gun and the home owner wasn't on his property
the county tried to prosecute him, and the Judge laughed at them for it and
dismissed it

Tom wrote:

>
> "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution
> states
> that all citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary to
> stop a felony in progress. Like the fellow that shot, in the back, a 19
> year old doing a beer run and was not charged. I don't remember the year
> but it was the gas station caddy corner to Alhambra high school on
> Camelback and 39th ave in Phx.
> Puff
>
> Lived in AZ for 17 years and I agree with what you say. But apparently
> terms of insurance policies would still make the homeowner financially
> liable for the death of the invader even though he was committing a
> felony
> by breaking in. I assume the difference between legal penalties and civil
> penalties. I suspect that the kin of the 19 year old would have been able
> to collect on the convenience store's insurance policy.
> By the way, do you remember the guy who shot to death the homeless man he
> caught going through his refrigerator. He said the guy pointed a gun
> owned
> by the homeowner at him so he shot him. Supposedly found the gun before
> going to the refrig. I always wondered if perhaps that gun was put in his
> hand after he was shot. No charges were filed in this case, either. It
> would pay to always keep a second gun around to give to the intruder after
> you shoot him, I guess. Just so you know where I stand...I have no
> sympathy
> for anyone who gets hurt while committing a crime. I work for what I have
> and I expect others to do the same, although if you or your family are
> starving, ask and I'll be happy to share what food I have. I could go on
> and on citing incidents of stupid people who got killed while committing
> crimes in AZ in the 17 years we were there.

Umm! Idaho law is a little more liberal than that. Defending property
includes defending it from being stolen and damaged. Running down the
street and shooting the thief in the back gets a little dicey.
However, you can do pretty much whatever you want to defend your
property if you are in/on it and/or near it. That includes disabling
or killing a person in your house or on your real estate or someone
car jacking your vehicle even though you shoot when you are outside
the vehicle. And contrary to many state's laws, Idaho's doesn't
indicate any need for one to escape or to limit actions to "reasonable
force." The property owners rights come first. As an example, in
tresspass law, the owner says, "Get off my property" and the
tresspasser must immediately leave via the nearest border even if that
means the trespasser must walk 200 feet to the north fence and then
follow fences several miles around to get to his car that was only 500
feet to the south on a main highway. And that "immediately" means
that any screwing around and the trespasser may be subject to rather
violent actions by the owner. Ah, life just isn't fair to crooks and
jerks in some state!



Richard Clements wrote:
>
> Living in Idaho has some advantages, if hes in my house and not on his way
> out the door, you can use any force necessary to defend your life, home and
> property until the threat is removed. all you hat to say it looked like he
> was holding a weapon. there was a home owner in Twin Falls a couple of
> years ago who came home to find a some teen agers just finishing a burglary
> of his home, he graped the shotgun from his Truck and chased one into a
> neighborers yard, the neighborers yard was fenced the the kid turned on him
> with a baseball bat and charged at him, so he shot and killed him. because
> the other guy didn't have a gun and the home owner wasn't on his property
> the county tried to prosecute him, and the Judge laughed at them for it and
> dismissed it
>
> Tom wrote:

Yeah, love that "attractive nuisance" law.

"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Todd Fatheree" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b)
that
> > it
> > wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.
> >
> > todd
>
> Oh... NOooooooo.. that would be abusing his rights to a proper trial by
jury
> and using unnecessary force. Proper training and sensitivity classes are
a
> must before proceeding with such behavior. Protecting ones property is
way
> over rated these days. Besides, you would also be found guilty of
> entrapment since the box was not locked. LOL
>
>

After briefly shopping a Target and going down the road, I heard a
noise coming from under the car. I stopped to inspect. Someone had
tried to steal the wheels off my car and the half the wheel bolts were
missing, and the others were gone! Wheel locks are worth it.

Another time someone was stealing gasoline out of my truck every
night. Eventually, the police caught these kids.

Back in the early 80's I caught a guy trying to steal the battery out of =
my motorcycle outside of a grocery store. I doubt he ever tried that =
again.
Puff

"Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
> I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for =
a=20
> house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a =
guy=20
> walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good=20
> thing I only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( =
and=20
> I have my 3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything =
good=20
> in there?" to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little =
forcibly=20
> ) "Then why are you looking through my bins?!?" A little shocked he=20
> just shrugged his shoulders and walked off towards the store. After I =

> loaded my stuff, I told the lumber yard-bird, described the guy to him =

> and left for home. They said they would keep an eye out for him. =20
> Hopefully they do and hopefully no customers get ripped off by this=20
> guy! Jeesh! What's with some people these days?? To have the brass =
to=20
> do that in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot!
>

"Grandpa" <jsdebooATcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Two of the nicer things about New Mexico are (1), it is perfectly legal
> to have a loaded handgun in your vehicle, concealed or not; and (2), we
> have a concealed carry law on the books now of which some 1500 people
> have been licensed to carry. Not saying this would be applicable inthis
> situation, however if the perp had grabbed some tools.........

I live in Illinois, which means we'll be getting concealed carry about the
time the sun is a small chunk of coal.

todd

I love that one Norm.
Puff

"Norman D. Crow" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
>=20
>=20
>=20
> "Tom" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution
> states
> > that all citizens of the state are required to use any force =
necessary to
> > stop a felony in progress. Like the fellow that shot, in the back, a =
19
> year
> > old doing a beer run and was not charged. I don't remember the year =
but it
> > was the gas station caddy corner to Alhambra high school on =
Camelback and
> > 39th ave in Phx.
> > Puff
>=20
> Now that AZ has entered the conversation, I just can't resist adding =
this,
> sort of a flip on the "Buffalo" humor a couple years back;
>=20
> Life in Arizona
> May 30:
> Just moved to Arizona. Now this is a state that knows how to live!!
> Beautiful sunny days and warm balmy evenings. What a place! It is
> beautiful. I've finally found my home. I love it here.
> June 14th:
> Really heating up. Got to 100 today. Not a problem. Live in an
> air-conditioned home, drive an air-conditioned car. What a pleasure to =
see
> the sun everyday like this. I'm turning into a sun worshipper.
> June 30th:
> Had the backyard landscaped with western plants today. Lots of cactus =
and
> rocks. What a breeze to maintain. No more mowing lawn for me. Another
> scorcher today, but I love it here.
> July 10th:
> The temperature hasn't been below 100 all week. How do people get used =
to
> this kind of heat? At least its kind of windy though. But getting used =
to
> the heat is taking longer than I expected.
> July 15th:
> Fell asleep by the community pool. (Got 3rd degree burns over 60% of =
my
> body). Missed 3 days of work. What a dumb thing to do. I learned my =
lesson
> though. Got to respect the ol' sun in a climate like this.
> July 20th:
> I missed Lomita (my cat) sneaking into the car when I left this =
morning. By
> the time I got to the hot car at noon, Lomita had died and swollen up =
to the
> size of a shopping bag, then popped like a water balloon. The car now =
smells
> like Kibbles and shits. I learned my lesson though. No more pets in =
this
> heat. Good ol' Mr. Sun strikes again.
> July 25th:
> The wind sucks. It feels like a giant freaking blow dryer!! And it's =
hot as
> hell. The home air-conditioner is on the fritz and the AC repairman =
charged
> $200 just to drive by and tell me he needed to order parts.
> July 30th:
> Been sleeping outside on the patio for 3 nights now. $225,000 house =
and I
> can't even go inside. Lomita is the lucky one. Why did I ever come =
here? |
> Aug. 4th:
> It's 115 degrees. Finally got the air-conditioner fixed today. It cost =
$500
> and gets the temperature down to 85. I hate this stupid state.
> Aug. 8th:
> If another wise ass cracks, 'Hot enough for you today?' I'm going to
> strangle him. Damn heat. By the time I get to work the radiator is =
boiling
> over, my clothes are soaking wet, and I smell like baked cat!!
> Aug. 9th:
> Tried to run some errands after work. Wore shorts, and when I sat on =
the
> seats in the car, I thought my ass was on fire. My skin melted to the =
seat.
> I lost 2 layers of flesh and all the hair on the back of my legs and =
ass...
> Now my car smells like burnt hair, fried ass, and baked cat.
> Aug 10th:
> The weather report might as well be a damn recording. Hot and sunny. =
Hot and
> sunny. Hot and sunny. It's been too hot to do shit for 2 damn months =
and the
> weatherman says it might really warm up next week. Doesn't it ever =
rain in
> this damn desert? Water rationing will be next, so my $1700 worth of =
cactus
> will just dry up and blow over. Even the cactus can't live in this =
damn heat
> Aug. 14th:
> Welcome to HELL! Temperature got to 115 today. Cactus are dead. Forgot =
to
> crack the window and blew the damn windshield out of the car. The =
installer
> came to fix it and said, "Hot enough for you today?" My sister had to =
spend
> $1500 to bail me out of jail. Freaking Arizona. What kind of a sick =
demented
> idiot would want to live here??
>=20
> Will write later to let you know how the trial goes. |
>=20
> --=20
> Nahmie
> The law of intelligent tinkering: save all the parts.
>=20
>=20
>

By the time you guys finish arguing how to treat a crime, the perpetrator
will have retired to a nursing home.

It's all very nice to know what you can do and can't do when one of these
crimes is happening, but unless you're a law enforcement professional or
something similar, you react as your personality dictates. You don't usually
stop to consider the ramifications of the actions you're about to take.

> > Required was the way it was put across in the media. John though has
said
> > he researched it and found no reference to it in the AZ constitution I
may
> > have been guilty of believing the media and if so I apologies. Puff I
will
> > research it further myself.
>
> I did find a statute (13-411 of the Arizona Revised Code, "Justification;
> use of force in crime prevention) as follows:
>
> "A. A person is justified in threatening or using both physical force and
> deadly physical force against another if and to the extent the person
> reasonably believes that physical force or deadly physical force is
> immediately necessary to prevent the other's commission of arson of an
> occupied structure under section 13-1704, burglary in the second or first
> degree under section 13-1507 or 13-1508, kidnapping under section 13-1304,
> manslaughter under section 13-1103, second or first degree murder under
> section 13-1104 or 13-1105, sexual conduct with a minor under section
> 13-1405, sexual assault under section 13-1406, child molestation under
> section 13-1410, armed robbery under section 13-1904, or aggravated
assault
> under section 13-1204, subsection A, paragraphs 1 and 2.
>
> B. There is no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly
physical
> force justified by subsection A of this section.
>
> C. A person is presumed to be acting reasonably for the purposes of this
> section if he is acting to prevent the commission of any of the offenses
> listed in subsection A of this section. "

Agreed. My business got broken into one night. Theif broke the
glass pane in the door. Just chatting with the cop afterwards, he
advised me to make sure it was replaced with tempered glass, not
simple plate glass.

If the theif came back and tried again, and get's hurt breaking the
glass, to break into my business, I was liable for his injuries.

Too me, there's just something totally wrong about that....

Pat



On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:18:32 -0500, "RonB" <[email protected]> wrote:

>The only problem is in today's legal world you'll end up in worse shape than
>him in the long run. A few years ago a cousin's 18 year old son came home
>at about 11:00 one evening and his folks were gone. A neighbor flagged him
>down at the corner and told him they had watched a guy break into the house
>and they had called the cops. As they were speaking the burgular walked out
>with an arm load of stereo components. The boy chased him down and demanded
>he put the stuff on the street. The crook dropped the components on the
>street and took a swing. The young man, who had been involved in amature
>and Golden Gloves boxing for about 10 years responded (knocked the crap out
>of him).
>
>Justice? Nope! The burgular spend a night in jail before being sprung. He
>then turned around a filed a law suit against my cousin's son for injuries,
>dental work and all the other crap. Their attorney and the police advised
>them that since the son was a very accomplished boxer, the civil court would
>look at it as excessive force and assault even though the police didn't
>charge him. The case never got to court becuase the the son was killed in
>an accident. They were looking at an almost certain loss or out-of-court
>settlement.
>

Required was the way it was put across in the media. John though has =
said he researched it and found no reference to it in the AZ =
constitution I may have been guilty of believing the media and if so I =
apologies.
Puff
I will research it further myself.

"Old Nick" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:10:10 -0500, "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]>
> vaguely proposed a theory=20
> ......and in reply I say!:=20
>=20
> remove ns from my header address to reply via email
>=20
> > Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution =
states that all=20
> > citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary=20
>=20
> Required or allowed?
>=20
> If required, I could be charged with not stopping a felony in AZ?
> *****************************************************
> I have decided that I should not be offended by=20
> anybody's behaviour but my own......the theory's=20
> good, anyway.

Put some air holes in the bin, get a mean dog - take it for a ride... Or, a
skunk, or mongoose, or anything with claws and attitude (hmm, you can borrow
my missus if you want!).

--
Greg


"Mark and Kim Smith" wrote in message ...
>I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for a
>house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a guy
>walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good thing I
>only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( and I have my
>3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything good in there?"
>to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little forcibly ) "Then why
>are you looking through my bins?!?"
snip

The only problem is in today's legal world you'll end up in worse shape than
him in the long run. A few years ago a cousin's 18 year old son came home
at about 11:00 one evening and his folks were gone. A neighbor flagged him
down at the corner and told him they had watched a guy break into the house
and they had called the cops. As they were speaking the burgular walked out
with an arm load of stereo components. The boy chased him down and demanded
he put the stuff on the street. The crook dropped the components on the
street and took a swing. The young man, who had been involved in amature
and Golden Gloves boxing for about 10 years responded (knocked the crap out
of him).

Justice? Nope! The burgular spend a night in jail before being sprung. He
then turned around a filed a law suit against my cousin's son for injuries,
dental work and all the other crap. Their attorney and the police advised
them that since the son was a very accomplished boxer, the civil court would
look at it as excessive force and assault even though the police didn't
charge him. The case never got to court becuase the the son was killed in
an accident. They were looking at an almost certain loss or out-of-court
settlement.

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:15:43 -0500, "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]>
vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I did a bit of a google. It would appear you are allowed. But I see
other posts that have the usual politico-legal squirms that mean you
could be ITS anyway, either financially or legally.

West Oz has a "reasonable force" policy. It is fairly new and not
really been tested yet. It was basically brought in because under the
old laws people defending themselves agains repeated attacks or
invasions, who by design or accident went "a bit far", were put
through the mill and almost let off by popularity poll.

It is often interesting, though, to read the histories of these
"heroes". It doesn't surprise me that _many_ (NOTE: not all!) of the
"ordinary citizens" who severely tackle burglars or muggers etc are a
bit questionable themselves.

The other class are the poor bastards in delis etc who have been
robbed 20 times and finally snap. Some of them get shot for it, too.

>Required was the way it was put across in the media. John though has said he researched it and found no reference to it in the AZ constitution I may have been guilty of believing the media and if so I apologies.
>Puff
>I will research it further myself.
>
>"Old Nick" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:10:10 -0500, "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]>
>> vaguely proposed a theory
>> ......and in reply I say!:
>>
>> remove ns from my header address to reply via email
>>
>> > Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution states that all
>> > citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary
>>
>> Required or allowed?
>>
>> If required, I could be charged with not stopping a felony in AZ?
>> *****************************************************
>> I have decided that I should not be offended by
>> anybody's behaviour but my own......the theory's
>> good, anyway.

*****************************************************
I have decided that I should not be offended by
anybody's behaviour but my own......the theory's
good, anyway.

Todd Fatheree wrote:

>"Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>
>>I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for a
>>house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a guy
>>walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good
>>thing I only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( and
>>I have my 3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything good
>>in there?" to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little forcibly
>>) "Then why are you looking through my bins?!?" A little shocked he
>>just shrugged his shoulders and walked off towards the store. After I
>>loaded my stuff, I told the lumber yard-bird, described the guy to him
>>and left for home. They said they would keep an eye out for him.
>>Hopefully they do and hopefully no customers get ripped off by this
>>guy! Jeesh! What's with some people these days?? To have the brass to
>>do that in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot!
>>
>>
>
>Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b) that it
>wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.
>
>todd
>
Ha! I actually carry a couple of tubafors in the bed which come in handy for various things. Also I happened to have a 1/8" x 3" x 4' piece of steel back there that would have done a lot more damage than a tubafor. Very sharp edges, that ol' piece of steel. Gotta get that stuff out of there before some hoodlum realizes he can break my windows with them.

I like the idea of slamming the door on his head and maybe standing on it until the flailing stops!

Tom wrote:

>
> "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution
> states
> that all citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary to
> stop a felony in progress. Like the fellow that shot, in the back, a 19
> year old doing a beer run and was not charged. I don't remember the year
> but it was the gas station caddy corner to Alhambra high school on
> Camelback and 39th ave in Phx.
> Puff
>
> Lived in AZ for 17 years and I agree with what you say. But apparently
> terms of insurance policies would still make the homeowner financially
> liable for the death of the invader even though he was committing a
> felony
> by breaking in. I assume the difference between legal penalties and civil
> penalties. I suspect that the kin of the 19 year old would have been able
> to collect on the convenience store's insurance policy.
> By the way, do you remember the guy who shot to death the homeless man he
> caught going through his refrigerator. He said the guy pointed a gun
> owned
> by the homeowner at him so he shot him. Supposedly found the gun before
> going to the refrig. I always wondered if perhaps that gun was put in his
> hand after he was shot. No charges were filed in this case, either. It
> would pay to always keep a second gun around to give to the intruder after
> you shoot him, I guess. Just so you know where I stand...I have no
> sympathy
> for anyone who gets hurt while committing a crime. I work for what I have
> and I expect others to do the same, although if you or your family are
> starving, ask and I'll be happy to share what food I have. I could go on
> and on citing incidents of stupid people who got killed while committing
> crimes in AZ in the 17 years we were there.

A search of the Arizona constitution does not yield the above wording. If
it's there it's phrased quite differently. The same search, however, does
yield "Section 31. No law shall be enacted in this state limiting the
amount of damages to be recovered for causing the death or injury of any
person." I note that there is no exception for causing the death or injury
of a person who was committing a crime at the time.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"Tom" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution
states
> that all citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary to
> stop a felony in progress. Like the fellow that shot, in the back, a 19
year
> old doing a beer run and was not charged. I don't remember the year but it
> was the gas station caddy corner to Alhambra high school on Camelback and
> 39th ave in Phx.
> Puff

Now that AZ has entered the conversation, I just can't resist adding this,
sort of a flip on the "Buffalo" humor a couple years back;

Life in Arizona
May 30:
Just moved to Arizona. Now this is a state that knows how to live!!
Beautiful sunny days and warm balmy evenings. What a place! It is
beautiful. I've finally found my home. I love it here.
June 14th:
Really heating up. Got to 100 today. Not a problem. Live in an
air-conditioned home, drive an air-conditioned car. What a pleasure to see
the sun everyday like this. I'm turning into a sun worshipper.
June 30th:
Had the backyard landscaped with western plants today. Lots of cactus and
rocks. What a breeze to maintain. No more mowing lawn for me. Another
scorcher today, but I love it here.
July 10th:
The temperature hasn't been below 100 all week. How do people get used to
this kind of heat? At least its kind of windy though. But getting used to
the heat is taking longer than I expected.
July 15th:
Fell asleep by the community pool. (Got 3rd degree burns over 60% of my
body). Missed 3 days of work. What a dumb thing to do. I learned my lesson
though. Got to respect the ol' sun in a climate like this.
July 20th:
I missed Lomita (my cat) sneaking into the car when I left this morning. By
the time I got to the hot car at noon, Lomita had died and swollen up to the
size of a shopping bag, then popped like a water balloon. The car now smells
like Kibbles and shits. I learned my lesson though. No more pets in this
heat. Good ol' Mr. Sun strikes again.
July 25th:
The wind sucks. It feels like a giant freaking blow dryer!! And it's hot as
hell. The home air-conditioner is on the fritz and the AC repairman charged
$200 just to drive by and tell me he needed to order parts.
July 30th:
Been sleeping outside on the patio for 3 nights now. $225,000 house and I
can't even go inside. Lomita is the lucky one. Why did I ever come here? |
Aug. 4th:
It's 115 degrees. Finally got the air-conditioner fixed today. It cost $500
and gets the temperature down to 85. I hate this stupid state.
Aug. 8th:
If another wise ass cracks, 'Hot enough for you today?' I'm going to
strangle him. Damn heat. By the time I get to work the radiator is boiling
over, my clothes are soaking wet, and I smell like baked cat!!
Aug. 9th:
Tried to run some errands after work. Wore shorts, and when I sat on the
seats in the car, I thought my ass was on fire. My skin melted to the seat.
I lost 2 layers of flesh and all the hair on the back of my legs and ass...
Now my car smells like burnt hair, fried ass, and baked cat.
Aug 10th:
The weather report might as well be a damn recording. Hot and sunny. Hot and
sunny. Hot and sunny. It's been too hot to do shit for 2 damn months and the
weatherman says it might really warm up next week. Doesn't it ever rain in
this damn desert? Water rationing will be next, so my $1700 worth of cactus
will just dry up and blow over. Even the cactus can't live in this damn heat
Aug. 14th:
Welcome to HELL! Temperature got to 115 today. Cactus are dead. Forgot to
crack the window and blew the damn windshield out of the car. The installer
came to fix it and said, "Hot enough for you today?" My sister had to spend
$1500 to bail me out of jail. Freaking Arizona. What kind of a sick demented
idiot would want to live here??

Will write later to let you know how the trial goes. |

--
Nahmie
The law of intelligent tinkering: save all the parts.

Puff Griffis wrote:

> Required was the way it was put across in the media. John though has said
> he researched it and found no reference to it in the AZ constitution I may
> have been guilty of believing the media and if so I apologies. Puff I will
> research it further myself.

I did find a statute (13-411 of the Arizona Revised Code, "Justification;
use of force in crime prevention) as follows:

"A. A person is justified in threatening or using both physical force and
deadly physical force against another if and to the extent the person
reasonably believes that physical force or deadly physical force is
immediately necessary to prevent the other's commission of arson of an
occupied structure under section 13-1704, burglary in the second or first
degree under section 13-1507 or 13-1508, kidnapping under section 13-1304,
manslaughter under section 13-1103, second or first degree murder under
section 13-1104 or 13-1105, sexual conduct with a minor under section
13-1405, sexual assault under section 13-1406, child molestation under
section 13-1410, armed robbery under section 13-1904, or aggravated assault
under section 13-1204, subsection A, paragraphs 1 and 2.


B. There is no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical
force justified by subsection A of this section.


C. A person is presumed to be acting reasonably for the purposes of this
section if he is acting to prevent the commission of any of the offenses
listed in subsection A of this section. "
>
> "Old Nick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:10:10 -0500, "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]>
>> vaguely proposed a theory
>> ......and in reply I say!:
>>
>> remove ns from my header address to reply via email
>>
>> > Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution
>> > states that all
>> > citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary
>>
>> Required or allowed?
>>
>> If required, I could be charged with not stopping a felony in AZ?
>> *****************************************************
>> I have decided that I should not be offended by
>> anybody's behaviour but my own......the theory's
>> good, anyway.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Grandpa <jsdebooATcomcast.net> wrote:

> Todd Fatheree wrote:
>
>> "Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for a
>>>house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a guy
>>>walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good
>>>thing I only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( and
>>>I have my 3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything good
>>>in there?" to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little forcibly
>>>) "Then why are you looking through my bins?!?" A little shocked he
>>>just shrugged his shoulders and walked off towards the store. After I
>>>loaded my stuff, I told the lumber yard-bird, described the guy to him
>>>and left for home. They said they would keep an eye out for him.
>>>Hopefully they do and hopefully no customers get ripped off by this
>>>guy! Jeesh! What's with some people these days?? To have the brass to
>>>do that in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot!
>>
>>
>> Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b) that
>> it wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box
>> door.
>
> Two of the nicer things about New Mexico are (1), it is perfectly legal
> to have a loaded handgun in your vehicle, concealed or not; and (2), we
> have a concealed carry law on the books now of which some 1500 people
> have been licensed to carry. Not saying this would be applicable inthis
> situation, however if the perp had grabbed some tools.........

Don't know if it's still true (too lazy to check the statutes again) but at
one time in AZ open carry of a loaded handgun was quite lawful with no
permit required.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Grandparents lived in a little town in New Mexico - Miami. I remember
visiting in the late 60s and driving in to Springer. There I saw guys
walking around town with revolvers strapped on, just like in Gunsmoke. I
asked one of these guys about it and he said they were used mainly for
shooting varous predators. Seemed a normal thing to me at the time.



"Grandpa" <jsdebooATcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Todd Fatheree wrote:
>
> > "Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for a
> >>house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a guy
> >>walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good
> >>thing I only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( and
> >>I have my 3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything good
> >>in there?" to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little forcibly
> >>) "Then why are you looking through my bins?!?" A little shocked he
> >>just shrugged his shoulders and walked off towards the store. After I
> >>loaded my stuff, I told the lumber yard-bird, described the guy to him
> >>and left for home. They said they would keep an eye out for him.
> >>Hopefully they do and hopefully no customers get ripped off by this
> >>guy! Jeesh! What's with some people these days?? To have the brass to
> >>do that in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot!
> >
> >
> > Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b)
that it
> > wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.
>
> Two of the nicer things about New Mexico are (1), it is perfectly legal
> to have a loaded handgun in your vehicle, concealed or not; and (2), we
> have a concealed carry law on the books now of which some 1500 people
> have been licensed to carry. Not saying this would be applicable inthis
> situation, however if the perp had grabbed some tools.........

In article <[email protected]>, Richard Clements <[email protected]> wrote:
>Living in Idaho has some advantages, if hes in my house and not on his way
>out the door, you can use any force necessary to defend your life, home and
>property until the threat is removed.

[story snipped]

Kinda reminds me of a time I was in Atlanta on business a few years back.
There was an article in the paper one morning about a homeowner in a rural
area of an adjacent county who had shot and killed a burglar the night before.
The reporter covering the story, obviously from the "big city" and unfamiliar
with rural life, asked the sheriff what charges might be filed against the
homeowner.

The response:

"Charges!? If I could, I'd give this guy a medal. If more homeowners would do
this, we'd have a lot less break-ins!"

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution =
states that all citizens of the state are required to use any force =
necessary to stop a felony in progress. Like the fellow that shot, in =
the back, a 19 year old doing a beer run and was not charged. I don't =
remember the year but it was the gas station caddy corner to Alhambra =
high school on Camelback and 39th ave in Phx.=20
Puff

"Tom" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
>=20
> "SawDust" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Agreed. My business got broken into one night. Theif broke the
> > glass pane in the door. Just chatting with the cop afterwards, he
> > advised me to make sure it was replaced with tempered glass, not
> > simple plate glass.
> >
> > If the theif came back and tried again, and get's hurt breaking the
> > glass, to break into my business, I was liable for his injuries.
> >
> > Too me, there's just something totally wrong about that....
> >
> > Pat
> >
> Several years ago, elderly lady in rural Arizona answers the door at =
night.
> Two men push their way past her into the house (home invasion). Her =
husband
> grabs his .38 off the end table next to him and gets off one shot =
killing
> one of the invaders, but at the same time they get off a shot killing =
him.
> Surviving invader flees. Employee of homeowners insurance company =
told me
> that wife of dead invader was entitled to claim a loss against the
> homeowners insurance. Insurance company, however, didn't intend to =
inform
> her of her rights. Apparently, the death occurring while engaged in =
an act
> of crime was not relevant. I'll bet, however, the dead invader had no
> insurance that would have helped the widow of the dead homeowner.
>=20
>

"Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Todd Fatheree wrote:
>
> >"Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >
> >
> >>I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for a
> >>house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a guy
> >>walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good
> >>thing I only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( and
> >>I have my 3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything good
> >>in there?" to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little forcibly
> >>) "Then why are you looking through my bins?!?" A little shocked he
> >>just shrugged his shoulders and walked off towards the store. After I
> >>loaded my stuff, I told the lumber yard-bird, described the guy to him
> >>and left for home. They said they would keep an eye out for him.
> >>Hopefully they do and hopefully no customers get ripped off by this
> >>guy! Jeesh! What's with some people these days?? To have the brass to
> >>do that in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot!
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b) that
it
> >wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.
> >
> >todd
> >
> Ha! I actually carry a couple of tubafors in the bed which come in handy
for various things. Also I happened to have a 1/8" x 3" x 4' piece of steel
back there that would have done a lot more damage than a tubafor. Very
sharp edges, that ol' piece of steel. Gotta get that stuff out of there
before some hoodlum realizes he can break my windows with them.
>
> I like the idea of slamming the door on his head and maybe standing on it
until the flailing stops!

On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 18:28:57 -0500, "Todd Fatheree" <[email protected]>
vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Just lend him a 3 YO for a couple of months. He'd beg for gaol! <G>

>Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b) that it
>wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.
>
>todd
>

*****************************************************
I have decided that I should not be offended by
anybody's behaviour but my own......the theory's
good, anyway.

"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Kinda reminds me of a time I was in Atlanta on business a few years back.
> There was an article in the paper one morning about a homeowner in a rural
> area of an adjacent county who had shot and killed a burglar the night
> before.
> The reporter covering the story, obviously from the "big city" and
> unfamiliar
> with rural life, asked the sheriff what charges might be filed against the
> homeowner.
>
> The response:
>
> "Charges!? If I could, I'd give this guy a medal. If more homeowners would
> do
> this, we'd have a lot less break-ins!"


Exactly. If the thief thinks twice about getting hurt he may simply try to
actually earning a living. If the police are the only ones enforcing the
law, it becomes a criminals wonder land.

"Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Todd Fatheree wrote:
>
> >"Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >
> >
> >>I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for a
> >>house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a guy
> >>walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good
> >>thing I only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( and
> >>I have my 3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything good
> >>in there?" to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little forcibly
> >>) "Then why are you looking through my bins?!?" A little shocked he
> >>just shrugged his shoulders and walked off towards the store. After I
> >>loaded my stuff, I told the lumber yard-bird, described the guy to him
> >>and left for home. They said they would keep an eye out for him.
> >>Hopefully they do and hopefully no customers get ripped off by this
> >>guy! Jeesh! What's with some people these days?? To have the brass to
> >>do that in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot!
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b) that
it
> >wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.
> >
> >todd
> >
> Ha! I actually carry a couple of tubafors in the bed which come in handy
for various things. Also I happened to have a 1/8" x 3" x 4' piece of steel
back there that would have done a lot more damage than a tubafor. Very
sharp edges, that ol' piece of steel. Gotta get that stuff out of there
before some hoodlum realizes he can break my windows with them.
>
> I like the idea of slamming the door on his head and maybe standing on it
until the flailing stops!

It almost makes you wish he had found something so you could follow him to
his car and report him for burglary. Of course, you'd probably spend more
time in the police station than he would. Cancel that...I'm back to
slamming his head in the toolbox door until unconscious, then a couple of
good raps with that steel bar across the back of the hands so he'd remember
it every time he tried to get into someone else's stuff.

todd

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:10:10 -0500, "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]>
vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

> Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ constitution states that all
> citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary

Required or allowed?

If required, I could be charged with not stopping a felony in AZ?
*****************************************************
I have decided that I should not be offended by
anybody's behaviour but my own......the theory's
good, anyway.

"Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for a
> house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a guy
> walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good
> thing I only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( and
> I have my 3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything good
> in there?" to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little forcibly
> ) "Then why are you looking through my bins?!?" A little shocked he
> just shrugged his shoulders and walked off towards the store. After I
> loaded my stuff, I told the lumber yard-bird, described the guy to him
> and left for home. They said they would keep an eye out for him.
> Hopefully they do and hopefully no customers get ripped off by this
> guy! Jeesh! What's with some people these days?? To have the brass to
> do that in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot!

Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b) that it
wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.

todd

"Todd Fatheree" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b) that
> it
> wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.
>
> todd

Oh... NOooooooo.. that would be abusing his rights to a proper trial by jury
and using unnecessary force. Proper training and sensitivity classes are a
must before proceeding with such behavior. Protecting ones property is way
over rated these days. Besides, you would also be found guilty of
entrapment since the box was not locked. LOL

Todd Fatheree wrote:

> "Mark and Kim Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>I was at the local Lowes to pick up some ready mix and some 2 x 6 for a
>>house project. As I was bringing my purchases to my truck, I see a guy
>>walk by and open up my cross box, no doubt looking for tools. Good
>>thing I only keep ropes and tie down stuff in there. As I walk up ( and
>>I have my 3 year old with me ) I ask the guy "Did you find anything good
>>in there?" to which he replied "No." So I asked him ( a little forcibly
>>) "Then why are you looking through my bins?!?" A little shocked he
>>just shrugged his shoulders and walked off towards the store. After I
>>loaded my stuff, I told the lumber yard-bird, described the guy to him
>>and left for home. They said they would keep an eye out for him.
>>Hopefully they do and hopefully no customers get ripped off by this
>>guy! Jeesh! What's with some people these days?? To have the brass to
>>do that in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot!
>
>
> Doesn't it make you wish a) you didn't have your 3YO with you and b) that it
> wasn't against the law to repeated slam someone's head in your box door.

Two of the nicer things about New Mexico are (1), it is perfectly legal
to have a loaded handgun in your vehicle, concealed or not; and (2), we
have a concealed carry law on the books now of which some 1500 people
have been licensed to carry. Not saying this would be applicable inthis
situation, however if the perp had grabbed some tools.........

Thank you for posting that John.=20
Puff

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
> Puff Griffis wrote:
>=20
> > Required was the way it was put across in the media. John though has =
said
> > he researched it and found no reference to it in the AZ constitution =
I may
> > have been guilty of believing the media and if so I apologies. Puff =
I will
> > research it further myself.
>=20
> I did find a statute (13-411 of the Arizona Revised Code, =
"Justification;
> use of force in crime prevention) as follows:
>=20
> "A. A person is justified in threatening or using both physical force =
and
> deadly physical force against another if and to the extent the person
> reasonably believes that physical force or deadly physical force is
> immediately necessary to prevent the other's commission of arson of an
> occupied structure under section 13-1704, burglary in the second or =
first
> degree under section 13-1507 or 13-1508, kidnapping under section =
13-1304,
> manslaughter under section 13-1103, second or first degree murder =
under
> section 13-1104 or 13-1105, sexual conduct with a minor under section
> 13-1405, sexual assault under section 13-1406, child molestation under
> section 13-1410, armed robbery under section 13-1904, or aggravated =
assault
> under section 13-1204, subsection A, paragraphs 1 and 2.
>=20
>=20
> B. There is no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly =
physical
> force justified by subsection A of this section.
>=20
>=20
> C. A person is presumed to be acting reasonably for the purposes of =
this
> section if he is acting to prevent the commission of any of the =
offenses
> listed in subsection A of this section. "
> >=20
> > "Old Nick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:10:10 -0500, "Puff Griffis" =
<[email protected]>
> >> vaguely proposed a theory
> >> ......and in reply I say!:
> >>=20
> >> remove ns from my header address to reply via email
> >>=20
> >> > Tom I am not trying to pick a fight here but the AZ =
constitution
> >> > states that all
> >> > citizens of the state are required to use any force necessary
> >>=20
> >> Required or allowed?
> >>=20
> >> If required, I could be charged with not stopping a felony in AZ?
> >> *****************************************************
> >> I have decided that I should not be offended by
> >> anybody's behaviour but my own......the theory's
> >> good, anyway.
>=20
> --=20
> --John
> Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)