Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 
391 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 132


  Reply # 1956706 14-Feb-2018 06:29
Send private message

Came in here for videos of sweet justice being swiftly served upon thieving mongrels... ITT people trying to justify seriously hurting or killing other humans for stealing something rather insignificant compared to another humans life.

With mixed emotions I can say this thread has delivered but in other ways.

gzt

10310 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1582


  Reply # 1956727 14-Feb-2018 08:30
Send private message

JimmyH: Coming back on topic, I would have no problem using bait tactics to catch thieves. Personally, I would feel no compulsion to seal a car just because it was unlocked with the keys in, or similar, and I doubt that such tactics somehow convert law abiding people into crooks. I have no issues with using those tactics to catch them.

Professional car thieves do not spend any time looking around for cars with keys in them.

 
 
 
 


5294 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2147


  Reply # 1957056 14-Feb-2018 13:35
Send private message

JimmyH:

 

MikeAqua:

 

I don't agree with robberies and I feel sorry for the victims.  But ... there is no compulsion to sell tobacco products.

 

 

No, but so what? There is no compulsion for a jeweler to sell diamonds, but would you qualify an expressuin of sympathy for a violently robbed jeweler with an inference that it's somehow their fault for having a "wrong" business, or that they should give up their business in response to being robbed? What about a liquor store owner - there is no "compulsion" to sell alcohol.

 

In my view, retailers going about their lawful business are being aggressively and violently robbed, and as such they are deserving of the protection of the law. Equally. All of them. Not just those with businesses you may or may not morally approve of.

 

 

Your quote truncates my post which can be summarised as: If you choose to sell tobacco in small retail premise then ... given the associated risk of violent robbery, you should have adequate safety measures in place.

 

I agree that people operating lawful businesses should be free from the threat of attack.  They aren't.  Therefore they have legal obligations to have security measures in place for safety purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 





Mike

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.