Comments on: By reader acclaim: foiled robber sues store employees

By: mark nelson

mark nelson — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 17:27:21 +0000

I’ve always felt that there should be a law that says something like this:

Any person who enters a residence or business with the express purpose of committing physical harm to the occupants or armed robbery (with the implication of physical harm), if apprehended or otherwise stopped by the occupants, may be held by said occupants indefinately and no criminal or civil liability shall be be assumed by occupants for anything done to the intruder during that time.

I think that would seriously reduce a lot of crime.

By: Walter E. Wallis

Walter E. Wallis — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:42:16 +0000

Any judge who allowed this to come to court needs to be assigned to parking ticket duty.

By: Jim Collins

Jim Collins — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 11:33:02 +0000

The more I think about this, the more I wonder who is sleezier, Buckman or the lawyer who took this case?

By the way if I shoot it is always to kill, otherwise there is no need to shoot.

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:02:30 +0000

Jim,

You are dead right. As most firearms instructors will tell you, *IF* you decide that you must defend yourself with your firearm, shoot to kill, EVERY TIME. This is not a new phenomenon, it’s just gotten a little more successful (and hence, more common).

Basically, I would rule this case this way:

Eli Crespo and Jerry Vega did indeed inflict emotional distress on Dana Buckman, so I order them to pay him $.50, so he can call someone who cares. I also find that Dana Buckman inflicted emotional distress on Eli Crespo and Jerry Vega, so I order him to pay them $500 each for ach day they had to spend in court for this case, and to cover all court expenses from both sides.

I think that might get the message across.

By: Jim Collins

Jim Collins — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:23:39 +0000

What amazes me is that there is nothing on the books about a person committing a crime taking an assumption of risk. To be honest, to me this just confirms my belief that it is simpler to just shoot an armed robber versus trying to apprehend them.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:42:00 +0000

Please, tell me. How does this even get on the docket? The thing that scares me about this is that the robber might win a case like this in England where people are steadily losing their right to defend their own life, limb, and property. Is America far behind?