Just thought this needed to be posted again. Well said bexley..

This intelligent discussion thing is quite the interesting concept.

I think I like it.

the only thing i can guess is, is that frank, you've never had your stuff stolen.

the only way i can imagine someone being so . . . naive . . . is that you've grown up in a very nice, sheltered place. i hope that the day your illusions of a friendly world are shattered when someone steals your things, rapes your girlfriend, or murders a loved one, that you can still hold on to those ideals.

And that when you discover your girlfriend being attacked, you can calmly approach the ******, softly grab his arm, and ask him if he likes your girlfriend.

I think he'd be more like to ask the attacker to 'please respect her boundaries'.

In the case of someone close to me, whether is be a friend, girlfriend, family member etc. being assaulted or put in danger, I would say it is reasonable to resort to violence. My argument isnt against the rare occasions, because I feel there are times when physical means are necessary, though none of those would work out very well for my skinny ass. I'm saying this situation is one I wouldnt resort to violence during, especially not in the manner that was described.
As for the idea that I havent ever been ripped off, that is laugh, I will be the first to admit I'm not from the streets and have grown up in a fortunate enough situation, but that doesnt mean I've never been stolen from, and I know it's frustrating. But in this situation, why not have grabbed the bike when the guy first approached it and left it for the police to sort out? Was following the thief and roughing him up necessary? I wasnt there, so I cant decisively say it wasnt, but it doesnt seem like it was from the description given.

I tend to agree with frankstoneline. excess violence is, well, excess. it doesn't sound like that is *necessarily* what the OP did. I think he handled it better than many would, as evidence by all the rush-to-punch responses....

**** escalates so fast, beyond where anyone would want it to be. I don't think think it is a good thing to have "beat-down" as your first response to anything like this.

Most of the time, the average person in a situation like this is going to go off of instinct. There is always time to recollect and argue about what should have gone down. This guy saw his bike being ripped off right in front of him. Do you really think in the heat of the moment you are going to sit and think about wtf is happening and how you should handle it... no. You're going to do what you naturally would do. GET YOUR **** BACK. Unless you grew up in some sort of environment where you were walked all over through out the entirety of your childhood or something. Everyone is always arguing about human rights bull****. There are over 6 billion people on earth, and 90% of them live in conditions most of us Americans will never see. How can you defend some piece of **** who preys on other people in a country like this?

Excessive violence is bad. Was the OP excessive in his use of force? Probably not but these things are difficult to determine and really depend on a lot of different variables. A few weekends ago I bought a rusty old bike to fix up for my girlfriend. I had just brought it home and locked it to a post in front of my apartment. My girlfriend and I went around the corner of the building to smoke a cigarette and while doing so I noticed the front wheel (the only part visible from where we stood) of the bike moving back and forth slowly. I walked over and found an old man had already undone the quick release and was trying to take the seat and seat post out of the frame. I responded pretty much as frankstoneline suggests and asked the guy what he was doing in very polite Korean. He looked embarrassed, backed off slowly and told me that my bicycle was "really nice".
Now I could have grabbed the guy by the throat and made a big deal about it but that would have been stupid. The Korean police do not take kindly to foreigners roughing up old Korean men. Aside from that, I was looking at potentially losing the crappy seat and post off of a bicycle that only cost about 30 dollars. It's just not worth it to me to get crazy over something like this and what I did do worked out just fine. Would those of you who maintain that ALL attempts at theft should be met with beatings and vigilante justice be willing to stand up for that principal in this situation?

When some ******* is holding your property and is standing toe to toe with you, would you rather ask him nicely to please return your property and let him, the person who has proven himself to be a felon, choose what to do, or would you rather take the necessary steps to ensure your own personal safety, retrieve your property, and restrain the criminal for the police to handle? It's an obvious answer, and attacking the OP's actions as excessively violent is crap. Was the perp injured? Bruised, even? A mild front choke is uncomfortable, but I wouldn't go as far as calling it violent at all.

Excessive violence would be eye-gouging, excessive groin strikes, joint locks, small joint manipulation, striking the perp unnecessarily or to the point of unconsciousness, that kinda stuff, stuff that leaves permanent damage. A few minutes of discomfort is not permanent damage. An unhappy, busted criminal with no injuries + return of property = great result for everybody involved, including the criminal.

You're living in a flowers and rainbows fantasy world if you think a front choke and takedown is 'excessively violent' in the face of felony property crime. If it were me, I wouldn't have hesitated to choke the guy unconscious given the opportunity to lock up a clean choke. It's safer for everybody involved and much less violent than striking a resisting guy into restraint/submission while waiting for cops. While some may be happy with recovering their property and letting the ****o run off, I see it as a last resort. Internet toughguy? Possibly. Do you run the risk of getting your ass kicked for defending your property? Certainly. Worth it? Totally.

[QUOTE=Pepper Grinder;6515129]the person who has proven himself to be a felon...
[QUOTE]

In the US theft is usually tried as larceny, and is not a felony unless the item stolen holds a value of 1000 dollars or more in most large cities (ie, New York, Boston etc.) though can be as low as 200 dollars, depending on local policy as far as I know. Probably wouldnt be tried as a felony...

No biggie, I'll just shank the f***er.

i think you guys are focusing on the wrong part of the story, my favorite part was this kid getting chased down by colin.

p.s. bill, once again, i'm glad you still have your bike.

You're comparing apples to crankshafts. In most states, the law is pretty clear on the difference between defending your property, and defending yourself/family. In the state I live in, if someone put their hand on my wife again, they would more than likely get shot. At least twice. If I let someone start to walk off with my bike, I would not have any legal defense for drawing my gun, even if he had a weapon.

hahaha that rules. pictures of the offender would have brought more fun to this thread.

This, and also don't forget this:



NoLa isn't exactly the safest place in the world. Biek thieves must pay WITH BLOOD!

One point that hasn't been brought up in this remarkably intelligent conversation:

One of the main ideas behind a justice system is deterrence -- the idea that laws should not only punish an individual for his/her actions, but also deter both that individual and other individuals from acting wrongly in the future.

In this situation, the OP could have stopped the thief from attempting to steal the bike beforehand. This would work well, since it prevents the crime and results in nobody being hurt. However, if I were a bicycle thief casing a bike, and somebody told me not to steal the bike, I would walk away and find a different bike to steal. On the flipside, if I were a bicycle thief and I actually took someones bike, got 15 steps away, and got gripped up by two 40 year olds, I would be scared ****less and probably would think twice about stealing another bike.

Not to mention the fact that OPs actions led to the arrest of a confirmed thief -- deterrence at its finest. frankstoneline's would instead have "grabbed the bike when the guy first approached it and left it for the police to sort out." sorry, frankstoneline, but approaching a bike and casing it doesn't even amount to an attempted crime under the most liberal standard of attempt. that thief would still be running around stealing bikes if OP let him go. theres nothing for the police to "sort out" at that point.

All i'm saying is that you have to look at the big picture. The OP deterred this bike thief from stealing a different bike that night, and probably more in the future. Good job, OP.

[QUOTE=frankstoneline;6517269][QUOTE=Pepper Grinder;6515129]the person who has proven himself to be a felon...
Even in the state of washington, theft of property with a value over $250 and less than $1500, it is a class C felony. "Theft in the second degree" they call it.

Linky

In Louisiana, we simply call it "theft" and with a value over $500, the kid is looking at up to 10 years in jail, with or without hard labor and a fine up to $3000...or both.

Linky



Oh..and thanks, russ. Colin running down the guy is the best part of the story. It was the classic gazelle/wildebeast scenario. "If I can just keep him in sight, I will outlast him" was colins state of mind.

That would have landed the OP in jail, even for brandishing.

this was a success story. no innocents were hurt, the thief visited jail to think about his dumb actions, and the owner got his bike back without damage.

[QUOTE=Bacchusbill;6518091][QUOTE=frankstoneline;6517269]
I'm no lawyer, so I have little grounds to argue about felony or not, but I know that one time a friend of mine was asking his step father (a public defender) about the difference between larceny and theft, as he saw seemingly similar cases coming through when he worked as a clerk in the courthouse under different headings, and his step dad said that in MOST cases unless there is breaking and entering or forced entry or the stolen goods are of an excessive value, cases of theft get tried as larseny, which is a misdemeanor and has a penalty of something like 6 months in jail and or community service and house arrest. I dont know if that is the case everywhere, but it's the explanation I was given. As much of a bummer as it is, to blanket someone grabbing an unlocked bike as a felon is misleading, despite the fact the fellow was probably less than bright and a criminal nonetheless.

Not if he shot the theif and bouncers, and the only remaining witnesses agreed upon his alleby.

That would've landed the OP in Valhalla. Fsck Virgins, or hopscotch with Jesus, or the big Spaghetti bowl in the sky FSM heaven...

I'll take hot Viking lusty mead swilling vixens ftw. Valkyries, plus when you die odds are you get to listen to black or thrash metal instead of elevator music. Big plus there.

Frank, your tenacity to defend the civil liberties of an accused theif is admirable. Not your argument of giving the benefit of doubt to the accused instead of to me, but your tenacity is admirable. Hopefully, you will keep that passion and not become jaded to real life as you grow up.

correct.

holy run on sentence, batman!



true. His initial charge will have little bearing on what he is convicted of. Plea bargaining is a normal, everyday occurence.

Yep. Click on links provided in my last post to see what those values are in your state and mine.


fine. Convict him of a misdemeanor. I suspect that ONLY 6 months in the orleans parish jail system will be life changing, and I doubt he will steal a bicycle again.....

......so until he pleads down, can we call him an accused felon, as opposed to a convicted felon? Still, the label "felon" is justified.


It varies from state to state.

correct.

What would you do if that guy was in UR base killin UR d00dz?

Down south of you, we have lots more gunz.