Texas restaurant owner fatally shoots suspected burglar, police say
A Texas restaurant owner fatally shot a man suspected of breaking into his business multiple times in recent weeks.
KGBT-TV reported that 46-year-old Gilbert Medina Jr. was shot and killed at the Pumpjack Mexican Restaurant in Edinburg early Tuesday.You know, here's the thing. We've been shown, over and over again, that the police have no duty whatsoever to protect us. So this guy's restaurant - the business that literally and figuratively puts food on his table - gets hit repeatedly. The police are under no geas to stop the burglar from stealing from this business owner - if they happen to catch the guy, great; however they are not obligated in any way, shape, or form to stop him from repeatedly stealing from the store owner.
So, tired of watching his hard work stolen from him, the restaurant owner decides he's going to be his own security guard. He could just as easily have hired a private company to patrol his premises and do exactly what he did; however, he's low on funds - remember, he's being stolen from repeatedly with no recompense. He hears the restaurant get broken into, and when he confronts the robber, he's attacked. Pretty clear case of self defense from where I'm sitting - if he had hired a security guard to watch the place who was attacked, I don't think anyone would fault the guard for shooting the burglar.
I'm pretty damn tired of a couple of things (well, a lot more than that, but a couple as pertain to this story). First, that this is some sort of "vigilante" action. Look, if the restaurant owner had found the bad guy's wallet at the scene (stranger things have happened), and then went to his house where he shot the dude dead, yeah, that's vigilante action. Keeping vigil in your place of business - your livelihood - and defending yourself against an attacker is not vigilanteism.
The second thing is the concept that "things" aren't worth killing people over. Usually it's in the comments to a DGC story about someone who defends themself against a strongarm robbery - the common lament being that a crook doesn't deserve to die over the $20 in your wallet. Now, this is objectionable on several levels. One, if they're using a weapon to threaten you, you have no way of knowing if they just want to scare you into giving your wallet up, if they have intentions to hurt or kill you if you don't comply, or if they simply want to hurt or kill you anyways regardless of your actions.
And two, they are taking things from you that do not belong to them - whether it be cash money or something you paid money for, they are taking those things from you when they have no claim to them. You worked hard for the money they're stealing or the money to buy the item(s) they are stealing from you - why on earth shouldn't you defend that which you have worked hard for? If it's not worth killing over, then dammit, it's not worth getting killed over.
Enough goblins start realizing that stuff's not worth dying for, maybe the world might be a better place.
Dead Goblin Count: 379
That is all.
7 comments:
You know, it's not a big deal to anyone when I protect my livestock (my livelihood) from coyotes or other feral predators. Why can't anyone else protect their livelihood?
If I shouldn't use violence to protect myself; isn't there a much greater taboo on using violence to take it?
Oh but the antis never seem to get around to addressing that point. As you say, if someone is threatening me I don't know if they are just going to take my stuff or do worse.
If the antis don't want lives lost over stuff I suggest they start a campaign to convince thieves not to steal. And I'll wish them luck with that as I stand back and watch.
Stealing from me will not result in a homicide.
It's a ritualized form of suicide.
The rite begins by intoning, "gimme all your money".
Y'know, that's a reasonable point you make, McThag.
"Give me all your money"
Well, let's see. With the current price - and scarcity - of ammunition these days, the 25 rounds of 9mm JHP are about $40 - $50.
That's more than the cash in my wallet.
Ergo...
Hmmm. Something to ponder.
Why is it when Joe Crackhead takes a Gun into the local Stop and Rob, shoot a Clerk and gets away, it barely makes the News.
But a Nutjob with a Shotgun starts shooting up a small town in New York State, then Barricades himself, suddenly there are Hundreds of local, State and Federal LEOs on the scene with Armored Vehicles, Robots, SWAT TEAMS, etc.
Good Lord, even Homeland Security and the FBI showed up!
But aren't both basically the Same Thing? A Guy with a Gun decides to to Evil.
Yet one more thing to ponder.
If $20 isn't worth killing over, then the bad guy will just walk away when I say no, right?
Oh, I guess he thinks it's worth killing over.
One thing not mentioned and most certainly no slip on Jay's part. Considering the wages paid to any security guard these days who says the guard he may of hired doesn't come back on him for the liability when he/she is actually attacked and injured or even shot. What about the security guards family if he is found dead. The anti-freedom folks never consider any of these things when they spout their venomous hatered "just give them the money" and somehow the magical talisman will suddenly appear and the bad guy/gal will say thank you and simply walk away.
If you believe that last part I have some swamp land to sell you in Alaska.
Post a Comment