Forums > Personal > World's most polite robber

forum rss feed
Author

Thistleboy1980 user not visiting Queenzone.com
You wanna ring the bell?
Thistleboy1980
Deity: 3057 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Feb 11, 19:12 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

See what manners can get you!

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20110209/tod-so-sorry-polite-robber-caught-on-cam-870a197.html


It ain't about how hard you can hit, it's about how hard you can get hit: how much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!
The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18639 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Feb 11, 23:48 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The unemployment rate is at 9%, yet they have trillions of dollars to spend on wars before they can take care of their own citizens.  Welcome to America in 2011, where robbery is the last resort for guys like this.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
Thistleboy1980 user not visiting Queenzone.com
You wanna ring the bell?
Thistleboy1980
Deity: 3057 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Feb 11, 05:29 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote: The unemployment rate is at 9%, yet they have trillions of dollars to spend on wars before they can take care of their own citizens.  Welcome to America in 2011, where robbery is the last resort for guys like this.
============================================================================================

Spot on. It really is sad, but oh so true.  Not just for the USA, but here in the UK too (although unemployment is higher). 
I actually couldn't help but feel for the guy - and the shopkeeper was so gracious about it, it was touching.  The guy does have previous for it though, but the way he said "if I get back on my feet, I'll bring it back to you" would have brought a tear to a glass eye.


It ain't about how hard you can hit, it's about how hard you can get hit: how much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!
GratefulFan user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Feb 11, 08:33 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

'Guys like this'?  As in guys with a record that includes fraud, who rob gas stations while on probation for bank robbery?  The polite guy routine is as likely to be a tool of a 65 year old main to gain cooperation as it is to be anything else.  I find myself with some curiousity about how old his hungry kids are as well.  At best, it's about what this guys wants to think about himself.  Because he's certainly not thinking about his victims in any meaningful way.

user name user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1449 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Feb 11, 11:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Seriously, it looks like some of you guys need to pull the wool out from over your eyes.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/theblotter/2014162297_polite_robber_suspect_once_kno.html

"In 2003, Hess pleaded guilty to robbery after he was arrested in connection with a string of heists."

"The Seattle man had quit his job at a Starbucks in Madison Park before Christmas, and he was sure his unemployment benefits would dry up any day, according to charges filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle."

Also, he more likely than not has no children (or family), as I have heard from multiple (albeit unverified) sources.

It's rather silly to give an armed robber the benefit of the doubt in any scenario, no matter how "polite" (I guess you must have missed that part about the robbery) he is. He is presumptively a deplorable, amoral degenerate unless it has been proven that there are mitigating circumstances that may or may not at least partially excuse his actions - however, we shouldn't make up these circumstances for him.

Furthermore, while armed robbery is perhaps the "last resort," that doesn't excuse skipping every other resort before the last. For us to even consider whether armed robbery is even somewhat excusable - for us to consider that this felon is not a deplorable, amoral degenerate - he must not have forgone any employment opportunities, no matter how undesirable. He must have attempted to sell or pawn off all of his possessions that are not absolutely necessary for survival. He must have explored and attempted to procure welfare, and failed. He must have explored and attempted to otherwise seek the benefits of the generosity of others (e.g., panhandling), and failed. He must have explored and attempted nonviolent means of theft, and failed. Furthermore, the lives of his loved ones must be immediately threatened, and he must have genuinely been acting exclusively in their favor. And he must not take any more than the bare minimum that he needs.

In short, not only must the robbery be absolutely necessary, not only must the robbery be limited to that which is absolutely necessary, but he must have explored every other possible opportunity conceivable before actively infringing upon the rights of others.


Creativity can always cover for a lack of knowledge.
Amazon user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 996 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Feb 11, 11:54 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

While I don't agree with user name (kinda like having password as your password :P) that the robber is a 'deplorable, amoral degenerate', I do agree that we shouldn't act as if he is doing what he is doing because he has no choice. No matter his situation, it does not justify his threatening someone with a loaded gun.

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18639 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Feb 11, 13:06 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Hmm, why is it always that people who aren't destitute are the first to judge those who are destitute?  Everyone seems to be an expert on everything they don't understand..


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
lifetimefanofqueen user not visiting Queenzone.com
lifetimefanofqueen
Royalty: 1328 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Feb 11, 13:38 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

he obviously didnt want to be violant because he saw the old lady who beat up the robbers in the streets on TV

Sebastian user not visiting Queenzone.com
Sebastian
Deity: 6328 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 11 Feb 11, 07:50 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

> Everyone seems to be an expert on everything they don't understand..

It's called humanity. Want some proof? Pick any thread on this forum.


John hated HS. Fred's fave singer was not PR. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' Witness testimonies are often inaccurate. Scotland's not in England. 'Bo Rhap' hasn't got 180 voices.
GratefulFan user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 12 Feb 11, 23:51 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote:

Everyone seems to be an expert on everything they don't understand..
==================================

You mean like weaving a whole fairytale around an armed robber because he said please and thank-you?  Google is full of polite thief stories. Of course good people can do bad things, and it's not enough to point out that not every person who finds themselves chronically short of cash resorts to sticking up banks and gas stations.  That said, we can have as much empathy for this guy as a person as we like, but as a society we still have to deal with his behaviour as criminal.  I think people are a bit too willing to romanticize felony robbery.

-fatty- 2850 user not visiting Queenzone.com
-fatty- 2850
Deity: 2029 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 13 Feb 11, 08:15 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It could so easily gone the other way had the store-keeper not handed over the cash.

"I'm really sorry about this but I'm going to have to put some bullets in your body. You might want to put your fingers in your ears as this gun is a tad on the loud side."
BLAM, BLAM,BLAM!
"I'm so sorry that I had to shoot in the chest just then. I sincerely hope that you survive your wounds and make a full recovery."

fatty.

Amazon user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 996 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Feb 11, 04:29 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote: "Hmm, why is it always that people who aren't destitute are the first to judge those who are destitute?"


Please, it's not about judging anyone, although I should point out that you do your fair bit of judging. It is about how no matter how poor one may be, it does not justify pointing a gun at someone.

This guy didn't just rob a house; he pointed a (presumably) loaded gun at someone. Nothing justifies that, and perhaps instead of bemoaning the fact that some people do not consider this guy to be a victim, maybe you can think about the real victim? That is the guy who had a gun pointed at him. What if this guy said no? Would the polite robber be so polite? How would the guy be coping with the fact that he was robbed at gun point? What this robber did was terrible, and his being destitute can certainly be brought up as a mitigating factor in the sentencing hearing, however I do not believe that it can in any way be used to justify or explain away what this guy did.

"Everyone seems to be an expert on everything they don't understand.."

You don't know what we do or do not understand. Regardless, it's irrelevent; the robber committed a serious crime.

BTW, I could say the same to you. You seem to be an expert on armed robbery yet presumably you've never been a victim of one.

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18639 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Feb 11, 10:07 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Amazon wrote:

BTW, I could say the same to you.  You seem to be an expert on armed robbery yet presumably you've never been a victim of one.

====================================

Right, so I'm not going to assume that every human being in this world would react the same to being robbed.  Maybe this clerk had a shred of humanity too, and knew the guy wasn't going to pull the trigger.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
Amazon user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 996 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Feb 11, 11:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote:"Right, so I'm not going to assume that every human being in this world would react the same to being robbed. Maybe this clerk had a shred of humanity too, and knew the guy wasn't going to pull the trigger."


Incredible. You actually think that if someone points a gun at you, and you don't know if they are going to pull the trigger, you don't have a 'shred of humanity'?

That is so ignorant it's not funny. For someone who has never been a victim of an armed robbery, that you would actually judge the victim and suggest that if he was afraid for his life (a natural reaction BTW) he does not have humanity, is incredible. This is truly taking arrogance and blindness to an entirely different level.

You're right, BTW. Not every human being would react the same way to being robbed. But no matter how they might react, it does not justify robbing them. If the robber had any shred of humanity, he wouldn't have gone into a store and pointed a gun at someone.

Robbing someone, in this way, doesn't simply take money from them. It also, in many cases, traumatizes them. But what would you care? Afterall, the victim had to know that the robber wouldn't actually pull the trigger; if the victim had refused, the robber was just going to apologise and walk away with the unfired gun.

Sebastian user not visiting Queenzone.com
Sebastian
Deity: 6328 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Feb 11, 05:36 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I don't know what the hell is going on this year, but I actually agree with Amazon. Armed robbery is not a game. It's serious business with serious consequences, even if it doesn't end in homicide. There's some sort of balance between being an extremist 'he who steals a pen from work deserves the chair and has to burn in hell for eternity' and 'well... he's suffered a lot, the government's done this and that, he's been "forced" to do what he did'.

Because if you look at things like that, every single thief, hitman, gangster, rapist, genocide or off-pitch singer has a valid Freudian excuse for whatever they do. What if the person who got robbed (who was completely innocent, BTW) gets so traumatised he starts beating his wife? I'm sure that's OK, since he suffered a lot. And then his wife mistreats their kids because she needs to give vent to the anger and frustration she feels. And the kids become bullies. And one of the kids they bully winds up committing suicide, thus enabling their parents and loved ones to seek and destroy the bullies, one of which had a baby, who then grows up with all sorts of fears and becomes an underachiever, compulsive liar and outcast. And then, one day, he or she goes to a shop and robs it with a gun... but that's alright, as he/she went through a lot!


John hated HS. Fred's fave singer was not PR. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' Witness testimonies are often inaccurate. Scotland's not in England. 'Bo Rhap' hasn't got 180 voices.
The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18639 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Feb 11, 13:37 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Amazon wrote:

For someone who has never been a victim of an armed robbery, that you would actually judge the victim and suggest that if he was afraid for his life (a natural reaction BTW) he does not have humanity, is incredible.

================

Where exactly did I imply that it was not possible for the clerk to have a composite of the two reactions, inner and/or outer?

In the past, I said "I am not a monotheist," and you chose to assume that meant "I am an atheist."

And today, you translated my last post as "The clerk cannot both have humanity and be afraid."

Honestly, you need to take a step back and think before you write, and quit making assumptions about what others are thinking.  You could have asked for clarification of what my thinking was, but instead you chose to see black and white and assume that I could only fathom one or the other.

I think it'd be best if you stopped responding to anything I write here, and I'll do the same for you.  We can co-exist, but you should not be turning threads that involve many people into flame wars.  This is just plain silly.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
Amazon user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 996 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Feb 11, 16:19 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote: "Where exactly did I imply that it was not possible for the clerk to have a composite of the two reactions, inner and/or outer?"


I can only go by what you write, and if you only write one or two sentences, you can't blame me for misinterpreting you. What you said was pretty clear, but if you have a problem with my interpretation, then explain to me why my interpretation was incorrect. Regardless, don't blame me when you should have made it clearer.

"In the past, I said "I am not a monotheist," and you chose to assume that meant "I am an atheist." "

No comment. I am not going to enter those discussions again.

"And today, you translated my last post as "The clerk cannot both have humanity and be afraid." "

You wrote 'right, so I'm not going to assume that every human being in this world would react the same to being robbed. Maybe this clerk had a shred of humanity too, and knew the guy wasn't going to pull the trigger.' Which is all you wrote.

How else am I meant to interpret that?

You know, instead of blaming me for misinterpreting you, perhaps you could ask youself why did I do so? You should have made yourself clearer, as it's not my responsibility to read your mind.

"Honestly, you need to take a step back and think before you write, and quit making assumptions about what others are thinking."

Excuse me? You are giving me advice? This is ridiculous!

I don't need any advice from you on thinking before I write and on making assumptions about other people. When it comes to those two things, you are the pot calling the kettle black!

"You could have asked for clarification of what my thinking was, but instead you chose to see black and white and assume that I could only fathom one or the other."

Actually, I don't see things in black and white. That's your area. I simply don't think, in this case, that being destitute is an excuse for pointing a loaded gun in someone's face.

As for asking for a clarification, no, it's not my responsibility to do so. I do so in some cases, but I am not obligated to do so. You made a post, and if you don't want people to misinterpret you, you should have been worded it differently, or expanded upon your thoughts.

However I 'choose' to see the world (which is not in black + white) is irrelevent. You can't just write a couple of sentences, and then blame the reader because they weren't able to read your mind and misinterpreted you.

"I think it'd be best if you stopped responding to anything I write here, and I'll do the same for you."

Nobody is forcing you to respond to me. I tend to respond to whichever posts I feel inclined to repond to, but if you want to ignore me, then go right ahead.

"We can co-exist, but you should not be turning threads that involve many people into flame wars. This is just plain silly."

No, you do not get to blame me. Somebody is turning this into a flame war, however it is not me. The fact that you not only don't respond to the meat of my posts, but also only respond to me, suggests it is YOU who is turning this into a flame war, and for you to think that I am is more than silly. It is absurd!

To be perfectly honest, I don't know if I will be responding to many of your future posts. The religion discussion, the vegatarianism discussion, as well as a couple of other ones, have shown that attempting to have discussions with you, where I have a different opinion, is a terrible idea.

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18639 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Feb 11, 18:02 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Amazon wrote:

"You made a post, and if you don't want people to misinterpret you, you should have been worded it differently, or expanded upon your thoughts."

==========================

I don't owe you or anyone at this forum a damn thing.  What is it with people and their sense of entitlement these days?  I'm expressing myself as I feel fit, not as someone else feels I should.

If you don't like the extent of which someone expresses themselves, then that's your problem.

On a lighter note, methinks you're taking this forum business a wee bit too seriously.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
Amazon user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 996 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Feb 11, 18:23 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote: "I don't owe you or anyone at this forum a damn thing."


Incredible. You blame me for 'misinterpreting' you, which is not my problem or fault at all, and when I suggest that you take measures to correct it, you throw out this "I don't owe you or anyone at this forum a damn thing" crap!

BTW, two can play this game. In your previous post you said "You could have asked for clarification of what my thinking was", well my response is I don't owe you or anyone at this forum a damn thing!

"What is it with people and their sense of entitlement these days?"

I agree. In what possible world do you honestly think that you are entitled to my seeking a clarification from you?!!! Furthermore, in what possible world do you think you are entitled to blame/criticise people for misinterpreting you, which is not their fault in the slightest?!!! Finally, what makes you think that you are entitled to give others advice on thinking before they write and making assumptions about other people?

You are so hypocritical it's not funny!

"I'm expressing myself as I feel fit, not as someone else feels I should.'

Then don't blame other people if they misinterpret you!

"If you don't like the extent of which someone expresses themselves, then that's your problem."

Similarly, if you don't like that I misinterpreted you, then that's your problem.

"On a lighter note, methinks you're taking this forum business a wee bit too seriously."

If this was real life, I would strangle you.

After this pathetic post of yours, in which you started with the 'damn thing' BS, you are telling me that I'm taking this too seriously?!

GH, have a look in the mirror and get over yourself! You are an absolute hypocrite and you have no self-awareness at all. Pathetic!

The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18639 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 16 Feb 11, 18:33 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Amazon wrote:

"you have no self-awareness at all."

Once again judging a person's overall psyche based on posts on a forum.  Well done.

"If this was real life, I would strangle you."

Resorting to threats?  Wait, I'm the one who takes forums too seriously.  My mistake..


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca