A. Stealing another person goods that actually is theirs or
B. Stealing from someone that which belongs to you.
In my opinion I would think that A is appropriate but to steal back what is yours is taking and not stealing or robbing. But to harm or endanger then that is another issue. I would like the opinion of others to coninside with what they think.
2007-09-18 20:24:26 · 15 answers · asked by JoJoBa 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Etiquette
my friend thinks you're high, dude
2007-09-18 20:45:40 · answer #1 · answered by Me :) 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that both are robbery and relatively few definitions of the word "robbery" include the qualification that the item being taken must belong to the person from whom the item is being taken. Most definitions simply require an item to be taken from a person by force or threat of violence.
However, to get more to the heart of what you are asking I don't believe that a person is justified in taking something from another person through force or threat of violence just because they know or believe that it rightfully belongs to them.
Allowing people to "reclaim" stolen property in the way that OJ SImpson reportedly did, opens the door for people to (a) claim that they believe the property they were stealing BELONGED to them (b) Wrongly "reclaim" an item that they believe is their stolen item but, in fact, is not (c) "Reclaim" an item from an individual who lawfully acquired that item--perhaps from a pawn shop or ebay--even if it was stolen
In other words, we have a justice system, a court system for a reason....if we allow people to circumvent that then many innocent individuals will be subject to people attempting to take justice in their own hands...
2007-09-19 03:55:20 · answer #2 · answered by joellemoe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say A it isn't robbery at all
I figure this is about O.J. so I will add this is not a murder trial from so many years ago that my kids don't remember it. This is a totally different thing for which he is being held accountable for the murder trial. Isn't this the United States Double Jeopardy or something like that. This was in response to a previous poster
2007-09-19 03:34:37 · answer #3 · answered by dee 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I just heard this on the radio regarding O.J. They had a lawyer on. Legally, O.J. would be have been okay if he only took what belonged to him WITHOUT any firearms/weapons. But the idiot threatened with guns, so now he's facing many charges with assault being one them. It didn't help that he also took some things that didn't belong to him. His accomplices also weren't in Vegas long enough for them to have had time to buy guns (there's a waiting period to buy guns). So it may be assumed that O.J. supplied them with guns, bringing yet more charges against him.
2007-09-19 03:35:01 · answer #4 · answered by BBHunter 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
there is a 211 which is armed robbery
recieving stolen property
commercialized burglary
I would say is A is stealing, which tends to be spur of the moment, robbery is always pre-meditated
2007-09-19 03:37:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lots of issues have been glazed over here. Like how did you get in to take 'your' things back, what that forced entry, breaking and entering or were you invited to dinner, saw you left your lighter on the table and slipped it into your pocket?
I think you are trying to build a case for O.J.?? Best to listen to the tape and know that a gun was involved.
2007-09-19 03:49:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think the answer is he had the right to ask for his things back, or call the police to get his things back but he didn't have the right to break in. That's breaking the law. I guess you're not sick of hearing about him. Hello, his book is coming out and he needs publicity so that they will sell. So he pulls this stupid stunt and is in the "news" again. Wake up!
2007-09-19 03:34:12 · answer #7 · answered by towanda 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
you left one out:
C: holding someone else at gunpoint to try to recover assets that were supposed to, by court order, be sold in order to pay a judgement awarded to 2 grieving families after you butchered their loved ones (one of them being the mother of your kids, the other someone whose only crime was to return a pair of sunglasses to a customer) and laughed about getting away with it?
yeah, i'd say this is another question about that punk oj
2007-09-19 03:37:42 · answer #8 · answered by spike missing debra m 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In modern power terminology I will prefer B. B is exact robbery, a sin , a terrorist act.
2007-09-19 03:33:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You don't steal something back that is actually yours - you sue to get it back or file a complaint with the police to have them arrested and get it returned - unless you are O.J. in which case everything you try to own belongs to the Goldmans
2007-09-19 03:30:58 · answer #10 · answered by Mike1942f 7 · 6⤊ 2⤋
A because be wouldnt really be robbery.
2007-09-19 03:29:47 · answer #11 · answered by scarface 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋