Hmmm armed drug dealer, two untrained gun wielding bail bondsmen what could go wrong...maybe ad a little whiskey to the mix! Effin amazing there wasn't three more body bags needed. These people are living a hundred years in the past still thinking its the wild west! As little faith as I have in law enforcement in the US that's a job for them not for any joe who has a gun license. Holy fack after watching that video i'm sure a few people had to go home & change their undies!
Bounty Hunters Killed in Violent Texas Shootout
- Thread starter Kilgore Trout
- Start date
If it was available, seeing as they are a very high risk due to their job, the rates would probably prohibitive if at all.I wonder if you have to have some sort of insurance as a bounty hunter for just such as occasion.
Many years ago there was a case of 2 American bounty hunters coming to Canada to arrest a fugitive and take him back to the U.S. They and many other Americans could not understand that American bounty hunters have no right to operate in Canada. If I remember right the bounty hunters managed to get the prisoner back to the U.S. The fugitive argued in court that the BHs had no authority in Canada so he should be released. I don't remember the final outcome of the case.
Assuming this info is correct, they may have broken the law by illegally entering that car dealership:
https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=314
https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=314
In the United States, bounty hunters have varying levels of authority in the execution of their duties. Generally, depending on the individual state's laws, a bounty hunter can enter the fugitive's private property without a warrant in order to take the person back into custody.
However, in most states the bounty hunter cannot enter the property of anyone other than the fugitive without a warrant or the permission of the owner, even if pursuing a fugitive, without being guilty of trespass
Two things..... the quote says "in most states" so who knows if it applies..... also do they mean private property? or any land owned by a person? if you walked into the dealership during business hours the list of situations in which you would be charged with trespass is short.Assuming this info is correct, they may have broken the law by illegally entering that car dealership:
https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=314
Anyways, will be interesting to see how this turns out as this seems like an irregular event.
the walking in and shooting up are two different things.I dunno, but I think its ridiculous they can just waltz into a private business and start shooting up the place. If they can do that to a car dealership, they can do it to your private residence as well
there's also a difference between walking into a dealership and your living room.
the shooting up is the problem.
Seemingly the fugitive started the "shooting up." That is of course a different question than was this a wise way to attempt to apprehend him.the walking in and shooting up are two different things.
there's also a difference between walking into a dealership and your living room.
the shooting up is the problem.
who pays for the cleanup?the walking in and shooting up are two different things.
there's also a difference between walking into a dealership and your living room.
the shooting up is the problem.
How much money is there in the estate of the Fugitive? What other obligations does his estate have?who pays for the cleanup?
So, presumably in the short term, the Automobile Dealership's Insurance.
Maybe in the land of the free, you can buy an endorsement for "shoot-outs at the OK Corral"?How much money is there in the estate of the Fugitive? What other obligations does his estate have?
So, presumably in the short term, the Automobile Dealership's Insurance.
Every society has its psychopaths. If there's no law and order (e.g Somalia), the psychos become warlords, and impose their own brand of law and order.Its just another casualty on that stupid war on drugs that the US will never win.
USA does have l.a.o; so becoming a warlord is not available for USA psychos. The USA needs another outlet by which the USA's vicious violent psychopaths can make a good living.
The USA's War On Drugs is that outlet. How else would US psychopaths whose only skill is to be viciously violent, even earn a living, if USA were to drop the W.O.D?
The notion that the W.O.D. deters vulnerable teenagers and young adults from doing drugs, was disproved and dismissed long ago. But one effect of the W.O.D. is that it enables USA's psychopaths to thrive and prosper by being vicious and violent -- so at least the W.O.D. focuses the harm USA psychopaths do onto the clowns who do drugs.
Same applies to prostitution. If USA were to decriminalize prostitution, it would no longer be profitable for vicious thugs to become pimps -- and who knows then what section of society they might harm?
I'm not so clear on your analogy.Every society has its psychopaths. If there's no law and order (e.g Somalia), the psychos become warlords, and impose their own brand of law and order.
USA does have l.a.o; so becoming a warlord is not available for USA psychos. The USA needs another outlet by which the USA's vicious violent psychopaths can make a good living.
The USA's War On Drugs is that outlet. How else would US psychopaths whose only skill is to be viciously violent, even earn a living, if USA were to drop the W.O.D?
The notion that the W.O.D. deters vulnerable teenagers and young adults from doing drugs, was disproved and dismissed long ago. But one effect of the W.O.D. is that it enables USA's psychopaths to thrive and prosper by being vicious and violent -- so at least the W.O.D. focuses the harm USA psychopaths do onto the clowns who do drugs.
Same applies to prostitution. If USA were to decriminalize prostitution, it would no longer be profitable for vicious thugs to become pimps -- and who knows then what section of society they might harm?
So the W.O.D. means that cops are also psychopaths?
(I don't necessarily agree on their W.O.D. btw)
The WOD is a massive funnel for the American private prison system.Every society has its psychopaths. If there's no law and order (e.g Somalia), the psychos become warlords, and impose their own brand of law and order.
USA does have l.a.o; so becoming a warlord is not available for USA psychos. The USA needs another outlet by which the USA's vicious violent psychopaths can make a good living.
The USA's War On Drugs is that outlet. How else would US psychopaths whose only skill is to be viciously violent, even earn a living, if USA were to drop the W.O.D?
The notion that the W.O.D. deters vulnerable teenagers and young adults from doing drugs, was disproved and dismissed long ago. But one effect of the W.O.D. is that it enables USA's psychopaths to thrive and prosper by being vicious and violent -- so at least the W.O.D. focuses the harm USA psychopaths do onto the clowns who do drugs.
Same applies to prostitution. If USA were to decriminalize prostitution, it would no longer be profitable for vicious thugs to become pimps -- and who knows then what section of society they might harm?
Without the WOD I bet crime would have fallen, as in most developed countries.
So it's less about protecting people and more about $$$$
My post #32 was meant as a sarcastic comment on the reasons why USA still wages its War on Drugs.
Suppose you are a vicious violent psychopath, and you want the government to provide a way for you to be able to use your vicious violence to make money.
You'd want the government to criminalize drugs, to create a black market. The tougher the War on Drugs, the more vicious the psychopaths who succeed at it.
Of course, you realize that the government is not going to advertise what they're doing as making the world a better place for vicious criminals. But the icing on the W.O.D. cake is that the gov can advertise that this is a way of deterring young kids off drugs.
Seriously -- how do you tell the difference between what the US government is actually doing, and what the violent psychopaths would do, if they were in charge?
Suppose you are a vicious violent psychopath, and you want the government to provide a way for you to be able to use your vicious violence to make money.
You'd want the government to criminalize drugs, to create a black market. The tougher the War on Drugs, the more vicious the psychopaths who succeed at it.
Of course, you realize that the government is not going to advertise what they're doing as making the world a better place for vicious criminals. But the icing on the W.O.D. cake is that the gov can advertise that this is a way of deterring young kids off drugs.
Seriously -- how do you tell the difference between what the US government is actually doing, and what the violent psychopaths would do, if they were in charge?
