Can’t use deadly force to defend property except for a couple of pretty specific situations.  Sounds like this probably was NOT one of them.

Drawing a weapon and pointing it at a suspect is not use of deadly force though, actually firing the weapon would be.
If you walked up to a car thief with a bat but didn't swing it would be the same issue with regards to deadly force. So the requirements to use deadly force are not the same as to present a deadly weapon.

Criminals should have a 3 strike rule,  after 3 felony crimes the next one is auto death sentence.   Would really cut down crime.

The supreme court (IIRC) ruled that automatic death penalty sentences are unconstitutional.

Death penalty may be a bit extreme for stealing $100 worth of agricultural products.

Death penalty may be a bit extreme for stealing $100 worth of agricultural products.

Is that really a felony?

Death penalty may be a bit extreme for stealing $100 worth of agricultural products.

Dont steal and it wont be a problem.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Dont steal and it wont be a problem.

Saw a Star Trek: TNG episode where the planet the crew was visiting had a strict set of laws.  The enforcement was randomly selected by sectors.  If you happened to be in a monitored sector and break the law, you get arrested.  If the sector is not being watched, you will not get in trouble.  The randomness kept everyone on their toes no matter where they were rather than risk being in the wrong place at the wrong time doing wrong.   

Lt. Wesley Crusher was horsing around playing some game of catch or something, and he accidentally fell headfirst into a gardening plot.  There was some minor damage, and the sector just happened to be actively monitored.

Oh, did i mention that the punishment for all infractions regardless of severity was the same?

Death!

After a trial and discussion, the planet's leaders decided they could not make an exception for an outsider, so they scheduled his execution.  The dilemma was, of course, whether Picard would break the prime "non-interference" directive, or act to save Wesley from such a disproportionate punishment.

When calling for extreme punishments for others, remember how screwed up our justice system is.  It might be you arguing for your own life against bogus charges one day.  Nowadays, it's just not enough to actually be innocent to avoid punishment.

I remember that episode.  Interesting dilemma.

When in Rome, can one expect to be treated using laws other than that of the Romans? 

When in Russia, does one expect Russian laws to be differently applied if one was American? Singapore?

Can we expect God given rights listed in the Bill of Rights to be observed in countries other than the USA? 

I remember that episode.  Interesting dilemma.

When in Rome, can one expect to be treated using laws other than that of the Romans? 

When in Russia, does one expect Russian laws to be differently applied if one was American? Singapore?

Can we expect God given rights listed in the Bill of Rights to be observed in countries other than the USA?

When in Rome, do what the Romans do...

Sent from my moto g power (2021) using Tapatalk

Saw a Star Trek: TNG episode where the planet the crew was visiting had a strict set of laws.  The enforcement was randomly selected by sectors.  If you happened to be in a monitored sector and break the law, you get arrested.  If the sector is not being watched, you will not get in trouble.  The randomness kept everyone on their toes no matter where they were rather than risk being in the wrong place at the wrong time doing wrong.   

Lt. Wesley Crusher was horsing around playing some game of catch or something, and he accidentally fell headfirst into a gardening plot.  There was some minor damage, and the sector just happened to be actively monitored.

Oh, did i mention that the punishment for all infractions regardless of severity was the same?

Death!

After a trial and discussion, the planet's leaders decided they could not make an exception for an outsider, so they scheduled his execution.  The dilemma was, of course, whether Picard would break the prime "non-interference" directive, or act to save Wesley from such a disproportionate punishment.

When calling for extreme punishments for others, remember how screwed up our justice system is.  It might be you arguing for your own life against bogus charges one day.  Nowadays, it's just not enough to actually be innocent to avoid punishment.

So what did Piccard do?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

So what did Piccard do?

It gets more complicated.  There's a strange ship (entity?) orbiting that the people of the planet call their God.

In order to convince the planet Edo counsel to spare Wesley, he transports one of the counsel leaders to the Enterprise to show what Star Fleet has accomplished. 

Apparently their God/Entity has a rule against the people leaving the planet, and now the entire ship's crew is to be executed for the violation.

Picard decided he's not losing his crew over a couple of minor infractions, so he decides to break Wesley out and take his ship out of danger.

However, that strange ship, entity, whatever then demonstrates it can disable the ship, transporters, etc.  It has the power to destroy the ship completely if the captain doesn't comply with the execution order. 

After a lot of back and forth and strategerizing, the entity eventually grants them a pass and tells them to leave and never return.  Kind of an anti-climactic ending.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation)

Is that really a felony?

Theft 2 is a felony.  Actually it could go to a lower value.

     (c)  An aquacultural product or part thereof from premises that are fenced or enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders or there is prominently displayed on the premises a sign or signs sufficient to give notice and reading as follows:  "Private Property", "No Trespassing", or a substantially similar message;

I suppose a thief could steal a talapia from a home aquaponics tank and get the death penalty.

Theft 2 is a felony.  Actually it could go to a lower value.

     (c)  An aquacultural product or part thereof from premises that are fenced or enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders or there is prominently displayed on the premises a sign or signs sufficient to give notice and reading as follows:  "Private Property", "No Trespassing", or a substantially similar message;

I suppose a thief could steal a talapia from a home aquaponics tank and get the death penalty.

3 tilapia on 3 separate occasions.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

The supreme court (IIRC) ruled that automatic death penalty sentences are unconstitutional.

The reason there was they did not differentiate between Violent felonies and property felonies.
I agree with three strikes you are out in the case of violent felonies.
Murder rape, physical assault resulting in ER treatment et al.
Not so much because of car thefts.
 
Automatic death penalty has a place, but I don't trust the government to
do it justly. 
 

The reason there was they did not differentiate between Violent felonies and property felonies.
I agree with three strikes you are out in the case of violent felonies.
Murder rape, physical assault resulting in ER treatment et al.
Not so much because of car thefts.
 
Automatic death penalty has a place, but I don't trust the government to
do it justly. 
 

You touched on the problem 3 strike laws are facing. Some were implemented so that it was any three strikes but that ended up hammering drug users and petty crimes a lot and in way that didn't really accomplish much so there is a lot of pushback against these types of laws. In my opinion 3 strike laws should be for certain classes of violent felonies.

You touched on the problem 3 strike laws are facing. Some were implemented so that it was any three strikes but that ended up hammering drug users and petty crimes a lot and in way that didn't really accomplish much so there is a lot of pushback against these types of laws. In my opinion 3 strike laws should be for certain classes of violent felonies.

Using some drugs often leads to committing different crimes in order to get money to feed the need for said drugs.  So a simple drug arrest/citation today isn't so simple in the long run.

Using some drugs often leads to committing different crimes in order to get money to feed the need for said drugs.  So a simple drug arrest/citation today isn't so simple in the long run.

What I was getting at was that with drug addiction the deterrent effect is not the same, it is a different dynamic. Often for someone looking for their next high nothing matters as much as getting a hit, the feeling is better than the best sex they ever had so they aren't thinking about trying to avoid jail. I don't think we can solve our crime problem by just locking up someone for decades on their third drug offense. From a simple logistics side, I don't think we can afford the financial cost. I think it is better to hammer the ones who choose violent approaches to feed their drug habits.