(Cable) Thieves drown after farmer shoots them

BGE said:
No matter what race, if the thieves were unarmed, the farmer is in serious dwang... why could he not call the police to handle the matter, or was his life in danger. My guess is the thieves were armed!
Click to expand...

The police would not have arrived in time. Stop defending criminals people. They chose a life of crime above a working life like the rest of us. They deserve what came their way.
 
BGE said:
No matter what race, if the thieves were unarmed, the farmer is in serious dwang... why could he not call the police to handle the matter, or was his life in danger. My guess is the thieves were armed!
Click to expand...

And the police would have found?

I get how angry these people get. If you have coolers and stores that has to go without power for weeks and produce rotting who do you claim money from?

The reality is that it’s not only his money rotting away. It's every farm worker's salary. And then they get angry and kill you in your sleep? When the media ask why they say the big bad farmer did not want to pay them. Nobody bothers to ask why there were not money to pay workers.

This should be the action of anybody seeing cable thieves. Shoot them. Electrocution is not a deterrent enough.

I have friends in that area that farms. They were attacked twice last year on their farm. Once the husband was slightly hurt. The second time he took 3 bullets.
 
Wyzak, so what you advocating is very man taking the law into his own hands? Before proven guilty?

That's the recipe for anarchy!

PS... if it was self defence I have zero issue with him shooting them...
 
BGE said:
Wyzak, so what you advocating is very man taking the law into his own hands? Before proven guilty?

That's the recipe for anarchy!
Click to expand...

Um, how much more proof of guilt do you need than trespassing in the middle of the night? I'm pretty sure they weren't there to weed his flowerbeds and paint his house.

Current law enforcement in this country isn't working.
 
The story would've been better had they NOT been shot and they had run into the dam and drowned (their own fault) - farmer get's off basically scott free. :(
Now it's possible that he was the result in their deaths :( Never nice knowing you killed someone, let alone 2 people!
 
BGE said:
Wyzak, so what you advocating is very man taking the law into his own hands? Before proven guilty?

That's the recipe for anarchy!
Click to expand...

If the ANC did not disban the system that was in place to protect the farmers you would not have had to defend yourself.

why did they run? If they stayed for the police to come they could have explained that they were not doing something wrong.
 
BGE said:
Wyzak, so what you advocating is very man taking the law into his own hands? Before proven guilty?
Click to expand...

I'd rather have two dead criminals - who might have been armed. Than another dead farmer who thought two criminals weren't armed.
 
Last edited:
It is anarchy. The law is no more. I say well done to all who have the guts to stop a criminal.
 
Sinbad said:
Um, how much more proof of guilt do you need than trespassing in the middle of the night? I'm pretty sure they weren't there to weed his flowerbeds and paint his house.
Click to expand...
So its OK for the farmer to shoot them, and one can assume he was trying to kill them based on the bullet wounds to the upper bodies and heads?
 
Probably only buck shot any how and wouldn't have killed and they probably couldn't swim, aaaannnyhooo they farmer must inverst in some crocs for they dam.

They do cause damage and endager others lives and cost every honest person a fortune every time we pay Escum, I am sick of crime and have no pitty.
 
gdiza said:
The story would've been better had they NOT been shot and they had run into the dam and drowned (their own fault) - farmer get's off basically scott free. :(
Click to expand...

He would still be blamed, no safety net and held liable.
 
grav80 said:
So its OK for the farmer to shoot them, and one can assume he was trying to kill them based on the bullet wounds to the upper bodies and heads?
Click to expand...

No. That was the part sticking out of the water. What other part should he have shot? If they were running on their hands their legs would have been hit.
 
Mila said:
No. That was the part sticking out of the water. What other part should he have shot? If they were running on their hands their legs would have been hit.
Click to expand...

That's assuming that they were in the water when they were shot.
 
Mila said:
No. That was the part sticking out of the water. What other part should he have shot? If they were running on their hands their legs would have been hit.
Click to expand...
News24 said:
The men, aged 32 and 35, ran into the farm dam and drowned.
Click to expand...
The bold part means they were already shot when they entered the dam
 
To quote Robin Hood - Men in Tights - "Good riddance, to bad rubbish"
 
grav80 said:
The bold part means they were already shot when they entered the dam
Click to expand...

That can mean they could not swim and drowned. That also does not proof that they were not shot in the dam. Ducking a bullet in water is not as easy as running like a rabbit on land. The only way you can do it is duck underwater. And if you stay to long you are going to drown. If you stick your head out you will be shot.

Picking between the devil and the deep blue sea it seems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X