Wouldnt this have to be brought to a civil court still for the cost of the door
@LosRikos
Yes but lets talk about what would be said in court. Would the fact that a tornado warning (aka tornado confirmed) that happened 20 miles away prove necessity? 10 miles? What is the definition of necessity of laws involved in a matter of natural disasters? Because during a tornado usually (but not the rule) don't kill people if f3 and below. These are the further questions I have always wanted answered lol.
@cochwithchrist3889
Would they be forced to pay damages?
@IbocC64
Of course if you break in then the windows are no longer a barrier and now you have sharp broken glass flying around. Not really a good option either.
@fenrir6911
I don't know about the law in US, but in Europe, there are also laws that require you to help people if their life is in danger, no matter who they are, as long as it doesn't require to put your own life at risk. So, in here, since the tornado wasn't that close yet, the store owner would be completely responsible for any harm happening to the person who filmed because of the refusal to let them in…
@DirtyDan806
Like the new teeth
@kenshinbattousai374
To clarify further, you could certainly still be held civilly liable due to how retarded our court system is
@phillips91682ify
What if the owners shoots them because they think they're trying to loot or something is the property owner guilty of murder or manslaughter or is it justifiable?
@benmasta5814
Does not criminally responsible include payback for locking the doors after you break in? Lmao
@toddrdavis2659
Walmart is across the street
@nasapayrollsystem8701
Good to know…now… I'm timing my bank heist and tornado
@toshiroyamada2443
Not sure how I'd hedge my bet there. The flimsey building or my truck. Both are pretty terrible options during a tornado
@smokey04200420
He won’t be criminally liable, but he could be civilly liable
@victorflantier9024
Break the door to survive. Gets shot and called a communist.
@danthiel8623
It probably depends on where you live because you might be held responsible for breaking and entering.
Comments
Wouldnt this have to be brought to a civil court still for the cost of the door
Yes but lets talk about what would be said in court.
Would the fact that a tornado warning (aka tornado confirmed) that happened 20 miles away prove necessity? 10 miles?
What is the definition of necessity of laws involved in a matter of natural disasters?
Because during a tornado usually (but not the rule) don't kill people if f3 and below. These are the further questions I have always wanted answered lol.
Would they be forced to pay damages?
Of course if you break in then the windows are no longer a barrier and now you have sharp broken glass flying around. Not really a good option either.
I don't know about the law in US, but in Europe, there are also laws that require you to help people if their life is in danger, no matter who they are, as long as it doesn't require to put your own life at risk. So, in here, since the tornado wasn't that close yet, the store owner would be completely responsible for any harm happening to the person who filmed because of the refusal to let them in…
Like the new teeth
To clarify further, you could certainly still be held civilly liable due to how retarded our court system is
What if the owners shoots them because they think they're trying to loot or something is the property owner guilty of murder or manslaughter or is it justifiable?
Does not criminally responsible include payback for locking the doors after you break in? Lmao
Walmart is across the street
Good to know…now… I'm timing my bank heist and tornado
Not sure how I'd hedge my bet there. The flimsey building or my truck. Both are pretty terrible options during a tornado
He won’t be criminally liable, but he could be civilly liable
Break the door to survive. Gets shot and called a communist.
It probably depends on where you live because you might be held responsible for breaking and entering.