©The Herald-Gazette/barnesville.com: This information may not be reprinted, broadcast or distributed electronically in any form or fashion without express consent. For reprint permission, e-mail [email protected]
From the 1.17.2012 print/e-edition of The Herald-Gazette
Dirtbags of all description are running rampant, destroying vacant homes, electrical substations, construction sites, vehicles and even cell towers to get at metal - primarily copper - that they sell off.
Walter Geiger
![Twitter](https://www.facebook.com/The-Herald-Gazette-113423362004259/?ref=settings"_blank"><img src="/uploads/SiteGraphics/facebook.jpg" alt="facebook-website" /></a></div>
<div class="serendipitySideBarFooter"></div>
</div>
<div class="serendipitySideBarItem serendipitySideBarItem_Last container_serendipity_html_nugget_plugin">
<div class="serendipitySideBarTitleEmpty"></div>
<div class="serendipitySideBarContent"><a href=)
I am with Walter Geiger on this one: come down on the thieves much harder when they are caught to make the potential consequences not work the possible payday. It won't stop all of them, but will make things miserable for the ones that do get caught.
Think about it. If these crooks had no place to sell the copper, then the crime of stealing it would be cut dramatically. I'm sure if they have to get fingerprinted and show their Drivers license, they wont show up.
As for infringing on my rights, it wouldn't bother me in the least to be fingerprinted. Only the criminals would worry about that and maybe the scrap yards because they of course would be loosing money.
Since reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit, try to understand this:
I already object to having my fingerprints taken to get my drivers license. However, because of the scope of issues covered by taken those fingerprints I do not object (even though I believe it is wrong and give the state more power/information that it should have). However, to carry out simple commerce I object to again have to provide that information to other people. If they want to get my driver's license information, ok. But more than that is invasive and uncalled for.
But, perhaps you are one of those that would welcome a system that requires some sort of biometric mark or chip in order to buy or sell. Hmmm...wonder where I have heard of that before.
Obviously, you are one of those that have a problem with reading comprehension and staying on the subject. And I am sorry your private little world is being infringed upon by someone that thinks differently from you. Perhaps you would like there to be some law that would prevent someone from expressing a dissenting opinion? I'm sure that would help you sleep at night.
No one has made any reference to it being in the 1950's or wanting it to be the 1950's. Pretty stupid remark on you behalf. I assume it was thrown in there just to try and undermine the strength of my argument and make yours look stronger, which, of course, it failed. I also can only infer by your comment that you are more willing to turn over your rights and role in a safe community over to the police rather than take an active role in it yourself. If that is you, that is pretty lazy of you.
One final note: I don't think it is that I have a superiority complex and much as it appears you have an inferiority complex. I never claimed I was better or smarter than anyone. You must recognize it as true or else why would you even write that? No one can make you feel inferior unless you already think you are. Buck up a little and feel better about yourself.
Have a nice day!
You have a nice day!
"All he done was steal copper because he cannot find a job." BULLSH!T
We need Clint Eastwood in our country now...millions of him.
MAKE MY DAY....PLEASE!
I tend toward being a liberal, especially in social issues, but I totally agree with you that these copper thieves and the unscrupulous dealers who buy the stolen copper should be locked up for long periods of time.
Still might not deter the criminals. Probably shooting a few of them in the act of stealing other people's property would do that.
Did you read about the thief whose intent was to steal computers from a school in Texas. He fell through a skylight and was seriously injured. His parents filed suit against the county and WON!
Is that stupid or what?
Probably the only way to deter this would be to make anyone recycling wait 7 to 10 days to be paid. This would probably force most of the copper thieves to find some other criminal enterprise to raise money
Have to come up with something better that punishing and inconveniencing the good people as it will not do anything to deter the bad ones.
Shoplifters caused 3 pound tags to be put on items that require special tools to remove.
Yelling "Discrimination" has created a volume of rules bigger than a set of encyclopedias combined.
Gambling is illegal unless our government gets their cut to buy computers for schools with TEACHERS that cheat on test to inflate the scores so they can get more money.
Crimes create rules.
Do you REALLY think the Sheriff's office wants to catch the BIGGEST drug dealer in the state. Hell no. They get 15 minutes of fame and feed him free for years. They average seven charges a week for less than an ounce of marijuana. get the fine money and set him free.
Personally, I think Marijuana should be controlled like alcohol and gambling and taxed.
But that would tick off the drug dealers....we can't have that.
Incorrect. By definition there could not have been any "speeders" before there were speed limits.
"Shoplifters caused 3 pound tags to be put on items that require special tools to remove."
This is really non sequitur. I have no problem with a retailer putting anti-theft devices that take all of 3 seconds to remove on their merchandise. It is a far cry from that to finger printing or making people wait for 7 to 10 days.
"Yelling "Discrimination" has created a volume of rules bigger than a set of encyclopedias combined."
This has nothing to do with the discussion or my points.
"Gambling is illegal unless our government gets their cut..."
I agree with you, but again this is not really relevant to my comment.
"Crimes create rules."
Yes, this is true to a degree. However, there is a difference between sensible rules and knee-jerk, poorly thought out, difficult/impossible to enforce rules.
As for the rest of your comment it was pretty much just blah, blah, blah, blah and not relevant at all.
"Incorrect. By definition there could not have been any "speeders" before there were speed limits."
You are incorrect, no name.
Arrests for speeding in motor vehicles precede law. Cabbie Jacob German was arrested and jailed in New York City May 20, 1899, for driving his electric taxi at the "breakneck speed" of 12 mph.
Have fun.
The one about stealing was written on a stone tablet many years ago.
Number 8 in the top 10.
The Copper Philosophy.
Maybe when your AC unit is destroyed you will change your mind. There has to be laws in place to deal with the POS criminals. Unfortunately, all of us good citizens have to deal with the aggravation that it may sometimes cause us. I would prefer being inconvenienced verses having to pay out of my own pocket to fix my own property etc. due to theft or vandalism.
It is sad to me that you are ok with law-abiding citizens having to be infringed upon with pointless laws that do nothing to stop the criminals. From your writing, you probably support oppressive gun control laws. I guess then you would be alright with cops just walking into your house anytime they choose, reading your mail/email or listening in on your phone calls too?
Most knee-jerk laws do nothing but expand the role and size of government as well as increase the over all cost (in time and money) to the average law-abiding citizen. Criminals, by their nature, do not obey laws and so just find a way around them.
It is already illegal to steal, illegal to vandalize, illegal to buy and sell stolen goods. What more laws are needed? The problem is enforcement, not laws.
Get your head out of your fourth point of contact and start thinking instead of reacting.
I have no problem holding the scrap yards themselves accountable. I have a problem with laws that put the burden on law abiding citizens like you.
And, yes, I can tell a lot about you by what you wrote. You would, with the right circumstance (ie, getting the bad guys), not mind civil liberties to be infringed upon. It is obvious by what you profess to be accepting of and the way you excuse it as acceptable.
I want the criminals stopped and I want them to get what they have earned from their crimes. But what I do not want is ordinary, freedom loving people to be further burdened upon. There are ways to accomplish 'getting the bad guys' other than that. Let's have some laws that don't punish the good guys and are actually enforceable. Are you agreeable with that or are you just so caught up in the same police state thinking that has governed our society for the passed 40 to 50 years? Or, do you want our civil liberties to continue to be eroded until the line between free state and police state disappears completely? It's up to you and all us 'paranoid jerks'.
'Justa swingin'.
NEXT. yeah, they could use the same necktie several times.