$100K REWARD...

[Elsie N]

...

aint nothing fishy about this. Been reading this forum for a long time. Just never felt compelled to write. But when innocent folk could put themselves in harm's way trying to reap an ounce of glory by returning the 'Lost Child' along with the notion of expanding their atm card by a $100 grand then I feel compelled to write.

Call me Defendor, if you please - but that with an O

There's no evidence this was an armed robbery so "In harm's way" is unknown. Usually rewards come in to play when an insider is aware of a theft and turns in someone they know or have heard about through some one that connects them.

Offering a reward is not a reckless thing. It is simply a way of making people aware.

Besides, even if what you suggest is accurate, you can't expect a camera company to anticipate every individual action that a reward might create.

And who knows, it may turn out that someone with cancer comes forward with the lead that catches the crooks, and then can afford to go to Korea and get treatmen.

 

[tj williams]

Mark Sorry to hear about your loss. I hope the media was replaceable or backed up!
this is the first I've heard of this. It seems to me that Jim's reaction to this tragedy bodes well for those who would like some form of LO JAck in our epics.

 

[James Carlsen]

There's no evidence this was an armed robbery so "In harm's way" is unknown.

You sound as if you aint never seen violence anywhere else than on your TIVO. You could have paid more attention.

Just because a thief (Thievery =NO ARMs) If the thief carries a gun then he is a rubber. Big difference standing infront of the judge.

Now - just cuz A thief aint carrying arms WHILE stealing doesn't mean that HE/SHE would NOT resolve to the use of arms when cornered by an idiot out for a $100,000 reward.


I hope you will choose more wisely, should you encounter the actual thief. You'd get hurt because you think this is a movie!

 

[Elsie N]

You sound as if you aint never seen violence anywhere else than on your TIVO. You could have paid more attention.

Just because a thief (Thievery =NO ARMs) If the thief carries a gun then he is a rubber. Big difference standing infront of the judge.

Now - just cuz A thief aint carrying arms WHILE stealing doesn't mean that HE/SHE would NOT resolve to the use of arms when cornered by an idiot out for a $100,000 reward.


I hope you will choose more wisely, should you encounter the actual thief. You'd get hurt because you think this is a movie!

Lame.

 

[Jannard]

Don't make me close the thread guys...

Jim

 

[Robert Frank]

Don't make me close the thread guys...

Jim

Jim, no offense intended, but I wish you would.

We can all see where this thread is headed, and I feel like Mark and his family have been through enough, for Mark to then be subjected to some of the nonsense being posted.

 

[Peter Moretti]

You sound as if you aint never seen violence anywhere else than on your TIVO. You could have paid more attention.

Just because a thief (Thievery =NO ARMs) If the thief carries a gun then he is a rubber. Big difference standing infront of the judge.

Now - just cuz A thief aint carrying arms WHILE stealing doesn't mean that HE/SHE would NOT resolve to the use of arms when cornered by an idiot out for a $100,000 reward.


I hope you will choose more wisely, should you encounter the actual thief. You'd get hurt because you think this is a movie!

James,

I understand that your friend lost his life pursuing a thief. And I of course feel sorry him and those who knew him.

I'm also sure that if there were some reliable algorithm that proved not offering a reward would add more good to the world at large than offering it, Jim would pull the reward. But that's simply not the case.

We can hypothesize till we are blue in the face instances where justice is served or innocents get injured. But we can prove none of them.

Let me give you an example from my own prosaic life. I frequent a restaurant that was getting a lot of fake bills, even low denominations like twenties. This continued until someone jotted down the license number of a rather sketchy looking patron who tried to pass a fake bill. The authorities were notified and the fake bills have stopped.

Was it smart for that person to risk their well being by copying down that license plate? A risk was certainly taken. Or were other crimes curtailed by her taking, albeit risky, action?

I personally don't think Jim has created some Wild West environment that will get people hurt, but it is possible. It's also possible that the reward will lead to capturing the thieves and preventing even more dangerous break-in's.

We simply don't know the answer, or even if one outcome is more probable than the other.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Beware of troll -- Do not feed.

Some people must have missed the sign on the way in. Oh well.