CRIME Totally over engineered glitter bomb for porch package thief (OP Dec 2018)

O

Old Gray Mare

TB Fanatic
Marks at it again just in time for the holidays. This years Glitterbomb is truely evil. Merry Christmas!

Fair use.

Car Thieves vs the Final GlitterBomb 5.0​


Mark Rober
Merry Christmas ya filthy animals. The FINAL Glitterbomb has autonomous drones :) You can still get a CrunchLabs Build Box for Christmas! Let's build some cool stuff together
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWeu2dxHRDg

run time 18:20
 
TKO

TKO

Veteran Member
Old Gray Mare said:
Merry Christmas to our tinkerers, geeks and engineers. Totally over engineered glitter bomb for porch package thief. I laughed hard at this one. Not sure if it's legal but I found it funny. Enjoy.

Package Thief vs. Glitter Bomb Trap

Mark Rober
Published on Dec 17, 2018

Link to source:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoxhDk-hwuo

run time: 11:09
Click to expand...
Rober has some great vids. He's a BYUer. I have watched him for a few years. The BYU alumni magazine featured him this year.
 
Redleg

Redleg

Veteran Member
Ragnarok said:
Seems like that would also include enough evidence for prosecution?
Click to expand...
That could backfire. Not sure if this would be considered baiting buy intentionally leaving the package out to get stolen.
A good lawyer could turn the tables on the good guys I think.
 
Dobbin

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
Redleg said:
That could backfire. Not sure if this would be considered baiting buy intentionally leaving the package out to get stolen.
A good lawyer could turn the tables on the good guys I think.
Click to expand...
THIS is the trouble with "The Law."

In the interest in allowing ALL possible defenses, they've allowed consideration of ALL possible refute.

The problem is MANY judges and prosecutors are using the all possible "selectively."

In many ways, the practice of law has become a formal "picking of nits." Find ANY excuse for a defendant and bring it to court and it will be considered defensively. And - since the judiciary and possibly even a "manicured" jury has NO experience in a real world situation, that excuse WILL be considered, possibly to the defendant's advantage.

A preponderance of excuse in a court of law CAN be a preponderance of "vindication." Unlike your parents who said "Don't make excuses." In a court of law excuses are encouraged.

I'll paraphrase, but this is how Owner tells of his experience in jury selection.

(Judge) Do you have any experience in product liability law or any knowledge of this subject that you might use in making a decision in your evaluation of the case?"

(Owner) "Yes, I am a Licensed Professional Engineer and I have a collegiate Senior level credit course AND continuing education credits latest being 2008."

(Defense Lawyer) "Your honor, the defense asks that this juror candidate be removed from consideration."
Click to expand...

I.e. Owner knew "too much." Defense doesn't want anyone who knows anything.

Both sides have to agree on the jury selection before consideration begins.

Consequently, court cases are decided by the "unknowing." And the law equates this to a "decision made by the common man." Which they view as a good thing. But not necessarily the best thing - or decision.

And logical answers to logical questions are not necessarily correlated.

And "feelz" is perhaps half of how court decisions are made.

Dobbin
Reader of the Law, at least what's left of it here that Owner throws down from the hayloft.
 
rafter

rafter

Since 1999
Gee thanks. I used the link and just spent the last 2 hours watching all the glitter bombs and the squirrel Olympics. :lol: And I highly recommend all of them!!!
 
P

Publius

TB Fanatic
Waiting for deer season and going to sporting goods stores looking for skunk piss in a bottle the stuff does not dissipate any time soon, Walmart use to carry the stuff but every year some jackass would pour the contents on the floor of the store and no one could go into that area of the store until they could clean it up, the local Walmart got wise and setup many cameras and caught them in the act and went after them on the spot and they were not only banned from the store they had to pay for the cleanup and how much that was I have no idea but may have been close to $150. and there is the loss of sales.
 
Outlaw-16

Outlaw-16

Contributing Member
The glitter bomb guy needs to meet the guy who made the compressed air cannon that shot doggy doo all over the porch pirate. Combine glitter and poo, what a combo.

However, there are problems with that - attack with a biological substance, and I'm pretty sure some ambulance chaser attorney could find all kinds of things to nail the home owner with. But, in the homeowner's defense, they could claim that they were only using the discarded delivery packages to contain their dog's deposits and it wasn't their fault that someone stole the packages. The thief did enter private property - could be criminal trespass, and then stole what they thought might be valuable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top