Fed Up with Lawless Blue America, as Employees Spank Would-be Robber

Fed Up with Lawless Blue America, as Employees Spank Would-be Robber

By Steve Pomper

I wasn’t there (and, most likely, neither were you), but I know what I saw on the video and read about the incident from media and at the Stockton (CA) P.D. Facebook page. And though my assessment will always have a law enforcement tinge to it, some observations may be of value to those who’ve never done coppin’ for a living.  

How often do we hear excuses for the legal system’s inaction against these bold criminals’ theft, violence, and destruction? Especially when people ask, “why stop them,” insurance will pay for the loss. In fact, you can hear the irritating bystander recording the viral video say this about a chaotic incident at a California convenience store.

As reported by FOX News, “Two 7-Eleven employees found themselves part of a viral video this week after they turned the tables on a man brazenly stealing cigarettes from their Stockton, California store and beat him with a stick until he began crying for mercy.” According to KCRA News, the suspect had reportedly targeted the store two previous times within a 24-hour period.

Storeowners’ who file insurance claims on significant, repeated shoplifting losses, such as the above incident seemed to be headed toward, will likely incur rate increases. Eventually, insurance companies may refuse to cover the business at all. While law enforcement understands shoplifting is theft, apparently some insurance companies apply different definitions. 

For example, the Hyman Brown Insurance Agency writes, “While shoplifting is normally not covered by a commercial insurance policy, theft is. Shoplifting often occurs during business hours without anyone even realizing it is occurring. Therefore, it’s hard to file a claim for that type of loss. Theft, on the other hand, often occurs after regular business hours and often results in thousands of dollars worth of merchandise being lost.” Time to update their definition of shoplifting. But, the point is owners are not always reimbursed for shoplift losses. Many won’t even make claims, to avoid rate increases.

As with fire, insurance companies implicitly partner with home and business owners to mitigate losses. Fire alarm and sprinkler system fire prevention can reduce costs, and burglar alarms and security personnel can do the same for loss (theft) prevention. Often, “security personnel” include (or are exclusively) business owners and employees. So much for the insurance will cover the losses rationalization of inaction against criminals. And those losses equal the proverbial food out of owners’ and employees’ mouths. Especially if the business is forced to close as so many have because politicians won’t allow cops to enforce the law.

As for the Stockton 7-Eleven incident, any cop will tell you that until a suspect has been thoroughly, physically searched (not just visually scanned or even patted down), they cannot be not considered “unarmed.” Especially when the suspect tells you he has a gun and will shoot you, as the suspect allegedly did.  

I cheered for the employees subduing the scumbag seen on video emptying shelves of tobacco and other products into a large trash container.

Still, as a retired cop, I also saw where, without critical thinking, some people could have a problem with the force the employees used. Until we hear the details. For instance, both FOX and the New York Post reported the suspect told employees he had a gun. In this case, the police are investigating the suspect for robberies, not shoplifting. Robbery requires the use or threat of force to steal, or retain stolen, items.  

Ladies and gentlemen, especially you folks way in the back, once a suspect says he has a gun, and you have not thoroughly searched him—yeah—you’re best off to believe him. There are guns that are so small suspects can easily conceal them.  

Stockton Police posted on Facebook that the previous day, at 3:41 a.m., the suspect entered that 7-Eleven and “went behind the counter and threatened to shoot an employee if he tried to stop him…,” implying he had a gun.

The next day, at 12:27 a.m., an employee reported the same suspect entered that store, again went behind the counter, indicated he had a gun, and “demanded money….” The employee refused and said the suspect then stole items and fled. 

At 3:05 a.m., later that morning (this incident), the same suspect returned and as mentioned above began emptying shelves into a large trash container. The viral video was recorded by some annoying moron who repeatedly tells the employees they should “let him go,” with a promise from the suspect that he won’t come back (again). The moron (apparently wearing x-ray glasses) tells the employees the suspect is lying about having a gun. Right.

Fire department personnel responded to medically assess the suspect for injuries. However, despite being struck some 25 times with what appears to be a long, lightweight wooden pole, the suspect requested he be taken to the hospital, complaining of leg and shoulder pain (yeah, it looked like those whacks probably stung a bit).


Stockton P.D. also posted on FB, at the time of the report, “Officers could not confirm if the male was the victim of an assault….” They also could not confirm if the “suspect [was] related to a series of robberies at the 7-Eleven.” The suspect told police “He did not know if he was assaulted” (from his perspective). So, was the suspect under the influence of a mind-altering substance?

Right on cue, following the initial media coverage, outlets began reporting, according to The Daily Wire, that the employees were now under investigation for assault—against a suspected repeat robbery suspect who’d earlier implied he had a gun and in the later incident reportedly told employees he had a gun and threatened to shoot them.

So, will the victims be prosecuted, and the suspect enjoy a payday from the city’s taxpayers? In a lucid world, no. But California doesn’t qualify as lucid, does it?    

These incidents and the California criminal justice responses to them are indicative of continuing blue jurisdiction lawlessness. Incidents like this will continue to happen, good people will put themselves in legal jeopardy by protecting what’s theirs, until politicians allow the cops to restore law and order to all of America.