Apparently you are now "racist" if you prosecute black shoplifters and assaulters

[Loren Pechtel]

You're grasping at phantom straws here. "Adult" = 18+. Drinking age = 21+. It's quite common for adults to have fake IDs to buy alcohol.

That's a uniquely American idiosyncrasy. In the civilized world, adults with fake IDs are rare, due to the simple expedient of letting people who are legally considered sufficiently responsible to die for their country or buy a home also buy alcohol.

Sounds to me like you have a major problem with unanticipated criminal activity, caused by a stupid and ineffective prohibition on alcohol. You might think that your country would have learned from its mistakes in that regard by now, but apparently not.

Note that her location is "Miami, Florida"--she's in the US and thus the idea of adults with fake IDs should be reasonable to her.

And the reason we have a drinking age of 21 is to make it harder for the 16-18 crowd to get alcohol. It did cut the DUI rate in that group.

 

[Derec]

This article seems to be a bit clearer on some details.

Yes it does. Including why Oberlin is going after Gibson's - they want to appease their über-leftist, über-woke student base.

The lawsuit lays out a narrative in which Oberlin College — trying to recover its image of being supportive of the African-American community after firing a professor who is black, and with business interests in wanting to buy the Gibson property and adjacent parking lot — latched on to a shoplifting incident to promote Gibson’s as a racist establishment to bolster its own image and interests.
It is being reported as fact that one of the three students tried to buy wine with a fake I.D. but also concealed two bottles of wine underneath his shirt. He denied the second part but admits the first part. All three students were charged.[..]
The lawsuit details when the college in November 2016 fired Joy Karega, an assistant professor of rhetoric and composition, for posting what the college considered to be anti-Semitic rhetoric.
In defense of Karega, students sent a 14-page list of demands, the complaint states, with one of those being that Karega, who is black, get “guaranteed tenure.”
Raimondo, who was special assistant to the president for diversity, equity and inclusion, was brought on to be vice president and dean of students “in an effort (for the college) to better market itself as a strong advocate for and a strong supporter of African-American students and racial minorities,” the complaint states.

Another motive is also stated in the article:

According to the complaint, this agenda also includes wanting to buy the Gibson’s building and the adjacent parking lot, owned by Allyn Gibson’s father, David Gibson.
The complaint states the college encouraged staff and outside contractors to park in the lot, knowing it was meant to serve customers of surrounding business, including Gibson’s Bakery.

Also, the college is escalating the witch hunt:

The complaint states that Gibson’s Bakery employees have been threatened and have had their tires punctured, the Gibsons’ homes have been damaged and students who shop at the bakery have been threatened.

The claim in this thread and other articles is that the students attacked the shop owner, but this article says that the shop owner's son chased after the three students out of the store. Without more detail, it sounds like the students reacted in self-defense after the shop owner's son pursued and assaulted them.

Self-defense? How do you figure? And the guy was assaulted before the thieves ran out of the store anyway:

The police report said Gibson told Aladin he was calling the police and not to leave. Aladin allegedly tried to leave, and Gibson told police he took out his phone to take a picture. That’s when Gibson said Aladin slapped the phone from his hand and the device hit Gibson in the face. Police have said Aladin then ran from the store, dropping the two bottles of wine to the floor.

Trio in Gibson's theft plead guilty

Bullshit he was "within his right" to leave his shop and chase them through town to "detain" them. Unfortunately this sounds all too much like the town circling their wagons against the college and its students.

"Circling the wagons" is what you do when you are being attacked by savages. Are you calling the college students and administrators savages?

How much is also due to race is hard to tell, but it is not at all unusual in this country to grossly over charge black teens...

Bullshit. They got a pretty lenient plea deal with no jail time.

especially when the white person involved was also in the wrong.

I know. He had the wrong skin color.

So, the students were forced to read prepared statements as part of their plea deal. I do not take that as an admission of their true thoughts on the matter at all.

I am sure they feel entitled to steal booze. But they did plead guilty, which is what matters.

Note the word "adults". With no direct access to the police data, I would consider this second-hand claim suspect. The three students were not "adults", hence the need for fake I.D.'s.

They were adults. Aladin was 20 and his two female sidekicks both 19. College students are usually adults and the need for fake ids is because drinking age is 21, not 18.

Moreover and more importantly, if the students at Oberlin are experiencing racial discrimination, Gibson pointing to "adult" arrest records for shoplifting does not actually dispute the students' claims.

You are kind of making my point from the OP. You see arresting black shoplifters as evidence of "discrimination" even though only 6 our of 40 shoplifting arrests during 2016 were of black people.

Nothing in any of the articles I have read give any support to the claim that the college or its vice president, Meredith Raimondo, participated in any of the protests or posting of flyers.

Read again.

It does say that the college ended a contract they had with the bakery for products at the college:

That is only one of the things they did.

Per one of the other articles, the college representatives asked Gibson's to refer the shoplifting accusations to the college for internal disciplinary action, but Gibson's refused. This is how they portray it:

And why should they do that?

Given this and other background from Gibson's lawsuit, it sounds to me like there HAS been a long-standing problem between this bakery and the students at Oberlin. Again, hard to tell if it is racially motivated, but it definitely seems like Gibson's assumes the worst about Oberlin and its students.

Given the facts, I can see why.

Sounds like more of a financial shake-down to me.

More like shakedown by Oberlin because they want to but Gibson's property on the cheap. Oberlin is like Hedley Lamarr from Blazing Saddles. "Unfortunately there is something that stands between me and that property - the rightful owners. There must be some way of scaring them off".

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Did the school really expect a business owner to turn over the law and disciplinary action for a criminal act to the school the students go to? Why would it expect that? Why would this bakery or ANY company agree to that? This is rightfully a matter for the police and the courts, not some student kangaroo court. That request in and of itself makes me suspect the school is up to no good here.

 

[laughing dog]

They admitted using fake ID. Refusing to serve was in compliance with the law.

Which has nothing to do with their claim of racism or whether Gibson's has a history of racial profiling or whether all the claims in Gibson's lawsuit are true.

The article also states

The three students arrested at Gibson's pleaded guilty in August to attempted theft and aggravated trespassing and said in statements required by a plea agreement that their actions were wrong and that the store wasn't racist.

Cadit quaestio

If their retraction was not part of a plea deal, it would be completely convincing to me. Since it was part of a plea deal, I do not find it convincing at all.

 

[dismal]

What are the actual statistics on shoplifting and race? ARE black youth more likely to shoplift than other customers? And if they are, then is it wrong to do the above regarding black youth in your store?

Seems like the appropriate question here would be: what are the statistics regarding people trying to buy wine with a fake ID and with two bottles of wine hidden under their shirt?

Are they more likely to be shoplifters than other customers?

If I were a betting man I'd take the over.

 

[whichphilosophy]

They admitted using fake ID. Refusing to serve was in compliance with the law.

Which has nothing to do with their claim of racism or whether Gibson's has a history of racial profiling or whether all the claims in Gibson's lawsuit are true.

The article also states

The three students arrested at Gibson's pleaded guilty in Aug.ust to attempted theft and aggravated trespassing and said in statements required by a plea agreement that their actions were wrong and that the store wasn't racist.

Cadit quaestio

If their retraction was not part of a plea deal, it would be completely convincing to me. Since it was part of a plea deal, I do not find it convincing at all.

.
My point is the case itself has nothing to do with whether the owner is racist.
They admitted the charges including aggravated theft hence admitted the charges.

The burden of proof is with the accuser bur Oberlin has not supported its claims.


The Owner is also suing the University for slander. It's not racist to defend one's property against theft.

 

[RavenSky]

Since Gibson's is suing the college for money, and not the other way around, your response is bupkus

The college shakedown was for a lack of prosecution, not for $.

You are babbling now

 

[RavenSky]

Also, the college is escalating the witch hunt:

The complaint states that Gibson’s Bakery employees have been threatened and have had their tires punctured, the Gibsons’ homes have been damaged and students who shop at the bakery have been threatened.

What you quoted does NOT say that the college (nor its employees) did anything.

In fact, there was not a shred of evidence of the college or its employees doing anything at all wrt the protests.

 

[Malintent]

So long as the son was trying to detain them or recover the stolen merchandise there is no right of self defense. Only if he simply started attacking them could they defend themselves.



You can detain a thief. Not exactly recommended for safety reasons, but legal.

Note the word "adults". With no direct access to the police data, I would consider this second-hand claim suspect. The three students were not "adults", hence the need for fake I.D.'s.

You're grasping at phantom straws here. "Adult" = 18+. Drinking age = 21+. It's quite common for adults to have fake IDs to buy alcohol.

Per one of the other articles, the college representatives asked Gibson's to refer the shoplifting accusations to the college for internal disciplinary action, but Gibson's refused. This is how they portray it:

“Gibson’s loses thousands of dollars a year due to stolen merchandise and such losses would certainly multiply if students learned they could steal without repercussion,” the lawsuit states. “David Gibson believes the policy would be inconsistent with his core belief that an educational institution of higher learning should be teaching its students not to commit robbery and theft, instead of sheltering and excusing that criminal activity.”

Given this and other background from Gibson's lawsuit, it sounds to me like there HAS been a long-standing problem between this bakery and the students at Oberlin. Again, hard to tell if it is racially motivated, but it definitely seems like Gibson's assumes the worst about Oberlin and its students.

Doesn't make them in the wrong. It does support the notion that the college is trying to sweep this under the rug, though. Colleges should not be trying to take over punishment in criminal matters!

So Gibson is pissed off that Oberlin has cancelled their long-standing bakery order - something Oberlin is well within their right to do for ANY reason - and retaliates by suing the college and the new vice president for $200,000.

Sounds like more of a financial shake-down to me.

Yeah, it sounds like a shakedown--by the college.

I am a Security Professional... In the State of New York (only set of laws I am familiar with on this topic), Loren is correct about what is permissible and appropriate, and Raven is wrong.

It's called a Citizen's Arrest, and physically detaining a person is lawful. If it turns out no law was broken and there was no justification for detaining a person, then that implies any of assault, kidnapping, wrongful imprisonment, and even slander.

Want to make a "quick" $50,000?

go to Walmart.... trick security into thinking you stole something... look suspicious... be black (just kidding)... then, as you leave the store, if security attempts to speak with you, call the security person an asshole or some other non-racial insult to get them angry and then run half-heartedly away (so hopefully he catches you on their property).. struggle... make him drag you kicking and screaming into the store... say things to get him to call you a thief in public...

Your resulting lawsuit for assault (if they touch you), kidnapping (if they pull you into the store) wrongful imprisonment (if they detain you there), and libel (if they imply you stole such that other customers hear them) will settle out of court for around 50k.

 

[whichphilosophy]

So long as the son was trying to detain them or recover the stolen merchandise there is no right of self defense. Only if he simply started attacking them could they defend themselves.



You can detain a thief. Not exactly recommended for safety reasons, but legal.



You're grasping at phantom straws here. "Adult" = 18+. Drinking age = 21+. It's quite common for adults to have fake IDs to buy alcohol.

Per one of the other articles, the college representatives asked Gibson's to refer the shoplifting accusations to the college for internal disciplinary action, but Gibson's refused. This is how they portray it:

“Gibson’s loses thousands of dollars a year due to stolen merchandise and such losses would certainly multiply if students learned they could steal without repercussion,” the lawsuit states. “David Gibson believes the policy would be inconsistent with his core belief that an educational institution of higher learning should be teaching its students not to commit robbery and theft, instead of sheltering and excusing that criminal activity.”

Given this and other background from Gibson's lawsuit, it sounds to me like there HAS been a long-standing problem between this bakery and the students at Oberlin. Again, hard to tell if it is racially motivated, but it definitely seems like Gibson's assumes the worst about Oberlin and its students.

Doesn't make them in the wrong. It does support the notion that the college is trying to sweep this under the rug, though. Colleges should not be trying to take over punishment in criminal matters!

So Gibson is pissed off that Oberlin has cancelled their long-standing bakery order - something Oberlin is well within their right to do for ANY reason - and retaliates by suing the college and the new vice president for $200,000.

Sounds like more of a financial shake-down to me.

Yeah, it sounds like a shakedown--by the college.

I am a Security Professional... In the State of New York (only set of laws I am familiar with on this topic), Loren is correct about what is permissible and appropriate, and Raven is wrong.

It's called a Citizen's Arrest, and physically detaining a person is lawful. If it turns out no law was broken and there was no justification for detaining a person, then that implies any of assault, kidnapping, wrongful imprisonment, and even slander.

Want to make a "quick" $50,000?

go to Walmart.... trick security into thinking you stole something... look suspicious... be black (just kidding)... then, as you leave the store, if security attempts to speak with you, call the security person an asshole or some other non-racial insult to get them angry and then run half-heartedly away (so hopefully he catches you on their property).. struggle... make him drag you kicking and screaming into the store... say things to get him to call you a thief in public...

Your resulting lawsuit for assault (if they touch you), kidnapping (if they pull you into the store) wrongful imprisonment (if they detain you there), and libel (if they imply you stole such that other customers hear them) will settle out of court for around 50k.

I tend to agree with your scenario as I managed shops some time ago in the UK.

 

[dismal]

It's called a Citizen's Arrest, and physically detaining a person is lawful. If it turns out no law was broken and there was no justification for detaining a person, then that implies any of assault, kidnapping, wrongful imprisonment, and even slander.

What research I have done suggests most states give Merchants some enhanced protection (versus everyday Citizens) from civil liability by statutes. As long as the store is acting in good faith and has reasonable cause to suspect someone of shoplifting they are allowed to reasonably detain a person for a limited amount of time.

https://www.google.com/search?q=mer...2j69i57j0l3.2656j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[RavenSky]

I am a Security Professional... In the State of New York (only set of laws I am familiar with on this topic), Loren is correct about what is permissible and appropriate, and Raven is wrong.

Oberlin College is in Ohio, isn't it? Not New York?

If so, I am correct while you and Loren are wrong.

Unless you are claiming that the two bottles of wine from a grocery store were worth more than $500. Are you claiming that? If so, produce evidence to verify.

Thank you.

 

[Malintent]

I am a Security Professional... In the State of New York (only set of laws I am familiar with on this topic), Loren is correct about what is permissible and appropriate, and Raven is wrong.

Oberlin College is in Ohio, isn't it? Not New York?

If so, I am correct while you and Loren are wrong.

Unless you are claiming that the two bottles of wine from a grocery store were worth more than $500. Are you claiming that? If so, produce evidence to verify.

Thank you.

No prolly not NY.. you may not be wrong depending on state law. The laws differ only slightly, though, as far as I understand they are more restrictive to the shopowner in NY than average. I highly doubt the subtle differences would be relevant to the incident in the parking lot. If anything, the shopkeeper in that state may have been allowed to shoot the fleeing suspects in the back... not likely he would have been MORE restricted in what he could legally do to detain, etc.. If I'm wrong, I apologize... show me the law in that state, if you feel like it.

 

[dismal]

I am a Security Professional... In the State of New York (only set of laws I am familiar with on this topic), Loren is correct about what is permissible and appropriate, and Raven is wrong.

Oberlin College is in Ohio, isn't it? Not New York?

If so, I am correct while you and Loren are wrong.

Unless you are claiming that the two bottles of wine from a grocery store were worth more than $500. Are you claiming that? If so, produce evidence to verify.

Thank you.

Here is the Ohio law I found regarding merchant detention, with relevant sections below:

2935.041 Detention and arrest of shoplifters - detention of persons in library, museum, or archival institution.
(A) A merchant, or an employee or agent of a merchant, who has probable cause to believe that items offered for sale by a mercantile establishment have been unlawfully taken by a person, may, for the purposes set forth in division (C) of this section, detain the person in a reasonable manner for a reasonable length of time within the mercantile establishment or its immediate vicinity.

....

(C) An officer, agent, or employee of a library, museum, or archival institution pursuant to division (B) of this section or a merchant or employee or agent of a merchant pursuant to division (A) of this section may detain another person for any of the following purposes:

(1) To recover the property that is the subject of the unlawful taking, criminal mischief, or theft;

(2) To cause an arrest to be made by a peace officer;

(3) To obtain a warrant of arrest;

(4) To offer the person, if the person is suspected of the unlawful taking, criminal mischief, or theft and notwithstanding any other provision of the Revised Code, an opportunity to complete a pretrial diversion program and to inform the person of the other legal remedies available to the library, museum, archival institution, or merchant.

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2935.041

What exactly makes you think you are right because this is Ohio again?

 

[RavenSky]

According to the college’s version of events as described in the Dec. 6 motion, three students, who are black, went to Gibson’s Bakery and one of the students, Jonathan Aladin, attempted to purchase wine with a fake ID. Allyn Gibson, who is white, followed the students out of the store and across the street into Tappan Square, property owned by the college, and “violently assaulted the male student,” the motion states.

The motion says that the two female students, Endia Lawrence and Cecelia Whettstone, intervened on behalf of Aladin when Gibson refused to stop the assault.

“When police arrived on the scene, they arrested only the three Oberlin College students despite witness statements that Allyn D. Gibson was the aggressor,” the motion states.

The motion says Gibson’s “seek(s) to personally profit from a polarizing event that negatively impacted Oberlin College, its students and the Oberlin community.”

The college says the lawsuit falsely portrays Gibson’s as innocent victims but “the actual facts do not bear this out.”

“In reality, it was an employee of Gibson’s Bakery and a relative of the individual plaintiffs, Allyn D. Gibson, who left the safety of his business to violently physically assault an unarmed student,” the motion states.

The college said its sole concern at all times has been the safety of its students and that it never targeted Gibson’s.

http://www.chroniclet.com/Local-New...es-motion-to-dismiss-Gibson-39-s-lawsuit.html

 

[RavenSky]

I am a Security Professional... In the State of New York (only set of laws I am familiar with on this topic), Loren is correct about what is permissible and appropriate, and Raven is wrong.

Oberlin College is in Ohio, isn't it? Not New York?

If so, I am correct while you and Loren are wrong.

Unless you are claiming that the two bottles of wine from a grocery store were worth more than $500. Are you claiming that? If so, produce evidence to verify.

Thank you.

No prolly not NY.. you may not be wrong depending on state law. The laws differ only slightly, though, as far as I understand they are more restrictive to the shopowner in NY than average. I highly doubt the subtle differences would be relevant to the incident in the parking lot. If anything, the shopkeeper in that state may have been allowed to shoot the fleeing suspects in the back... not likely he would have been MORE restricted in what he could legally do to detain, etc.. If I'm wrong, I apologize... show me the law in that state, if you feel like it.

So which is it?

Is Oberlin College in New York or is it in Ohio? It would be very easy for you to determine this small detail. (Hint: I already know the answer)

And once you have determined which state the college is in, perhaps you should also endeavor to determine whether the laws of Ohio are the same as they are in New York - the latter being the only state you say you have any expertise in.

Further, Gibson's alleged assault on the students took place on college property, not in Gibson's parking lot. This is another fact you would be able to ascertain for yourself had you looked into the incident instead of misguidedly defending Loren's incorrect claims.

If you are going to boldly proclaim that I am wrong, I strongly suggest that you support your claim with something resembling facts rather than your musings. No, I am not going to do your research for you after you have made your unsubstantiated claims.

Thank you.

 

[dismal]

No prolly not NY.. you may not be wrong depending on state law. The laws differ only slightly, though, as far as I understand they are more restrictive to the shopowner in NY than average. I highly doubt the subtle differences would be relevant to the incident in the parking lot. If anything, the shopkeeper in that state may have been allowed to shoot the fleeing suspects in the back... not likely he would have been MORE restricted in what he could legally do to detain, etc.. If I'm wrong, I apologize... show me the law in that state, if you feel like it.

So which is it?

Is Oberlin College in New York or is it in Ohio? It would be very easy for you to determine this small detail. (Hint: I already know the answer)

And once you have determined which state the college is in, perhaps you should also endeavor to determine whether the laws of Ohio are the same as they are in New York - the latter being the only state you say you have any expertise in.

Further, Gibson's alleged assault on the students took place on college property, not in Gibson's parking lot. This is another fact you would be able to ascertain for yourself had you looked into the incident instead of misguidedly defending Loren's incorrect claims.

If you are going to boldly proclaim that I am wrong, I strongly suggest that you support your claim with something resembling facts rather than your musings. No, I am not going to do your research for you after you have made your unsubstantiated claims.

Thank you.

I posted the Ohio law there sport.

You still seem to be wrong, in spite of your mic-drop genius level claim "this is Ohio".

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

No prolly not NY.. you may not be wrong depending on state law. The laws differ only slightly, though, as far as I understand they are more restrictive to the shopowner in NY than average. I highly doubt the subtle differences would be relevant to the incident in the parking lot. If anything, the shopkeeper in that state may have been allowed to shoot the fleeing suspects in the back... not likely he would have been MORE restricted in what he could legally do to detain, etc.. If I'm wrong, I apologize... show me the law in that state, if you feel like it.

So which is it?

Is Oberlin College in New York or is it in Ohio? It would be very easy for you to determine this small detail. (Hint: I already know the answer)

And once you have determined which state the college is in, perhaps you should also endeavor to determine whether the laws of Ohio are the same as they are in New York - the latter being the only state you say you have any expertise in.

Further, Gibson's alleged assault on the students took place on college property, not in Gibson's parking lot. This is another fact you would be able to ascertain for yourself had you looked into the incident instead of misguidedly defending Loren's incorrect claims.

If you are going to boldly proclaim that I am wrong, I strongly suggest that you support your claim with something resembling facts rather than your musings. No, I am not going to do your research for you after you have made your unsubstantiated claims.

Thank you.

I posted the Ohio law there sport.

You still seem to be wrong, in spite of your mic-drop genius level claim "this is Ohio".

LMAO thanks for that dismal. Its always worth a chuckle when somebody gets all smarmy, sarcastic and aggressive like that and then shot down because they misread something.

 

[RavenSky]

This article is interesting. It is from shortly after the original incident, and seems to have a lot more detail than anything else I've seen, and per this article the altercation did start inside the store before spilling outside and then onto college property:

Discrepancies between eyewitness and police reports have led to conflicting versions of the incident, but what remains abundantly clear is that the scuffle between Aladin, 19, and Gibson, the white son of store owner David Gibson, escalated quickly and had moved outside of the store to across the street when officers arrived at the scene.

However, College junior Andy Goelzer called that account “completely false” and said that “there was no conversation before Allyn attacked him.”

Instead, Goelzer said that Gibson used force immediately on Aladin, who they say was standing in line to pay instead of attempting to leave.

“He was literally just standing there, and Allyn Gibson comes running from the back of the store screaming, ‘Shoplifter!’ and grabs him,” Goelzer said. “The kid is like, ‘Get off me, I’m not doing anything.’ At this point, people in the store are starting to yell, ‘Get off him’, ‘What are you doing?'”

Both the police report and the eyewitnesses agree that Gibson then pursued Aladin to the back of the store when an altercation ensued as Gibson attempted to physically detain Aladin and two bottles of wine ended up on the floor.

The police report details that Aladin allegedly threw the bottles of wine on the floor, but eyewitnesses said that the bottles could have fallen from shelving that was knocked over during the struggle.

“Allyn stated he never threw a punch at Aladin and just kept attempting to grab him to keep him from hitting him and leaving the store,” the report reads.

In contrast, Goelzer stated that they called the police out of concern for Aladin’s safety.

“At this point, a few people in the store start running over to try to pull him off, and there’s like four people trying to pull him off and no one can manage to break him free, and he’s hitting this kid and putting him in a chokehold,” Goelzer said.

Aladin allegedly managed to break free and ran out to the sidewalk, where Goelzer stated that they saw Gibson tackle Aladin again. At this point, witnesses say Whettstone and Lawrence physically tried to free Aladin by hitting Gibson.

Aladin, allegedly pursued by Gibson, then ran across the street to Tappan Square, where the struggle resumed, with Whettstone and Lawrence joining again, according to witnesses.

College junior Angie Vaaler described the fight as a “ball of people,” and College junior Jake Berstein said that it seemed like there were punches coming from both sides. At that point, police arrived at the scene and broke up the scuffle.

“As officers approached the area, Sergeant [Victor] Ortiz, and Officer [Raymond] Feuerstein both stated they observed Allyn Gibson lying on his back with several individuals kneeling over him punching and kicking him with several other individuals in the immediate area,” the report reads.

But according to Goelzer, Whettstone and Lawrence were trying to free Aladin, not injure Gibson.

“They were trying to pull him off of the kid, so they might’ve had his arms, but they were trying to pull him off the kid,” Goelzer said.

https://oberlinreview.org/11713/news/students-call-for-gibsons-bakery-boycott/

 

[Malintent]

No prolly not NY.. you may not be wrong depending on state law. The laws differ only slightly, though, as far as I understand they are more restrictive to the shopowner in NY than average. I highly doubt the subtle differences would be relevant to the incident in the parking lot. If anything, the shopkeeper in that state may have been allowed to shoot the fleeing suspects in the back... not likely he would have been MORE restricted in what he could legally do to detain, etc.. If I'm wrong, I apologize... show me the law in that state, if you feel like it.

So which is it?

Is Oberlin College in New York or is it in Ohio? It would be very easy for you to determine this small detail. (Hint: I already know the answer)

And once you have determined which state the college is in, perhaps you should also endeavor to determine whether the laws of Ohio are the same as they are in New York - the latter being the only state you say you have any expertise in.

Further, Gibson's alleged assault on the students took place on college property, not in Gibson's parking lot. This is another fact you would be able to ascertain for yourself had you looked into the incident instead of misguidedly defending Loren's incorrect claims.

If you are going to boldly proclaim that I am wrong, I strongly suggest that you support your claim with something resembling facts rather than your musings. No, I am not going to do your research for you after you have made your unsubstantiated claims.

Thank you.

I posted the Ohio law there sport.

You still seem to be wrong, in spite of your mic-drop genius level claim "this is Ohio".

Thank you, Dismal. I agree with Raven that it was my responsibility to point out that Ohio law is nearly identical to NY law (and all of the states are nearly identical with this fairly straight-forward law), and post it. So, Thank you for doing that for me... I appreciate it.