Hacker News Reader

Comment by klyrs | Hacker News Reader

Expecting this random guy to deeply understand the technicalities of why Apple is directing angry people to his house, in a state where it's legal to kill people for stealing your stuff, is not terribly reasonable. If techies are interested, they could help by figuring out the reason for this.

View on HN

Expecting journalists to have an answer before writing a piece is very reasonable.

> The Post reached out to Apple on Thursday seeking comment on Schuster’s predicament, and the company’s efforts to resolve it, and was awaiting a reply.

There are technologists other than Apple who could help them understand.

Yeah sure, expecting journalists to find a cause + fix for the trillion-dollar company's buggy software and _only_ call-out and amplify a commoner's struggle _after_ they figure it out sounds super reasonable. Totally.

I’m curious why you imagine anyone is expecting that?

Because you said "Expecting journalists to have an answer before writing a piece is very reasonable." - given the journalist did not have an answer, it implies you think the journalist should have had an answer before publishing

How is that relevant to Sangeeth69’s comment?

There doesn’t seem to be any connection between what they said and what I said.

You said "Expecting journalists to have an answer before writing a piece is very reasonable.", implying it was reasonable to ask journalists to have an answer to the Q in the article. Sangeeth disagrees with you.

I don’t think so.

Can you quote something that Sangeeth wrote that indicates how they disagree with me?

Its da Post so maybe not.

I don't expect a random guy to deeply understand the technicalities, but I do expect a journalist to do more investigation than reaching out to a large corporation for comment.

Regardless of what is "expected" I stand by that it would have been interesting to dig in to the details. Hopefully somebody does. I doubt apple will, but I think there can be lessons learned from understanding how it happened if someone were to research it.

In what state is it legal to kill people for stealing your stuff?

I’m fairly certain it is legal to shoot people on your property just for being on your property in some states.

I don’t know about finding somebody and “protecting” your property somewhere else.

I think you’re spreading misinformation. I hope it’s not intentional.

There is not a single state in the US where it is legal to shoot someone just for being on your property.

It does seem like there are a number of states in which deadly force is permitted in the circumstances of trespassing

https://www.ncsl.org/civil-and-criminal-justice/self-defense...

While it probably wouldn’t apply in this specific case, in Texas the Castle Doctrine describes circumstances where one could apply lethal force to defend one’s property

Can you explain how this has any relevance at all to going to someone else’s house and killing them because you wrongly think your cellphone is somewhere nearby?

As far as I can see the person who I was replying to is simply making this up.

Please mind the site guidelines. You're being super aggro in this thread.

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine.

Your question was:

> In what state is it legal to kill people for stealing your stuff?

In Texas, under certain circumstances, it is legal to kill people for stealing your stuff. This might be very different than the laws in the state that you live in (it certainly is for me in New Jersey) but it is the reality.

As I mentioned it likely wouldn't apply in this case.

As a side note, the Castle Doctrine does apply within one's vehicle. Presumably an argument could be made that if someone stayed within their vehicle while confronting the home owner the Castle Doctrine may apply. Admittedly that is quite a stretch and I have no idea if something like that has ever been tried in Texas courts.

That may be slightly overstated, but use of lethal force to protect one's property is legal in Texas. Very recently somebody in Texas did kill somebody for stealing their truck, using airtags to find to track them down. Legally speaking, somebody showing up at your door with a gun to recover their phone may not be okay. Realistically, the law doesn't act until you're dead.

https://globalnews.ca/news/9590520/truck-thief-airtag-shot-d...

It’s more than slightly overstated. It’s a total lie.

Showing up at someone’s house and killing someone because they have your phone is always illegal in every US state.

I don’t know why people are trying to defend this. It’s complete misinformation.

Showing up while in real time pursuit is not in Texas. If you followed the thief all the way, the worst you get is a trespassing charge.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com