Man robs the same Winnipeg RBC bank four times

[CDNBear]

Why don't you hold your "troll buddies" to the same standard you expect me to meet...

Your usual diversion when accurately, and righteously called out, aside. That would be your own standard!!!

And neither does anyone else.

Something that has become crystal clear to so many, including the staff.

It's hard to grasp why it still eludes EAO.

Get off your high horse.

I hate to correct you, but that's a cross he's on.

He throws himself up there every time he gets butthurt.

 

[shadowshiv]

Sorry, I assumed you understood that an armed guard in a bank increases the chances that a robbery will result in a shootout risking the lives of the bank guard, bank employees and innocent bystanders like you and me. I'd rather not be in a bank during a shootout between robbers and armed guards. In fact, I'd probably stop using a bank that posts armed guards for safety reasons.

How bank robberies go down in the US:

A blaze of automatic gunfire ripped through a crowded neighborhood after several heavily armed gunmen dressed like commandos botched a bank robbery.

Two suspects were killed, and 15 people were injured, including 10 policemen. None of the injuries incurred during the hourlong shootout was life threatening, Los Angeles Police Chief Willie Williams said.

Initially outgunned, police responded to a scene in North Hollywood that resembled a combat zone. Bullets were flying from all directions into cars and buildings and bystanders, too.

More than 200 police were on hand for the siege, which lasted more than an hour. Armored personnel carriers and dozens of police cars, fire engines and ambulances were called to subdue the attackers and attend to the wounded.

Wearing body armor and carrying a trunk full of weapons, the robbers were ready for a fight. And thats exactly what they delivered, firing multiple hundreds of rounds, according to police.

They fired armorpiercing bullets at anything that moved, and one suspect used a getaway car as a shield. Two suspects fought fiercely to the death, killed by helmeted police who fired bullets to the head at close range.
Botched L.A bank heist turns into bloody shootout - CNN

Canadian Bank Robbery

A 30-year-old man wanted for three bank robberies in Vernon is now in custody.

The Vernon resident allegedly robbed VantageOne Credit Union, the Bank of Montreal, and HSBC Bank, said Gordon Molendyk of the Vernon/North Okanagan RCMP.

Police released surveillance photos of the suspect last week. He was ID’d following a tip from the public.

The man was arrested without incident at a police station Monday after he walked into a detachment to talk to police.

Suspected Vernon bank robber arrested after walking into police station

You know what assuming gets you, right? And I hate to tell you, that gunfights due to armed guards are not as common as you seem to think. The shootout that you are talking about above, the ones where the robbers had freaking AUTOMATIC rifles(AK47s to be exact) with hundreds upon hundreds of rounds, body armour, and other weapons, started when they opened fire on POLICE OFFICERS. Who were just doing their jobs. What the heck are they supposed to do? Let the robbers go because they might open fire? No. They start doing that, and the criminals would continue to use the same M.O. with bank robberies. This isn't like television shows where the cops put down their weapons because a criminal tells them to. That isn't the real world, and that actually irks me when watching the show, as I removes any sense of realness to it.

And the BEST part of the above example? The only ones killed were the piece of **** robbers. They reaped what they sowed.

 

[Chev]

Years ago my cousin was a teller and someone came to her to rob her. She kept her cool, replied "you're kidding, are you nuts, are you out of your mind?" The robber was totally stunned and left with nothing.
Another teller I know pretended she was going to vomit all over her counter and the robber. He left in a hurry, with nothing.

I think I'd have fainted afterward! (I was a teller for a few years.)

 

[earth_as_one]

You know what assuming gets you, right? And I hate to tell you, that gunfights due to armed guards are not as common as you seem to think. The shootout that you are talking about above, the ones where the robbers had freaking AUTOMATIC rifles(AK47s to be exact) with hundreds upon hundreds of rounds, body armour, and other weapons, started when they opened fire on POLICE OFFICERS. Who were just doing their jobs. What the heck are they supposed to do? Let the robbers go because they might open fire? No. They start doing that, and the criminals would continue to use the same M.O. with bank robberies. This isn't like television shows where the cops put down their weapons because a criminal tells them to. That isn't the real world, and that actually irks me when watching the show, as I removes any sense of realness to it.

And the BEST part of the above example? The only ones killed were the piece of **** robbers. They reaped what they sowed.

I wouldn't have wanted to be in that American bank while it was robbed.

The reason why the robbers came loaded for bear is they were expected to shoot their way out. If they came to Canada, they could have robbed a bank with a small pointy object like screw driver. How much money are they going to get? A couple of thousands in marked bills and a packet of exploding red dye. That's hardly worth killing or dying.

Also you never mentioned the police that were injured, the innocent bystanders who were traumatized or the effect shooting and killing someone would have on anyone including a police officer.

How was your day honey? Oh you know, the same old, same old... oh yes, I nearly forgot. I did I empty my assault weapon into a robber's face today. I splattered their brains all over the street. But other than that, not so bad. How was your day?

I doubt armed guards reduce the incidence of armed robberies. It might cause the robbers to go after softer targets and it certainly raises the stakes.

I hope Canadian banks never use armed guards except in exceptional circumstances.

 

[L Gilbert]

Man robs the same Winnipeg RBC bank four times
Man robs the same Winnipeg RBC bank four times | Daily Buzz - Yahoo! News Canada


They get robbed. Heck, lightning doesn't strike the same place twice, yada, yada, yada, no need to beef up security. I can almost kind of understand the logic, no sense closing the barn door after the horse has already gotten out right?



But after the second or third time????


Stupidity your name is RBC Winnipeg.

Stupidity seems to have been the main theme there ........... on everyone's part.

 

[shadowshiv]

I wouldn't have wanted to be in that American bank while it was robbed.

The reason why the robbers came loaded for bear is they were expected to shoot their way out. If they came to Canada, they could have robbed a bank with a small pointy object like screw driver. How much money are they going to get? A couple of thousands in marked bills and a packet of exploding red dye. That's hardly worth killing or dying.

Also you never mentioned the police that were injured, the innocent bystanders who were traumatized or the effect shooting and killing someone would have on anyone including a police officer.

How was your day honey? Oh you know, the same old, same old... oh yes, I nearly forgot. I did I empty my assault weapon into a robber's face today. I splattered their brains all over the street. But other than that, not so bad. How was your day?

I doubt armed guards reduce the incidence of armed robberies. It might cause the robbers to go after softer targets and it certainly raises the stakes.

I hope Canadian banks never use armed guards except in exceptional circumstances.

I seriously doubt that anyone would want to have been in the bank when that was going on.

Depending on the bank, and the time of day. Some of the larger banks I'm sure they would get a heck of a lot more than a "few thousand dollars". And some criminals don't care how much money is involved. They'll attempt to kill any potential witnesses.

Yeah, because police officers routinely empty their assault rifles into a criminal's face. And they know that someday they may have to kill someone in the line of duty. They knew it the day they joined the force. And the innocent bystanders being traumatized is due to the actions of the criminals, and even if a shot wasn't fired bystanders can still be plenty traumatized.

 

[SLM]

How was your day honey? Oh you know, the same old, same old... oh yes, I nearly forgot. I did I empty my assault weapon into a robber's face today. I splattered their brains all over the street. But other than that, not so bad. How was your day?

This is your characterization of a police officer after having to use his weapon in the line of duty?

Wow, just wow.

 

[earth_as_one]

I was making a point regarding these statements:

I said I didn't give a rat's ass if the robber got hurt, as that is how I feel. The robber is a criminal, and why would I give a rat's ass about him.

and

And the BEST part of the above example? The only ones killed were the piece of **** robbers.

I believe in least harm.

The best outcome of an armed robbery would be if no one is hurt including the bank robber. If the armed robber is confronted in the bank by the police or an armed guard, there is a good chance someone will be hurt. Even if the bank robber is the only one hurt, its still going to be a bad day for the shooter.

 

[CDNBear]

What a load of crap.

 

[shadowshiv]

I was making a point regarding these statements:

I said I didn't give a rat's ass if the robber got hurt, as that is how I feel. The robber is a criminal, and why would I give a rat's ass about him.

and

And the BEST part of the above example? The only ones killed were the piece of **** robbers.

I believe in least harm.

The best outcome of an armed robbery would be if no one is hurt including the bank robber. If the armed robber is confronted in the bank by the police or an armed guard, there is a good chance someone will be hurt. Even if the bank robber is the only one hurt, its still going to be a bad day for the shooter.

I never said that I want all bank robber shot or killed. What I said is that if they happen to be hurt or killed while perpetrating their crime, then I don't give a fiddler's ****. Why would I? They are criminals and if they are shot, then there was a good reason for it. It wasn't because the guard or the police felt like being Rambo and shooting the crap out of people, it's because they were defending innocent people from criminals.

And if the bank robber is the only one hurt, then that is a GOOD day as the bank robber is the only one hurt, NOT an innocent person. If a person wants money so bad, either get a job or a loan if possible.

 

[SLM]

I was making a point regarding these statements:

I said I didn't give a rat's ass if the robber got hurt, as that is how I feel. The robber is a criminal, and why would I give a rat's ass about him.

and

And the BEST part of the above example? The only ones killed were the piece of **** robbers.

Making a point huh? Then maybe you need to rethink the way you phrase your sentences and construct your posting because it does not come across that way.

I believe in least harm.

So, just to clarify, do you or do you not intend to imply that everyone else does not believe in least harm? Because given the way these conversations with you tend to go, it would be best if you explained that up front.

The best outcome of an armed robbery would be if no one is hurt including the bank robber. If the armed robber is confronted in the bank by the police or an armed guard, there is a good chance someone will be hurt. Even if the bank robber is the only one hurt, its still going to be a bad day for the shooter.

No kidding, you don't say! (Note: that is how one does sarcasm)

Perhaps before extrapolating where someone has said that they don't sympathize with criminals being hurt or even killed in the commission of a crime to a sad characterization of a police officer who blows someones brains out in a nonchalant manner as a rebuttal, you might want to discern how that same someone views what a police officer would feel having to discharge his weapon in the line of duty. Because otherwise you are again making an assumption in order to prove a point and if you have to assume in order to prove a point than perhaps that point doesn't actually need to be made.

Bottom line in this scenario here is that there is one person and only one person who can be said without a shadow of a doubt does not care about the outcome in regards to innocent people and that would be the criminal. They are the ones who go into a bank intent only on their own personal gain which points to a disregard of other people from the jump. If the situation escalates on whose shoulders does the initial fault for that lie?

 

[earth_as_one]

If you support injuring or killing the bank robber or are neutral about the fate of the robber, then I would say that you do not support least harm. Least harm in my opinion would include the robber's safety as well as everyone else.

That said I would expect the police to resort to lethal force when facing a lethal threat.. again because that would be least harm.

Shooting someone is harmful... not just to the shootee, but also the shooter. But the harm to the shooter could be the least harmful option if the robber threatens to harm others...

It must suck to be a police officer... Guess who gets to cleanup car accident death scenes and suicides... after taking pictures and samples of remains for forensics....... I know I couldn't do their job,

Regarding the robber... if they are robbing a bank, my guess they are desperate. I'm not so willing to assume all robbers have a complete disregard for human life... They could have no intention of killing someone and believe they are only risking their own lives. (they could have a non-lethal replica weapon).. but as the shootout in front of the Empire State Building highlights, the police have real firearms and when they use lethal force, everyone within the firearm's range is at risk.

 

[shadowshiv]

My dad was an OPP officer(retired), my late Uncle was an RCMP officer, and my cousin's girlfriend is a city police officer. And they didn't think their job sucked. They loved their job.

 

[JLM]

This is Canadian mediocrity he keeps robbing the same bank because
he knows the layout. Not even criminals have ambition anymore they
don't try new ideas and the police in turn just keep tasering the same
people. you would think that after four robberies, the cops would find a
few clues.

The fact that this happened four times doesn't attest to the intelligence of any of the "players"! I think Darwin awards could be handed out all round.