Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The mans actions were in response to a crime committed against him. His actions would not be necessary if that crime was not committed. The person committing the crime had complete control here, they created this issue, for if they did not steal, this would have never happened.
So again, you are wrong.
if she performed the act and he didn't pay could she use deadly force?
The law says so but I doubt the law would rule in her favor.
Texas and Florida reach further into the south than any other state and both have some crazy laws when it comes to murder.
Getting down to the nitty gritty...his act of soliciting a prostitute via Craigslist (of all places) was a crime in the first place. I did not see this addressed in the article and I was under the impression that Craigslist no longer ran those types of ads, but then again in Texas...who knows. All this for a $150 bucks. What a social reject! And yes, what about the john that refuses to pay the prostitute. Can she kill him as he makes his exit? And if not, why the hell not?
Are you trying to imply that because he was committing a crime with prostitution, that it makes all other legal acts of his illegal? Can you explain the logic in that?
I get it, you don't like him, you are angry, upset, and emotionalizing the issue. Personally, I don't care about the guy, he is irrelevant, the point was the law and if his actions were legal within the context of lethal force being used. Past that, well... the rest is Jerry Springer opinions that are subjective and meaningless.
As for your example, yes... she could.. IF she meets the requirements of the law. Go ahead, read the law, what does it say about theft and recovery of property in the commission of a crime? Make a valid argument using the law and if it is within bounds.
if she performed the act and he didn't pay could she use deadly force?
The law says so but I doubt the law would rule in her favor.
Texas and Florida reach further into the south than any other state and both have some crazy laws when it comes to murder.
I posted the law, what do you think? What does the law say? What are the conditions? I am not going to do the work for you, look back through the thread, I posted the law on it.
Are you trying to imply that because he was committing a crime with prostitution, that it makes all other legal acts of his illegal? Can you explain the logic in that?
I get it, you don't like him, you are angry, upset, and emotionalizing the issue. Personally, I don't care about the guy, he is irrelevant, the point was the law and if his actions were legal within the context of lethal force being used. Past that, well... the rest is Jerry Springer opinions that are subjective and meaningless.
As for your example, yes... she could.. IF she meets the requirements of the law. Go ahead, read the law, what does it say about theft and recovery of property in the commission of a crime? Make a valid argument using the law and if it is within bounds.
You said that she intiated the situation, I pointed ot that from the outset, he was just as responsible for initiating the situation. He was obviously shopping for bargain sex and is equally responsible for what happened next.
You said that she intiated the situation, I pointed ot that from the outset, he was just as responsible for initiating the situation. He was obviously shopping for bargain sex and is equally responsible for what happened next.
Initially, they both consented to that prospect of business. At no time did the man consent to being stolen from. This is all on her. She could have refused, gave his money back and there would have been no cause for his actions. She stole the money, she caused the situation to escalate, he had no choice after that point other than to lose the money. He was perfectly legal in his actions concerning that escalation, she was not.
Why do they state that though? It is the "intent" that is key here. Many people live after being shot, so lethal force is not definitive, it simply means that the force is sufficient to cause death, not that it will cause death.
Now that I will respond to since it's a somewhat different issue approach interestingly enough you reach the same basic conclusion. Makes me wonder if that's indoctrination, stubbornness or obsession.
Anyway, rarely does a cop fire a single shot unless they're a sniper. Usually we/they fire multiples to make sure the individual is "stopped." More often than not, death is the result. You have to remember that also more often than not they are "batch" shootings in which two or more officers fire multiple shots each at the subject.
Kinda makes your big issue of what's lethal force moot.
Now that I will respond to since it's a somewhat different issue approach interestingly enough you reach the same basic conclusion. Makes me wonder if that's indoctrination, stubbornness or obsession.
Anyway, rarely does a cop fire a single shot unless they're a sniper. Usually we/they fire multiples to make sure the individual is "stopped." More often than not, death is the result. You have to remember that also more often than not they are "batch" shootings in which two or more officers fire multiple shots each at the subject.
Kinda makes your big issue of what's lethal force moot.
Not really, it means that a person can apply it and not intend to kill as some posters were attempting to imply that was the intent. It may be the result, but there is a big difference in applying lethal force to stop a given action and applying it with the intent to kill, a big difference.
What's with you guys? Whether it be a million dollars or 10 bucks..How can you folks sit here and justify shooting someone running off with your money? What about if you order a 100 dollar meal and it is horrible and you refuse to eat it and they refuse to give you a refund...Do you dash into the kitchen and start blasting away at the chef? You folks love your guns a little to much and any justification to use them is explored I see.
Not really, it means that a person can apply it and not intend to kill as some posters were attempting to imply that was the intent. It may be the result, but there is a big difference in applying lethal force to stop a given action and applying it with the intent to kill, a big difference.
Hair splitting must be exhausting. Now try hard to follow this. I AM GOING TO SHOOT -- I AM GOING TO AIM FOR CENTER OF MASS -- THAT CAN BE A KILLING SHOT -- I AM GOING TO FIRE MORE THAN ONCE -- THAT INCREASES THE ODDS THAT I WILL KILL MY TARGET. So, was that my intent? To answer that you'd have to have been there, done that. But you haven't and won't.
Also consider this. Normal rules of engagement specify that you only shoot if there is an immediate threat of serious injury or death to you or someone else. For the record, serious injury can ultimately lead to death. Just want to clearly spell that out for you too. Under those circumstances, do you really think anyone but a complete wuss really cares what damage they do to the potential threat, or should? Well, you probably do.
Yeah. I know. That's all logical, therefore incomprehensible.
Not much different than the military mantra. "If I see it I can acquire it. If I acquire it I can shoot it. If I shoot it I can kill it." Oh my!
OK! That's enough. Still fruitless. It's one of two things. Either you actually believe your own drivel, which would be really sad, or you just love and need to argue.
Last edited by Curmudgeon; 08-01-2013 at 12:35 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hair splitting must be exhausting. Now try hard to follow this. I AM GOING TO SHOOT -- I AM GOING TO AIM FOR CENTER OF MASS -- THAT CAN BE A KILLING SHOT -- I AM GOING TO FIRE MORE THAN ONCE -- THAT INCREASES THE ODDS THAT I WILL KILL MY TARGET. So, was that my intent? To answer that you'd have to have been there, done that. But you haven't and won't.
