Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-10-2018, 02:04 PM
 
211 posts, read 118,010 times
Reputation: 602

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rebeldor View Post
There's nothing complicated about it. It's not premeditated, but criminally negligent.

If you or I heard gunshots and went into someone's house to investigate, then shot the homeowner by mistake, we'd be charged with trespassing, and manslaughter at the very least. However, once you call yourselves "government," you can do things like shoot people by mistake and get away with it.

If I was working on a construction site and my bad decision caused the death of someone else, I would be fired immediately, and may have charges brought up against me.

"The department" is funded by taxpayers, so once again, everyday people will be shelling out for the cops' mistake.
Yes, welcome to the United States of America, going strong now for more than 240 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-10-2018, 02:26 PM
 
45,226 posts, read 26,443,162 times
Reputation: 24980
Quote:
Originally Posted by CypressHeat View Post
Yes, welcome to the United States of America, going strong now for more than 240 years.
Must be the all the wars, spying, taxation and locking up of non violent peoples that keeps it chuggin along
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 02:50 PM
 
3,637 posts, read 1,698,703 times
Reputation: 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
Tonight I will break into your home, naked, and try to attack your wife and/or kids as they take a bath.

When the cops show up I want you to follow orders to the letter immediately after you've rightfully killed my evil ass.



Uh, you misread what the poster said. He said the Grandfather should have dropped the gun and complied, not the naked intruder. If the Grandfather hadn't acted improperly, he would still probably be alive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 03:09 PM
 
3,366 posts, read 1,606,149 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Du Ma View Post
The 73 year old man was "proven" himself to be not a threat after the fact or before the fact?
Are you familiar with Graham v Connor supreme court case in 1989?
This statement/question does not make any sense.

How about we as a society don't accept,
"the old guy shouldn't have gotten attacked and been disoriented in his own home if he didn't want to get shot" ,as a reasonable response to a citizen in need being killed by a government employee.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Du Ma View Post
so explain this comment. Yes, I have a comprehension difficulty, so why don't you break it down for me.
Explain what? It means what I wrote. We often ask the military to operate under do not fire until fired upon ROE in situations that don't involve US citizens.
Also, we should expect better of LE than to shoot first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 03:14 PM
 
3,366 posts, read 1,606,149 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by WMak70 View Post
Uh, you misread what the poster said. He said the Grandfather should have dropped the gun and complied, not the naked intruder. If the Grandfather hadn't acted improperly, he would still probably be alive.
So, he deserved to die, for being old and disoriented after being attacked and defending his family in his home.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 03:14 PM
 
Location: NNJ
15,071 posts, read 10,101,447 times
Reputation: 17247
Long standing argument is that gun control laws cannot differentiate between a law biding citizen and one that has intent to use the weapon for harm.

Apparently, the same problem exists for police officers responding to a shooting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 03:18 PM
 
Location: Cali
14,228 posts, read 4,593,980 times
Reputation: 8320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo302 View Post
This statement/question does not make any sense.

It does not make any sense to you because you haven't read Graham v Connor case law. Police's use of force in United States derived from that case law.




Quote:
Explain what? It means what I wrote. We often ask the military to operate under do not fire until fired upon ROE in situations that don't involve US citizens.
Also, we should expect better of LE than to shoot first.
How many tours have you served in Iraq or Afghanistan?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,853 posts, read 17,363,818 times
Reputation: 14459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo302 View Post
So, he deserved to die, for being old and disoriented after being attacked and defending his family in his home.
Exactly.

I'm pretty hardened from growing up in the ghetto. This old man was in 'Nam. Your mind and body don't immediately go to neutral after the incident is over...especially if you've had these experiences.

Science my friends, science.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 03:44 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,853 posts, read 17,363,818 times
Reputation: 14459
Quote:
Originally Posted by usayit View Post
Long standing argument is that gun control laws cannot differentiate between a law biding citizen and one that has intent to use the weapon for harm.

Apparently, the same problem exists for police officers responding to a shooting.
The State has a monopoly on force and is above the law so it gets to decide when it f'd up...which is somewhere between rarely to never.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 03:45 PM
 
3,366 posts, read 1,606,149 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Du Ma View Post
The 73 year old man was "proven" himself to be not a threat after the fact or before the fact?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Du Ma View Post
It does not make any sense to you because you haven't read Graham v Connor case law. Police's use of force in United States derived from that case law.
No, it does not make sense because it is not grammatically coherent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Du Ma View Post
How many tours have you served in Iraq or Afghanistan?
I'm still in.

Are you not aware of do not fire until fired upon ROE 's? CONUS is not a combat zone and does not need to be treated as one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:05 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top