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.
I think the guy in this case probably should have been arrested. But deadly force seems unnecessary. I would like to see more "alternative" approaches to de-escalate situations instead of pulling out their guns and shooting.
And resisting arrest in many times is bogus. The police pull someone over without just cause. Refuse to tell the person why they are stopped. Then they get arrested for resisting arrest.
You keep pretending that the cops showed up with guns blazing. What I've read so far, Taylor was inside the building when he ran instead of obeying an order to lie down. Still no shots fired.
Unless sources are telling you details of the so-called 'altercation,' you have zip rationale to claim the shooting seems unnecessary.
I doubt you're right, but if you can show me law that says differently, I'll listen.
Ok, just read any law that deals with slander. You can voice an opinion, that is covered by free speech. However, once you say "you are..." that is no longer opinion and can be tested as slander or even libel. The police officer can then arrest you for that becuase an arrest is just that, it is not a conviction but merely an allegation. "slan·der
ˈslandər/
noun
LAW
1.
the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.
"he is suing the TV network for slander"
" When spoken it requires a third person to hear it. To person to cop, no but person to cop in the presence of others, yes. More to the point, why do it? People who insult cops usually do it to incite the cop.
The more you post the more you expose yourself as not knowing very much. Like the difference between "may not" and "shall not" you seem to be less than cluess.
Ok, just read any law that deals with slander. You can voice an opinion, that is covered by free speech. However, once you say "you are..." that is no longer opinion and can be tested as slander or even libel. The police officer can then arrest you for that becuase an arrest is just that, it is not a conviction but merely an allegation.
IT IS NOT CRIMINAL, it is civil you cannot be arrested for it. I already tried to explain that to you once, but let me try again
THIS should help you understand that slander/defamation is civil, not criminal: Defamation Law Made Simple | Nolo.com "Defamation" is a catch-all term for any statement that hurts someone's reputation. Written defamation is called "libel," and spoken defamation is called "slander." Defamation is not a crime, but it is a "tort" (a civil wrong, rather than a criminal wrong). A person who has been defamed can sue the person who did the defaming.
Penalties for Civil vs Criminal acts: The Mississippi Bar: The Difference Between a Civil and Criminal Case "A civil case involves a dispute between two people, or parties, on a certain issue. One party sues the other, and the jury determines liability and the amount of damages. The court may order the party found at fault to pay money to the injured party or to fulfill an obligation, such as honoring a contract".
"Criminal law considers a crime an act against society rather than an individual. Therefore, the government brings legal action against a person for committing a crime. If found guilty, the defendant may have to pay a fine, serve time in jail or prison, or be placed on probation. The law and society view jail time, or incarceration, as the loss of one's personal freedom and thus, a more severe penalty than a monetary fine".
I want us to investigate every police shooting where the victim is unarmed. Why must every altercation include the use of a gun? We clearly need better training.
Do you have any training or qualifications to make a statement like that?
You see 2sleepy, while I won't say you are often ignorant about much of what you say, I would say that you shoukd consider if that is true. Twice now you've simply said things that aren't close to be truthful, well, actually three times so maybe take a breather and at least do a vit if research before saying such things. It only causes others to point out how wrong you are. Don't you get the point yet?
The more you post the more you expose yourself as not knowing very much. Like the difference between "may not" and "shall not" you seem to be less than cluess.
GEORGIA DEFAMATION LAW: Williamson v. State, 249 Ga. 851 (1982), held that the statute was partially unconstitutional because the language “tends to provoke a breach of peace” is vague and overbroad. Yet in light of the decision, the statute has not been revised and remains on the books.
TEXAS STATUTE: Does not apply to defamation of a person in any way, but rather slander against an 'association'
a) A person commits an offense if the person, with intent to injure an association or a federal association in this state:
(1) knowingly makes, utters, circulates, or transmits to another person a statement that is untrue and derogatory to the financial condition of the association or federal association; or
(2) counsels, aids, procures, or induces another person to originate, make, utter, transmit, or circulate a statement or rumor that is untrue and derogatory to the financial condition of the association or federal association.
UTAH STATUTE
Utah repealed its criminal-libel statutes in 2007 (S.B. 86, effective April 30, 2007), but a similar criminal-defamation statute remains on the books. The libel statute was previously found unconstitutional in I.M.L. v. State, 61 P.3d 1038, 1048 (Utah, 2002).
The criminal-defamation statute is codified at Utah Code Ann. § 76-9-404:
(1) A person is guilty of criminal defamation if he knowingly communicates to any person orally or in writing any information which he knows to be false and knows will tend to expose any other living person to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule.
Here's a full list: Criminal-libel statutes, state by state | First Amendment Center Most of the states with criminal defamation laws still have them simply because no one removed them, they are generally unconstitutional. There is still a law on the books in Nevada that makes it a crime for a hotel operator to have sheets that extend less than 13" over the mattress, and another that makes it a crime to swear in front of a dead person
How about in situations like this all the cops do is surround the suspect or location instead of attempting an arrest. Call mom and dad to try and talk sense to the person. Offer a free education or other reward for turning himself in. There are all sorts of alternatives to making an arrest.
Because police officers are not social workers, a fact that way too many people forget when they're having a family squirmish and promptly dial 911, then stand outside their house and moan and cry as their loved one is being arrested for domestic violence.
GEORGIA DEFAMATION LAW: Williamson v. State, 249 Ga. 851 (1982), held that the statute was partially unconstitutional because the language “tends to provoke a breach of peace” is vague and overbroad. Yet in light of the decision, the statute has not been revised and remains on the books.
TEXAS STATUTE: Does not apply to defamation of a person in any way, but rather slander against an 'association'
a) A person commits an offense if the person, with intent to injure an association or a federal association in this state:
(1) knowingly makes, utters, circulates, or transmits to another person a statement that is untrue and derogatory to the financial condition of the association or federal association; or
(2) counsels, aids, procures, or induces another person to originate, make, utter, transmit, or circulate a statement or rumor that is untrue and derogatory to the financial condition of the association or federal association.
UTAH STATUTE
Utah repealed its criminal-libel statutes in 2007 (S.B. 86, effective April 30, 2007), but a similar criminal-defamation statute remains on the books. The libel statute was previously found unconstitutional in I.M.L. v. State, 61 P.3d 1038, 1048 (Utah, 2002).
The criminal-defamation statute is codified at Utah Code Ann. § 76-9-404:
(1) A person is guilty of criminal defamation if he knowingly communicates to any person orally or in writing any information which he knows to be false and knows will tend to expose any other living person to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule.
See, you just don't get it. A cop does belong to an association and representa such. First learn what "Association" means. Jailhouse lawyer is starting to come to mind concerning your post, it explains quite a lot.
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.
