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'm about to log off and go about my business on a Sunday afternoon but before I do I'd like to mention something that crossed my mind I hope you ponder regarding this situation with this woman pulling a gun and OTHER past situations regarding other people.
I don't agree with or support mandatory sentencing laws. I think it is short sided, created by politicians to get elected to show they are tough on crime. It takes away the ability of a judge and jury to deliberate extenuated circumstances unique to each case.
If this woman does get convicted for using a gun wrongly, I think we can agree she doesn't deserve a automatic 10 or 20 years prison time, which mandatory laws do when saying use a gun in a crime, get a automatic determined prison sentence. I don't know her state laws just saying this in general.
There was a woman years ago in Florida (black woman) who shot a warning shot against a abusive boyfriend or husband, I think we can agree that while it may be unlawful to discharge a firearm improperly her case doesn't or didn't warrant a automated sentencing timeline.
These are clear cases that are totally different than a known felon with a record using a gun in another crime.
Same goes for drug laws, automated prison laws for having drugs can destroy a life for a person who might otherwise not have never really been someone particularly dangerous to society.
So I hope you agree that mandatory tough on crime laws are short sided and should not be supported.
IMHO there needs to be an overhaul to the whole justice system -- but now some states are saying 12 yrs can marry old men, as long and daddy or mommy signs.. UGH how do we fix people??
That's all true but who is facing a felony now? if you carry a gun learn from this. CCW holders need to understand what the risk is. Even if they end up with a brandishing conviction what employer is going to hire them with that kind of record none.
You really do care a lot about what happens to other people, don't you?
Except for two videos that show everything you just posted is completely false and made up, so there's that.
Take another look. There is no such showing. In fact from the Detroit Newspaper report...
****************************************
Hill then said she thought the driver was going to hit them as the driver backed out of the parking space, so she hit the back window of the vehicle to stop it.
The woman jumped out and pulled a gun. The woman walks backward and repeatedly shouts "Get the (expletive) back!" and "Back the (expletive) up!" as she points the gun. The mother and teen begin yelling and calling for the cops as the woman climbs back into the vehicle.
***************************************
So you claim mine reading skills to interpret what happened?
If you see all my posts -I said the Judge or jury will decide the case--- many times.
The white couple as arrested- the police must had cause.
Blockage of the car,,, a matter of opinion... forensics will break down the video and there might be cameras at Chipotle...
Those videos at Wendy's eventually showed exactly who threw that cocktail to light the place up.
Give it time to get all their information.
But as some only have one narrative, I don't see it that way and it doesn't matter to me what color any of them are. I see action- reaction. And its costing them dearly- would not be surprised the black people also get death threats.. Americans love that
This is your most reasonable post. I agree with the bold.
This said, one brother and my uncle happened to be attorneys, If I understand or remember their words correctly, Depending on state law, you may be allowed to brandish or use a gun against someone you believe is about to kill or seriously hurt you, even if you're outside your home and could have retreated. However, a victim must fear being gravely injured or killed, and that fear must be reasonable.
Like you said, it is up to the judge and juries to decide.
What really bothers me about this story is how irresponsible media has been: carelessly labeling these two white people racists. Racists, they are NOT. HELL NO, they are not.
The white gentleman was fired and who will hire him again once he was labeled a racist? He didn't do anything or say anything racist. The black woman yelled at him, "if you say something, I'd beat you white a** too."
Racist is definitely a buzzword in this day and age, used for a variety of purposes. The definition of “racism” is rapidly morphing into “any action involving a Person of Color that does not result in a positive result as determined by that person.”
Being loud and obnoxious will not make people respect you (general term) more, yelling racism will not make your argument valid. Somewhere there must be a middle ground where reason, not excuses, stupidity nor hate rule the day.
I earlier already got you to admit you would convict this woman, so just quit pretending as if you're just a concerned person wanting to help and protect CCW holders
I earlier already got you to admit you would convict this woman, so just quit pretending as if you're just a concerned person wanting to help and protect CCW holders
I would give them both community service but take away their guns. As for losing his job-- Veteran's place?? that's up to them. For any reason one can get fired.
I would give them both community service but take away their guns. As for losing his job-- Veteran's place?? that's up to them. For any reason one can get fired.
Take away her gun for what, doing what it is intended to do? Even Michigan law allows you to use force that is less than deadly force (such as brandishing a weapon) if you reasonably believe it will prevent the use of force about to be used on you.
I would give them both community service but take away their guns. As for losing his job-- Veteran's place?? that's up to them. For any reason one can get fired.
.. and people shouldn't put up with that. More and more people are suing for wrongful termination.
My brother's law firm has wrongful termination attorneys, many clients are white people and they win lawsuits everyday.
This is your most reasonable post. I agree with the bold.
This said, one brother and my uncle happened to be attorneys, If I understand or remember their words correctly, Depending on state law, you may be allowed to brandish or use a gun against someone you believe is about to kill or seriously hurt you, even if you're outside your home and could have retreated. However, a victim must fear being gravely injured or killed, and that fear must be reasonable.
Like you said, it is up to the judge and juries to decide.
What really bothers me about this story is how irresponsible media has been: carelessly labeling these two white people racists. Racists, they are NOT. HELL NO, they are not.
The white gentleman was fired and who will hire him again once he was labeled a racist? He didn't do anything or say anything racist. The black woman yelled at him, "if you say something, I'd beat you white a** too."
Racist is definitely a buzzword in this day and age, used for a variety of purposes. The definition of “racism” is rapidly morphing into “any action involving a Person of Color that does not result in a positive result as determined by that person.”
Being loud and obnoxious will not make people respect you (general term) more, yelling racism will not make your argument valid. Somewhere there must be a middle ground where reason, not excuses, stupidity nor hate rule the day.
Cite main line media calling the couple racist. I have not seen that. The Black Mom does appear to claim their actions were racist.. But I have not seen any major news source to assert that being true. And I would tend to agree that the interaction got hostile but does not seem racially driven.
Cite main line media calling the couple racist. I have not seen that. The Black Mom does appear to claim their actions were racist.. But I have not seen any major news source to assert that being true. And I would tend to agree that the interaction got hostile but does not seem racially driven.
Okay, they "hinted" it was racially driven, better?
What's the point to post only the end of the video? What's the point to bring these couple's skin color into discussion?
Come on.
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.
I agree with the bold.
