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.
Do you agree with the paradigm that says police have "protection" that non-State agents don't have?
I would not call it protection I would call it discretion they are getting less then they used to. They do get immunity from civil lawsuits personally where CCW holder can be personally sued.
I agree that police have to given some discretion because in order to have a civil society they have to enforce the law. Police officers have to deal with disorderly people sometimes that means use of force. The level of force they use is little fuzzy meaning there is no time to take public opinion polls on a guy charging your who is 6'2" tall 260lbs. IMO I would even give police a pass on guy who is shot and killed grabbing for his meth pipe when officer thought it was a gun. The kid with the BB gun who pointed it at officers.
Police are humans make mistakes we can't have 100% arrest with 0% mistakes comes down to each case. George Floyd I can't really say that was legal use of force.
Judges, and DA's will give police the benefit because it's their job not to back down from an irate woman who is disorderly. CCW holder has no job to handle an irate woman. I'm not worried about you since you can't even buy a box of ammo without a background check LOL.
I would not call it protection I would call it discretion they are getting less then they used to. They do get immunity from civil lawsuits personally where CCW holder can be personally sued.
I agree that police have to given some discretion because in order to have a civil society they have to enforce the law. Police officers have to deal with disorderly people sometimes that means use of force. The level of force they use is little fuzzy meaning there is no time to take public opinion polls on a guy charging your who is 6'2" tall 260lbs. IMO I would even give police a pass on guy who is shot and killed grabbing for his meth pipe when officer thought it was a gun. The kid with the BB gun who pointed it at officers.
Police are humans make mistakes we can't have 100% arrest with 0% mistakes comes down to each case. Floyd George I can't really say that was legal use of force.
Judges, and DA's will give police the benefit because it's their job not to back down from an irate woman who is disorderly. CCW holder has no job to handle an irate woman. I'm not worried about you since you can't even buy a box of ammo without a background check LOL.
Yeah, don't worry about me when it comes to this stuff.
In Michigan, you may use deadly force, with no duty to retreat, if you have an honest and reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent death, great bodily harm or sexual assault to yourself or to another individual.
Mrs Wuestenberg was not faced with imminent death, great bodily harm or sexual assault.
Once you violate my rights you forfeit your rights.
If you attempt to kidnap/wrongfully imprison me...twice...and then place your hands on my property I'm going to use my rights to whatever extent necessary to ensure my safety as well as the safety of my property.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1
She is not required to accept false imprisonment.
what you guys are forgetting is that the black woman HAD NO WEAPON. these was no threat a bodily injury, property damage, or even death. no ones life was in danger. its better to wait in the car and file criminal charges against the black woman for false imprisonment, and other felonies, and let her deal with the legal issues, than for you to get felony charges of brandishing a weapon and assault with a deadly weapon, and menacing.
sorry but again there was no reason to pull a firearm in that situation.
when you keep a cool head, you can think clearly, and turn a bad situation into one that benefits you, to the detriment of the other person. sorry bt the white woman is a hot head and should not becarrying a firearm.
remember that with rights come responsibilities, and one big responsibility of carrying a firearm is to use it wisely. the white woman didnt and she will be paying the price in court. you can bet a jury will see this video, and will mostly likely rule against the white woman as they can clearly see there is no threat to life or property.
you hae to think BEFORE you act. yes there are times when a firearm is a necessary tool to prevent bodily injury or even death, but it isnt two women yelling at each other.
Where did I say that. The testimony however claims the white lady was the actual aggressor. And many mothers can get very angry if someone messes with the kids. My kids mother was that way. A good sized Italian lady she had a temper that could soar to heights. And messing with one of her kids was a fine way to set her off.
Let's say the mother's account is accurate and the white woman did get in the daughter's face after the bump. There weren't any threats and that 'aggression' was long over. The ww and husband were calm in the parking lot, the mother and daughter were threatening, hurling insults, and confrontational.
In post 665 you said that the verbal threats by the mother were 'Clearly just angry words.'
Without knowing what was happening in the 10 seconds before the video showing the ww with the gun, I don't have a strong opinion re whether she had a 'reasonable' belief of imminent great bodily harm.
She doesn't have to be faced with deadly force, just a reasonable belief that bodily harm is approaching. Which she was being swarmed by the black woman.
Quick question: Do you carry a gun?
I do carry a gun. Most of us who carry guns are aware that if we want to keep carrying guns, and if we want to avoid enriching our lawyers even further to stay out of jail, that circumspection is the best rule for living a pleasant life despite "muh rights!"
But of course, a person who doesn't carry a gun is free to rant about "muh rights!"
Maybe if it was 1963 Alabama she probably could have shot killed her and got away with it back then.
Yelling at someone even making threats still doesn't give you the right to pull guns. She was not faced with deadly force.
Give me your answer.
Given the woman was pregnant would you say a punch or kick to her stomach could lead to the death of the baby? The only answer is yes.
Given that the mother and daughter were making threats to "beat their white azz" and were getting in their face, along with blocking and beating on their car doesn't that give reasonable assumption that they could or would become physically violent against the woman at any moment? The only answer is yes
Given that the couple tried to leave peacefully, but were blocked from doing so and were threatened with violence that the couple at any moment be injured by the window being shattered? Only answer is yes
Given that the daughter repeatedly said "do something! do something" to bait the couple while the mother threatened to beat them, and made it a racial thing, wouldn't you say the mother and daughter were the ones looking to escalate the situation? The only answer is yes.
So let me ask, do you think the woman should have waited to actually be physically assaulted risking the life of her baby or potential physical harm to her before pulling the gun? The only answer especially considering the baby is no.
The mother and daughter, almost seemed happy that the woman pulled a gun with a got ya! attitude, you would think with a gun pulled on ya you wouldn't risk your life further. The mom and daughter were baiting these people hoping to escalate it into a racial thing and gain fame with a video so the media could run another biased news story of how white people being bad against black people with a headline of "white woman draws gun on black woman".
Given the woman was pregnant would you say a punch or kick to her stomach could lead to the death of the baby? The only answer is yes.
Given that the mother and daughter were making threats to "beat their white azz" and were getting in their face, along with blocking and beating on their car doesn't that give reasonable assumption that they could or would become physically violent against the woman at any moment? The only answer is yes
Given that the couple tried to leave peacefully, but were blocked from doing so and were threatened with violence that the couple at any moment be injured by the window being shattered? Only answer is yes
Given that the daughter repeatedly said "do something! do something" to bait the couple while the mother threatened to beat them, and made it a racial thing, wouldn't you say the mother and daughter were the ones looking to escalate the situation? The only answer is yes.
So let me ask, do you think the woman should have waited to actually be physically assaulted risking the life of her baby or potential physical harm to her before pulling the gun? The only answer especially considering the baby is no.
The mother and daughter, almost seemed happy that the woman pulled a gun with a got ya! attitude, you would think with a gun pulled on ya you wouldn't risk your life further. The mom and daughter were baiting these people hoping to escalate it into a racial thing and gain fame with a video so the media could run another biased news story of how white people being bad against black people with a headline of "white woman draws gun on black woman".
Well, I think that pretty much clears things up.
You hit the nail squarely on the head.
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.
