Page 9 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 164

Thread: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

  1. #81
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    That would have violated their civil rights.
    They have the same rights in that country as everyone else in that country. Just because you're a US citizen does not mean that you have the same rights as a US citizen in anyone else's country. You obey the law of the land in the country that you are in and suffer the consequences of that country if you don't.

    Lets put it this way. If a country that someone else was a citizen of allowed "honor killings" should that person be allowed to do the same thing on US soil? Hell no. And I know you wouldn't agree to that either. You'd tell that other country where to stick their laws and demand that person be tried on US soil under US laws. And you'd be right to. What happened with these people is no different.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  2. #82
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,190

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by lifeisshort View Post
    So in a way it's our fault huh
    Your posts constantly display a kind of dismissive victimhood that is unbecoming the strong nation America is. If people don't trust you - your nation, or you personally - then yes, it's your own fault that you've given people reason not to trust you or not done enough to gain their trust. Is it always right or fair - no - but it is what it is.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  3. #83
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,190

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    We would have never prosecuted someone for violating Sharia Law.
    There's middle ground between Sharia Law and lawlessness. Obama wasn't interested in seeking it.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  4. #84
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    IMO, even as the details of the above two cases differ, the principles that define whether a claim of self-defense is justified are shared. Hence, it is no surprise that both cases resulted in the failure of the self-defense argument.

    You don't even know why the Juries found the way they did. Yet here you are making it up. Truly sad.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The Wafer case in Michigan saw the argument of self-defense fail, because the shooter fired through a locked screen door at a woman. There was no imminent threat to the shooter's life. He could have easily closed and locked the door he had opened prior to shooting the woman and called the police.
    Either of his accounts of purposely pulling the trigger or accidentally pulling the trigger after being startled by the person who was violently pounding to get into his home, are alone reasonable. Unfortunately he changed his story and the Jury didn't believe him because of it.

    To the underlined.
    What you state is nonsense. Had he been found guilty over such reasoning, it would have been a miscarriage of justice.
    The law does not require that you do something else or call the police, it requires the actions of using the firearm in self defense at that moment to be reasonable.
    But as we know, it wasn't for that, it was that the JUry didn't believe him because he changed his story.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The Dunn case also saw the argument of self-defense fail. In this case, the targets of the shooting were unarmed. Moreover, they were trying to drive away from the scene of the argument, in effect "disengaging" from the confrontation. Even if a threat had existed, and no witnesses saw the victims of the shooting ever draw a shotgun and the teens were found to have been unarmed, disengagement would indicate that the threat had ended. Therefore, the kind of imminent threat required to sustain a self-defense argument was lacking. That the shooter failed to contact the police afterward further undercut the self-defense argument, as reasonable people who had defended themselves would have contacted the police to report their actions confident that they had acted lawfully.
    Still showing you do not know the evidence of the case and willing to spin what do, all the while substituting your judgement for what is reasonable.


    The lack of a weapon is easily attributable to their suspicious activity, and return from, the other parking lot, as well as the Police failing to search that area. Which the young men suspiciously failed to tell the police about.

    The Durango backed up and stopped behind him (you know, within feet of him), which he then continued shooting. That is not disengagement.
    (A vehicle with the armed threat is still a threat, and would remain a threat until it was far enough away, especially as no one could see in the vehicle with it's tinted windows.)
    The Durango again started moving and only after it was no longer a threat did he stop shooting.

    And given the trauma he just experienced, Dunn's actions after the shooting are what a normal person may do. Reasonable folks understand that.





    Quote Originally Posted by radioman View Post
    Let's see if I can respond to this as some of our more addled...oops..I mean illustrious posters might....
    The arguments made were/are about the evidence. You can't even refute the arguments made, and instead want to make completely untrue assertions. That is a demonstration of addled reasoning.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #85
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post

    You don't even know why the Juries found the way they did. Yet here you are making it up. Truly sad.
    Sorry, I believe it's the other way around. Otherwise, there would have been no bewilderment about the two juries' verdicts in the Dunn case, both of which rejected the shooter's self-defense alibi. Your opinion is noted. IMO, it is wrong. More consequential, the juries that had all the evidence and reviewed it in its proper context also concluded that Dunn had not acted in self-defense. One jury even found premeditation since he reached into his glove compartment to pull out his murder weapon at the time when the teens were trying to drive away.

    Given what was reported, I also believe Dunn made an "untrue assertion" of self-defense. Dunn did not act in self-defense.

    Firing "again and again" as he described it suggests more than an attempt to neutralize a "threat" that quite frankly never existed. Attacking the Durango when the teens were leaving the scene also undercuts any notion of self-defense. As The New York Times reported:

    In the end, the jury found that Mr. Dunn intended to kill Mr. Davis and acted with premeditation as he reached into his glove compartment for his gun and fired 10 times at Mr. Davis and the Durango, even as it pulled away to evade the gunfire. Three bullets hit Mr. Davis...

    Mr. Dunn fled the scene and never called the police, not even after he learned that someone had died. Instead, he and the woman who was then his fiancée drove to their hotel, where he walked the dog, poured himself a rum and Coke and ordered a pizza. The next day he drove two and a half hours back to his house in Satellite Beach, where the police, who by then had his license plate number, arrested him.


    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/us...pute.html?_r=0

    Never reporting the shooting demonstrates that Dunn didn't want the police to learn about his actions (why not?). Never mentioning anything about a gun to his fiance indicated that there was no "shotgun." Both his failure to report his shooting to the police and his lack of mention of the alleged shotgun to his fiance (now ex-fiance) strongly indicated that he concocted a self-defense argument and fabricated the account of his seeing a shotgun only after he was arrested.

    Not surprisingly, the two juries' rejected Dunn's self-defense alibi. He fully deserved the sentence he received for taking an innocent life.

    That's the real world. Impartial review of the evidence coupled with the legal basis for self-defense illustrates why two capable juries could only find as they did. Dunn acted in self-defense only in an alternate reality in which the legal definition of self-defense is malleable and the suspect's alibi trumps the evidence.

    Finally, to the larger point in this thread, this case is a good example that the self-defense argument has limits as understood from legal precedents. Actual or imminent threat to one's life or of serious injury must exist (it didn't in this case, as one was dealing with unarmed teens who were attacked when leaving the scene of the argument).
    Last edited by donsutherland1; 10-24-14 at 09:28 AM.

  6. #86
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    the high desert
    Last Seen
    01-10-15 @ 11:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,337

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    IMO they should have been left in that country to face punishment. Not brought here and prosecuted.
    Throw them to the wolves huh.

  7. #87
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    the high desert
    Last Seen
    01-10-15 @ 11:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,337

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Your posts constantly display a kind of dismissive victimhood that is unbecoming the strong nation America is. If people don't trust you - your nation, or you personally - then yes, it's your own fault that you've given people reason not to trust you or not done enough to gain their trust. Is it always right or fair - no - but it is what it is.
    As I thought, you think we have it coming. For A Canadian you seem a bit right of center but when all is said and done you are at root a Canadian and as such hold animosity towards America. Here we are calling that the Lilliputian complex and it is not just Canadians but countries all over the world that suffer this psychological condition. You may want to label this "dismissive victimhood" but it is just the reality of being the worlds superpower and I would rather be Gulliver than a Lilliputian.

  8. #88
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by lifeisshort View Post
    Throw them to the wolves huh.
    If a country that someone else was a citizen of allowed "honor killings" should that person be allowed to do the same thing on US soil? Hell no. And I know you wouldn't agree to that either. You'd tell that other country where to stick their laws and demand that person be tried on US soil under US laws. And you'd be right to. What happened with these people is no different.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  9. #89
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In a Blue State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,733

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by lifeisshort View Post
    Throw them to the wolves huh.
    The contractors are protected under the US-Iraq status of forces agreement like soldiers. I don't agree with this, but I get it. Companies should not be operating like this is War Inc.
    We went from sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me to safe spaces.

  10. #90
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    the high desert
    Last Seen
    01-10-15 @ 11:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,337

    Re: Jury: Ex-Blackwater contractors guilty in 'outrageous' Nusoor Square shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    If a country that someone else was a citizen of allowed "honor killings" should that person be allowed to do the same thing on US soil? Hell no. And I know you wouldn't agree to that either. You'd tell that other country where to stick their laws and demand that person be tried on US soil under US laws. And you'd be right to. What happened with these people is no different.
    The difference is that the US has a very good legal system firmly in place while Iraq is a complete mess in every way and turning these guys over to them would be a travesty.

Page 9 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •