Page 48 of 61 FirstFirst ... 38464748495058 ... LastLast
Results 471 to 480 of 604

Thread: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

  1. #471
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-26-17 @ 10:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,697

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrepresented View Post
    Again, I'm not arguing what our current legal standards based on case law are. I'm arguing the conflicts in the legal theory of "self defense."



    I can prevent myself from being raped if I were to proactively kill every human on the planet. That's not defense, however. It's still murder.

    At what point to we prioritize prevention of rape v access to due process?
    I'm not even sure why you decided to use that completely irrelevant analogy, but good luck with it. No one was murdered. An officer or citizen that kills their attacker, it's not murder. It's JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE. It is legal in all 50 states and federally. It means you have the right to defend yourself with lethal force, when someone is already attacking you with lethal force. Grabbing and trying to shoot a police officer with their gun is 100% that category. It means the savage criminal (brown) caused his own death.

    I hope this helped clear up your confusion/ignorance of the way our society works.

  2. #472
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,662

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by 11Bravo View Post
    I'm not even sure why you decided to use that completely irrelevant analogy, but good luck with it. No one was murdered. An officer or citizen that kills their attacker, it's not murder. It's JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE. It is legal in all 50 states and federally. It means you have the right to defend yourself with lethal force, when someone is already attacking you with lethal force. Grabbing and trying to shoot a police officer with their gun is 100% that category. It means the savage criminal (brown) caused his own death.

    I hope this helped clear up your confusion/ignorance of the way our society works.
    He knows and believes that law is unConstitutional. This is what he believes and he makes no attempt to deny it:

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    And you are arguing that if people can save themselves thru lethal force, they legally and morally may not and must allow themselves to be killed or raped.
    He believes that it is a miscarriage of justice and that the attacker should be allowed to kill and THEN be tried in the courts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  3. #473
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-26-17 @ 10:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,697

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    He knows and believes that law is unConstitutional. This is what he believes and he makes no attempt to deny it:
    If this individual believes you cannot protect yourself with lethal force when someone is using it on you, than this individual needs to move to Fantasy Land where all your dreams come true!

  4. #474
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-26-17 @ 10:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,697

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    He knows and believes that law is unConstitutional. This is what he believes and he makes no attempt to deny it:



    He believes that it is a miscarriage of justice and that the attacker should be allowed to kill and THEN be tried in the courts.
    Protecting the rights of the murderer. That's a new one.

  5. #475
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,505

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrepresented View Post
    Again, I'm not arguing what our current legal standards based on case law are. I'm arguing the conflicts in the legal theory of "self defense."



    I can prevent myself from being raped if I were to proactively kill every human on the planet. That's not defense, however. It's still murder.

    At what point to we prioritize prevention of rape v access to due process?
    At the point that some (bleep!) attacks a woman and someone is near enough to help her.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  6. #476
    Undisclosed
    Unrepresented's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    06-12-16 @ 09:05 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,230

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Barely and only circumspectly a response to the post (reposted below). That is pretty desperate.

    So, still cannot honestly come out and defend your apparently indefensible opinion with a direct answer.
    I have answered your question: The rights of both citizens need to be observed, both the one perceived to be committing the crime and the one perceived to be the victim of the crime. If there is a need for justice, let the justice system be the arbiter not the vigilante.
    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    When you were born, did the government tell you when to enter the world?
    In a sense, yes. It helped to determine who my parents were, it helped to build the hospital I was born in, it helped to educate the doctor who performed my birth, etc.

    I am a product of society.

    Quote Originally Posted by 11Bravo View Post
    I'm not even sure why you decided to use that completely irrelevant analogy, but good luck with it. No one was murdered. An officer or citizen that kills their attacker, it's not murder. It's JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE. It is legal in all 50 states and federally. It means you have the right to defend yourself with lethal force, when someone is already attacking you with lethal force. Grabbing and trying to shoot a police officer with their gun is 100% that category. It means the savage criminal (brown) caused his own death.

    I hope this helped clear up your confusion/ignorance of the way our society works.
    I understand what the law considers "justifiable homicide." This isn't an argument over me not having a basic understanding of our law, it's a difference of opinion on the validity of the law.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    He knows and believes that law is unConstitutional. This is what he believes and he makes no attempt to deny it:



    He believes that it is a miscarriage of justice and that the attacker should be allowed to kill and THEN be tried in the courts.
    I don't believe the attacker should be allowed to kill, I just disagree about what constitutes self defense.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    At the point that some (bleep!) attacks a woman and someone is near enough to help her.
    She can be defended without killing citizens.
    "The side that stays within its fortifications is beaten." ~Napoleon

  7. #477
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,662

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrepresented View Post
    I have answered your question: The rights of both citizens need to be observed, both the one perceived to be committing the crime and the one perceived to be the victim of the crime. If there is a need for justice, let the justice system be the arbiter not the vigilante.
    No...you did not. You continue to avoid it....preferring to hide the actual words that state for everyone your position. Because the rights of both citizens CANNOT be observed if one attacks and kills the other. Who is protecting the rights of the attacked? The laws supporting self-defense which only allow lethal force when there is no alternative. WHich you completely ignore OR are unable to understand. Can you clarify that for me? Do you understand that lethal force is only legal when there is no other alternative to save a life or from gross bodily harm?

    So again: you stumble around trying to avoid answering: should the policeman being bludgeoned to death, already with a broken arm and leg, have to allow the attacker to kill him without using lethal force to stop him?

    And, should a bystander, a woman like myself, just stand there, call 911, and let an armed man rape your daughter rather than use lethal force to stop him?

    You have not answered these direct questions, not once.. And they are not rare....that has also been proven since we have obvious and recent examples right here in this thread.

    So....any possibility you can honestly answer to support your moral belief...or not? The daughter gets raped, the cop gets bludgeoned to death...better than lethal intervention...yes or no?

    Any cojones in there at all????? If not, it's apparent that your unrealistic and selfish moral position is not actually your true belief, especially when it affects you personally.


    Quote Originally Posted by Unrepresented View Post
    She can be defended without killing citizens.
    How? How can a woman stop a rapist with a knife coming at her, with nowhere to escape to? Let's hear it.

    C'mon, put something real beneath the shifting sands of your selfish moral stance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  8. #478
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,662

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrepresented View Post

    I don't believe the attacker should be allowed to kill, I just disagree about what constitutes self defense.
    The law is clear on self-defense.....you can only use lethal force if it's the only way to stop from being killed or from an attacker doing gross bodily harm.

    So...what constitutes self-defense in your opinion?


    And crazy question I know....if using lethal force to stop them is the ONLY way to stop the attacker....how do you 'not allow it?'

    (It should be noted that the purpose of lethal force is to stop the attack as immediately as possible...not to kill. Lethal force often does not kill, but the victim must continue until the attack STOPS.)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  9. #479
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrepresented View Post
    I have answered your question: The rights of both citizens need to be observed, both the one perceived to be committing the crime and the one perceived to be the victim of the crime. If there is a need for justice, let the justice system be the arbiter not the vigilante.

    In a sense, yes. It helped to determine who my parents were, it helped to build the hospital I was born in, it helped to educate the doctor who performed my birth, etc.

    I am a product of society.



    I understand what the law considers "justifiable homicide." This isn't an argument over me not having a basic understanding of our law, it's a difference of opinion on the validity of the law.



    I don't believe the attacker should be allowed to kill, I just disagree about what constitutes self defense.

    She can be defended without killing citizens.
    It determined who you parents were? How's that?
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  10. #480
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-26-17 @ 10:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,697

    Re: Man tries to run over Pa. police, shot dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrepresented View Post
    I have answered your question: The rights of both citizens need to be observed, both the one perceived to be committing the crime and the one perceived to be the victim of the crime. If there is a need for justice, let the justice system be the arbiter not the vigilante.

    In a sense, yes. It helped to determine who my parents were, it helped to build the hospital I was born in, it helped to educate the doctor who performed my birth, etc.

    I am a product of society.



    I understand what the law considers "justifiable homicide." This isn't an argument over me not having a basic understanding of our law, it's a difference of opinion on the validity of the law.



    I don't believe the attacker should be allowed to kill, I just disagree about what constitutes self defense.

    She can be defended without killing citizens.
    Let me ask you this, Unrepresented:

    If you stop to ask someone for directions and the person you ask for directions takes a bat and starts beating you (without you having physically touched this person), do you believe you have a right to defend yourself? We both know the answer to that question.

    Brown physically attacked (of all people) a cop. The reason Wilson was not even indicted, was because he did the RIGHT thing. Killing Brown was not only necessary due to the situation, but likely prevented future murders from a savage animal. Anyone willing to murder an officer in cold blood in public, has likely killed before. I am sure once this dies down that they will likely dig into Brown's past to see if any unsolved murders are linked to him. Likely there are.

Page 48 of 61 FirstFirst ... 38464748495058 ... 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
  •