• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Slager gets 20y for shooting

In b4 Excon presumably defends Slager.
 
Fruityfact said:
In b4 Excon presumably defends Slager.
Click to expand...
That's kinda funny.

Iirc, his defense of Slager rested on the premise that there is a "moment" of undefined length in which it is acceptable to kill someone who is no longer a threat to you.

e.g.
Scott presented a threat to Slager.
The magic moment began.
Scott stopped being a threat to Slager.
Slager killed Scott.
Some indefinite time after the shooting the magic moment ended.
It doesn't matter that Scott was no longer a threat when he was gunned down.
Because of this magic moment, Slager is good to go.​

or some silly something like that.
iirc anyway
 
Lutherf said:
Ex-cop Michael Slager sentenced to 20 years for shooting death of Walter Scott - ABC News

Mike Slager gunned down Walter Scott after a traffic stop. The shooting was egregious. Now he pays the price for it.
Click to expand...
It's about time!

IMO - due to the nature of the job, we've got give our LEO's the very best benefit of doubt. But when there's proof beyond doubt, throw the book at 'em! They've betrayed the public trust, which is a bigger deal than only their personal actions in relation to them.
 
Chomsky said:
It's about time!

IMO - due to the nature of the job, we've got give our LEO's the very best benefit of doubt. But when there's proof beyond doubt, throw the book at 'em! They've betrayed the public trust, which is a bigger deal than only their personal actions in relation to them.
Click to expand...

Because of the potentially severe punishments upon conviction, homicide cases should take as long as they need to get it right.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
That's kinda funny.

Iirc, his defense of Slager rested on the premise that there is a "moment" of undefined length in which it is acceptable to kill someone who is no longer a threat to you.

e.g.
Scott presented a threat to Slager.
The magic moment began.
Scott stopped being a threat to Slager.
Slager killed Scott.
Some indefinite time after the shooting the magic moment ended.
It doesn't matter that Scott was no longer a threat when he was gunned down.
Because of this magic moment, Slager is good to go.​

or some silly something like that.
iirc anyway
Click to expand...

Yep, the "you had to be there" defense falls apart when the video supplies a "like you were there" perspective. The "he took my taser" falls apart when you see it planted in the "correct" location for the "you had to be there" defense to work. My take was that the initial defense was to be that the guy posed a threat "to the community" if he got away.
 
Lutherf said:
Because of the potentially severe punishments upon conviction, homicide cases should take as long as they need to get it right.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, the "you had to be there" defense falls apart when the video supplies a "like you were there" perspective. The "he took my taser" falls apart when you see it planted in the "correct" location for the "you had to be there" defense to work. My take was that the initial defense was to be that the guy posed a threat "to the community" if he got away.
Click to expand...
I'd best let Excon defend his defense as I find it indefensible.
 
Very glad this cop has received justice.

His conduct was an outrage.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Indeed. Finally one actually pays the price. Good.
Click to expand...

Cops who make bad shoots are regularly prosecuted. Unfortunately, some people fail to understand what a bad shoot actually is.
 
Lutherf said:
Cops who make bad shoots are regularly prosecuted. Unfortunately, some people fail to understand what a bad shoot actually is.
Click to expand...

And regularly are acquitted.

Nor would I assume those are all 'good shoots.'
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Should have been an LWOP, if that was a potential punishment.
Click to expand...

From the article he was convicted of 2nd degree murder and 19-24 years is the normal sentence for that in SC.

Not to editorialize but from what I've seen very few people who committ murder actually serve life sentences - as in they come out in a pine box. That's wrong in my not so humble opinion.
 
Lutherf said:
Cops who make bad shoots are regularly prosecuted. Unfortunately, some people fail to understand what a bad shoot actually is.
Click to expand...

I don't really disagree. The case I had a real problem with was one that did not involve guns, but IMO murder or at least blatant manslaughter occurred.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner

The other problem I have with these types of cases is that they are frequently decided by grand juries. That's a stacked deck.
 
Meanwhile the kind of people I've worked for get life without possibility of parole.



I guess 20 is something, but it's not enough. I watched that video many times. It was cold-blooded murder.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Should have been an LWOP, if that was a potential punishment.
Click to expand...

Believe he pled to a federal civil rights offense to make the murder charges go away. Amazingly, there had been a mistrial. Somehow.
 
Chomsky said:
It's about time!

IMO - due to the nature of the job, we've got give our LEO's the very best benefit of doubt. But when there's proof beyond doubt, throw the book at 'em! They've betrayed the public trust, which is a bigger deal than only their personal actions in relation to them.
Click to expand...

Wholeheartedly agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom