But that's not what happened here, not even remotely close.
|
|
|
Man charged with stabbing intruder
- Thread starter matthew
- Start date
But that's not what happened here, not even remotely close.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHHAHA
Were you able to type that with a straight face?
So you are ok if i Stab or shoot someone if that is what happened here ? Good!
No Im not suggesting we allow torture and dungeons, Im suggesting we allow the use of simple deadly force (knife, gun, bat, whatever) against intruders, regardless of whether they are armed. It's wholly unreasonable to expect a homeowner (victim) to attempt to assess the degree of 'reasonable force' he can use in a situation where someone breaks into his home. It's completely reasonable to conclude that someone who is willing to break into your home is also willing to cause you and your family harm; therefore it should be completely reasonable to kill that person in defense without stopping to figure out what kind of knife or gun he's carrying.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the burden shouldn't be on the victim, it should be on the criminal.
EXACTLY!! Great point. Micheal Bryant killled a cyclist, and didn't even need to bother proving he "feared for his safety" and thus retaliated.
In this case, who is to say the homeowner's weren't fearful for their safety? If I am fearful for my family's safety, you can bet I will, if at all possible, demonstrate more force than my attacker-at least enough to win the altercation between the burglar and myself. Equal force just isn't gonna do it.
Furthermore- the shooting at Carribanna turns out to be a farce- cops shot the hero!
The guy they shot, was the innocent bystander that had seconds earlier, just disarmed the gunman. The hero and another fellow grabbed the gunman after he fored into the crowd, and proceeded to bit the gunman until he dropped the gun and ran off. Then the cops arrived and shot one of the fellows who succeeded in doing what the cops should have done- protected the crowd. And now buddy is dead for being a hero. Cops can kill without asking questions, but a civilian can come home to strangers inside his home, possibly being there to harm his family, and there certainly wouldn't be any mistaken identities, as anyone knows who should and shouldn't be inside their home......and the civilian is still to blame?
Bah. Poor guy, now he, and the rest of society will feel that next time, they should simply kill the intruder, and hide the body. The cops aren't there to help anyways....they are there to intimidate the masses into submission.
Last edited:
SIU investigate's while the officer is put on paid leave, or a desk job until the legal matter is resolved. The cop's legal fee's are probably covered up to $50000+, by the union's protection plan.
It's quite possible some of the wounded were hit by police gunfire, but was the dead guy really the hero?
The cop's career is put into limbo for months and even years, the cop is the one who gets put on the hot seat in court, and if found guilty of wrongdoing is the one who will have to fulfill the sentence. That doesn't sound like getting a free pass to me.
But in suggesting that a homeowner should not be brought to account for a decision to use deadly force, you are in essence saying that anything goes. That sets the stage for all sorts of convenient ruses to "justify" cold-blooded murder, whether it be stranger or friend. All you have to claim is that he broke in. Surely life should not be so cheap.
If the cop is convicted of wrong doing on an indictable offense they are terminated because of a security clearance issue. They go to arbitration and are offered $50000+ (dependent on they're amount of years of service), to cut ties with they're employer. If they do not agree to terms of the arbitration they go through mediation and are offered even more money to cut tie's with there employer. If they appeal the conviction and sentence and have them overturned; they get there job back, and are paid retro actively for the time they missed at work while they were terminated. I am not 100% sure, but If they are convicted of a summary offense they most likely would be able keep they're job. They would probably keep the job if they are not sentenced to a significant amount of jail time and the employer doesn't try to terminate them on grounds of job abdonement.
Last edited:
That's what cops and investigators are for. They can do, you know- police work, to determine whether or not it was a break-in.
As the law is written currently, the onus is on the victim to determine (in a very intense and short period of time) how much force is justifiable. If he uses 'too much', he faces prison time; too little and he faces injury or death. That's an unfair amount of responsibility to put on the victim of a crime; it's an unfair amount of responsibility to put on an untrained civilian in fear for his/her life.
Last edited:
Today's paper, had an interview with a few witnesses of the entitre mess....and a number of them all had the same story. Shooter opened fire on crowd. One bystander grabbed shooter around torso and another grabbed shooter's arm and hand, and began biting him till he handed over the gun, screaming in agony and holding his bitten hand as he fled into the crowd. Cops arrived seconds later, and were shouting to the man (hero) who now held the gun removed from the shooter, to drop the weapon. The man stepped towards the cops and they shot him, as they probably assumed he was the one who did the shooting into the crowd.
Link to article I read while eating breakfast this am:
http://www.calgarysun.com/2011/07/31/cops-probed-in-caribbean-carnival-shooting-death
Last edited:
If a cop is terminated because of a serious conviction, that is termination with cause and no severance is due. Any sentence resulting in jail time, even just a day, is generally cause for automatic termination.
The way the law is written, the homeowner is not expected to meet a standard of perfect judgement. Only reasonable judgement is expected in light of all circumstances, fear included. That does not translate into giving a homeowner completely unfettered power to determine what is reasonable or not when it comes to use of deadly force. The homeowner does not get to assume the role of absolute judge, jury and executioner.
. If this is truly how the shootabana story panned out; that would take the cake for police clusterf**k's.
Last edited:
Unless I'm reading it wrong, that article recounts the claims of ONE and at most possibly two witnesses. It also notes that the person with the gun (hero or not TBD) RAN towards police with gun in hand ignoring police shouts to get down. Some would call that suicide by cop. Others would just call it extremely foolhardy.
Did the witness get things right? Why would a person apparently known to and wanted by the police be running at them with gun in hand? Would such a person not want to avoid getting involved with any potential contact with police if possible.
The rest of this Vancouver Sun article paints a far different picture than that in the Calgary Sun. I'd be quite skeptical of any early stories, especially from witnesses who don't want to be named.
I read it in the Toronto Sun....The Calgary one is a word for word copy of the one in Toronto's paper this am.
Regardless of whether or not the Hero was a retard for going towards cops with a gun in his hand, he is dead from what is possibly mistaken identity...and somehow that's okay, but it isn't okay to hurt or kill an intruder in your family's home. That is the point I am trying to make.
If you have a badge or a public face, you are above the law.
Regardless of whether or not the Hero was a retard for going towards cops with a gun in his hand, he is dead from what is possibly mistaken identity...and somehow that's okay, but it isn't okay to hurt or kill an intruder in your family's home. That is the point I am trying to make.
If you have a badge or a public face, you are above the law.
EngineerJoe
Well-known member
Looking at how much grilling cops are getting on this forum, I can only imagine how much worse it would be by a lawyer in court.
ashkan
Banned
this is stupid! our legal system is overly nice and allows for effed up crackheads to break in to peoples homes and not worry about a thing! I mean COME ON!!! some trash breaks in to your house to steals **** and youre suppose to reason with him and escort him out while waving goodbyes@??@#@$ this legal system is FU&&&& UP!
|
|
|
|
|