peanutt121
07/31/18 2:22:08 PM
#23 | Kyuubi4269 posted...adjl posted...
Kyuubi4269 posted...
but you can't argue he wasn't trying to protect his daughter,
He started a firefight while she was right behind him.
If you go on the assumption that police must always shoot first, particularly when they're attempting to force entry. Remember, anybody else shooting is supposed to consider what's behind the target even in a life or death scenario. In this case the sensible option for the officer was to leave the doorway.
Nichtcrawler X posted...
Kyuubi4269 posted...
He should be responsible for his crimes, not for the officer shooting through him to kill his daughter.
And pointing a gun at a cop is not a crime? With the cop opening fire not the logical response?
He should have legal repurcussions for threatening an officer with a firearm, I'm not questioning that at all, but his daughter's death is because of the officer's action and was an unfortunate consequence in itself.
If you really want to charge him with manslaughter then the officer is equally guilty, but I think it should be written off entirely.
Zangulus posted...
The very premise of his response shows he doesnt even understand the situation hes responding about. The cop wasnt there to do a damned thing with the daughter.
Officially, he wasn't there to do anything to the daughter but there are two obvious issues that could certainly be motive to believe harm may be caused:
a) If he is made homeless, what happens to his innocent daughter? Obviously she doesn't get to stay there so that's harmful to her.
b) He doesn't trust the government, police in the US are notoriously corrupt, why would he trust the police who are already taking his home? Think about this from an emotional perspective, I'm not defending the objective logic.
Zangulus posted...
The father was the one that put her in harms way. Which is the exact opposite of defending her.
If you point a gun at an intruder breaking in to your home with your family inside and the intruder shoots in to the building and kills your daughter, who is normally to blame? From his perspective he was defending against a home invader and where I'm from, you can't be charged for damage caused when acting in good faith to save people. Remember, this is a issue of intent and he certainly didn't believe he was putting her in more danger by the confrontation.
And as I said above, charge him over what he actually did, that's more than enough to put him away for a long time. Pursuing manslaughter in this case is simply a push to maintain tyranny over the common man which is basically the opposite of what common law was about. This entire response is proof you can't fix stupid. --- I may very well be the oldest member of the site, but I am far from the dumbest :) |
peanutt121
07/23/18 9:42:07 AM
#3 | "When I was 5 I thought my father knew everything, at 10 I thought he was cool , at 15 I though he knew nothing at 20 I ignored him , at 35 I saw he was right and now at 50 I think he really knew everything" Quoted from a plaque I gave my dad on his 80th birthday. He passed away on August 13 2001 and never got to see his New England Patriots win the Super Bowl. I've missed him every single day since --- I may very well be the oldest member of the site, but I am far from the dumbest :) |