You mean if the jury doesn't find the evidence presented to meet the standard of "reasonable doubt", and declines to issue a guilty verdict? That letter of the law? Conflating laws concerning homicide with "automation and offshoring of jobs and corporate greed" and "upcoming lawsuit settlements" is amazingly sharp thinking...Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife
Priceless. Might as well just throw the guy to the mob now to be torn apart.
Kill the pig, kill the pig.
Definitely Lord Of The Flies territory.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
Regardless of what you have posted here, Bae, I have posted how a chunk of the country thinks and all the laws in the world are not going to change this. You may very well be insulated from this world, and more power to you, but if you were to visit South Seattle and spend some time there.....the thinking and the reality are completely different there. I can't change your reality Bae, and such is not really my intention, the point here is that your reality is not my reality and vice versa. Also the laws of which you have such high regard mean very little if anything to a subset of the US population - as I've stated, appearances and perception matter a great deal more. It's great that you know so much about the law, and there is no sarcasm implied here - the only problem is that the laws you so believe in often serve to work against and not for all citizens, and due to this, laws tend to be distrusted and feared in places like South Seattle. As they very much should be in my opinion. That said, I follow the laws as I've stated before I don't care to pay any consequences for not doing so, and I don't disagree with the laws 100%, either. But in this case with the shooting of Michael Brown and how the police have behaved since - really, it's no different from the third world. And I resent that as in the third world there is a tendency towards family values and colorful marketplaces and once you get out of the huge cities, a slower pace of life. If America is going to be so obviously third world, is it wrong to demand the good of the third world? He we are just getting the crooked, corrupt bad of the third world without the little bit of good.You mean if the jury doesn't find the evidence presented to meet the standard of "reasonable doubt", and declines to issue a guilty verdict? That letter of the law? Conflating laws concerning homicide with "automation and offshoring of jobs and corporate greed" and "upcoming lawsuit settlements" is amazingly sharp thinking...
Priceless. Might as well just throw the guy to the mob now to be torn apart.
Kill the pig, kill the pig.
To summarize - the laws you hold so highly.....many work against and not for all citizens, and due to this, really, for many they don't mean much. You may brush this aside now and it's great that you are in a position to do so - but as things continue to slide in America, the day may come when this reality can't be brushed aside so easily. Just a friendly heads up based on US debt levels and the shrinkage of the middle class. Rob
Rob, the day you and your little savages decide that the laws against murder don't work for you, and that you don't like the rule of law, feel free to drop by my community, and I will happily show you how the alternative works...
It won't be a long visit, and the crab harvest will be spectacular the next year I bet.
I think maybe I need to get more specific here. When I posted earlier that to a subset of the population the laws really don't mean anything, I am referring to AFTER the shooting death of Michael Brown and I'm referring to potentially subsequent court actions and litigation. I am NOT giving a green light to criminal acts and I'm sorry that I neglected to make this clear. I'm referring more to the fact that Darren Wilson remains on paid vacation while most others would be behind bars - that's hugely inflammatory right there. I am referring to "the rule of law" in any subsequent court proceedings - such laws are distrusted and feared by the segment to the population I am talking about. I am not saying that it is right to strong arm convenience store clerks or to break other laws. I am however saying that the procedings that now may be taking place - the laws surrounding these proceedings? Distrusted and feared by this segment of the population, and rightly so in my book. But to go and commit murder - I never meant to imply that such was acceptable or that I was condoning such. I'm also saying that due to baked in fear and distrust of the courts and police (rightly so to have such fear) there can be no faith or trust in the law for this segment of the population - and having seen officers walk scott free in other instances for what has been perceived to have been police brutality - instant and permanent fear of the law, the police, and the courts. Irrevocably so. I can totally understand this where it seems that others here can't grasp it. I share the same fear, though probably not to the same level of intensity. After having witnessed police brutality myself, I will never again trust American police - though I will say the courts were a good vehicle in this case to acquire a retaliatory settlement, so the courts are not completely without their use.
Once again, I am not condoning criminal acts by anyone, and if anyone commits criminal acts, I am not against their being prosecuted, regardless of race - with the provision that sentencing for such acts is fairly equal for all races, which is not always the case in America, yet another reason I don't trust the police or the courts. But I digress, I am not for anyone committing criminal acts. I hope this is clear. Rob
Except that's not how the world works. I am familiar with the circumstances of *hundreds* of defensive shooting cases, and your assertion is simply incorrect.
You don't put someone "behind bars" until they are convicted, *unless* they are a flight risk or a danger to the community. You cannot take a man's liberty without due process. And you seem to object to due process in a rush to punish the officer, before he has even been charged, much less tried and convicted. There is plenty of time to punish him after due process has run its course.
Yet you freely admit ignorance of what the proceedings are, and what the law says.I am however saying that the procedings that now may be taking place - the laws surrounding these proceedings?
You are not reasoning, you are emoting.
Kill the pig.
Bae, I'll post this one last time and then I'll move on. The laws surrounding the proceedings potentially coming up? They are feared, disrespected, and distrusted by this segment of the population. That's my point and say what you will about the law - and I'd trust that you have real knowledge of the law - what I just posted is a fact and no discussion of the law will make this go away. I guess it's the elephant in the room that refuses to go away. And I doubt it ever will in my lifetime. Rob
Rob the problem is, you're doing away with the entire concept of "innocent until proven guilty". You're relying on perceptions and misconceptions fueled by social media and incorrect assumptions about how the law works. You're not living within a third world justice system, your fostering it.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
I often disagree with Alan and bae on various topics, but about 20 pages ago I posted an explanation of why Darren Wilson isn't on "paid vacation" that Alan just reiterated.
I'll repeat myself. Darren Wilson's job requires that he carry a gun and potentially use it. Let me reiterate. HE CARRIES A GUN AND IS EXPECTED TO USE IT AS PART OF HIS JOB IF THAT'S THE ONLY WAY HE CAN PROTECT HIMSELF OR CIVILIANS THAT ARE AT RISK.
In the event that he uses it there is a protocol for reviewing the situation to determine whether the use of it was necessary. If it was his life goes on. If not he faces the justice system. Until it's determined that he used the gun wrongly there's no logical reason for him to not continue to earn his salary. WIthout that safety net in place only the absolutely most desperate of people would be willing to become cops. After all, who would want to become a cop if they were to risk becoming unemployed and homeless any time they used their gun, regardless of whether it was warranted. That's why he's on paid leave. Until the investigation determines what happened there's no other logical thing to do with him.
Jp1, great post
gimme, if you are still reading go to this page
http://www.odmp.org/search/year/2014?ref=sidebar
it lists the officer deaths in the line of duty in 2014 and read the stories. Then read previous years stories. Most of us do not go to work everyday and risk being killed. No matter how much it sucks to be a waiter the risk of being killed or even assaulted is very low. And if you were in danger you would call 911 for police assistance, wouldn't you? And police would show up to help you, and put themselves in danger to help you.
Many K9 deaths are listed too
The Ferguson story is very sad indeed as in any loss of life.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote