- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 79,903
- Reaction score
- 20,981
- Location
- I love your hate.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Then you would deserve to be tried for murder.
So every time our lives are threatened instead of dealing with the threat accordingly we should just allow people to violate the law because they were willing to use lethal force.If his life was actually in danger, and he didn't give up his attempted arrest in order to provide himself better coverage from the attacks, he would deserve to die.
Depends on if he could quickly assess where the shot was coming from and take out the threat without having to run for cover first in order to do so.Would he be expected to keep holding the guy if they were bullets coming at him? I'd think that any rational and intelligent person would release teh guy and try to defend himself from a position of cover.
No more like 40% which still is a large number and pretty silly.
Then you would deserve to be tried for murder.
Rocks are considered deadly weapons when hurled as projectiles by most police districts.rof
Had he shot one of the one's that were on the US side of the border, I wouldn't have had a problem with it.
So every time our lives are threatened instead of dealing with the threat accordingly we should just allow people to violate the law because they were willing to use lethal force.
Nice. Liberal ideology at its worst, I think im done here.
Depends on if he could quickly assess where the shot was coming from and take out the threat without having to run for cover first in order to do so.
If some sniper was shooting at him, sure.
Not even remotely close to what I said.
I actually said that if the arresting officer's life is actually in danger and he tries to continue the arrest instead of preserving his life, he would in fact deserve to die.
This is just darwinism. If somoene is so stupid that they try to do anything else but preserve their life, they dont deserve to live.
This means that trying to continue an arrest in teh face of mortal danger is so unbelievably stupid, somoene who does this deserves to die.
Not a very liberal attitude, if one actually wants to look at it rationally.
I said nothing about not using lethal force in the face of a real life danger. I'm using the fact that one can try to continue the arrest while shooting back a tthe perosn as proof that the danger he is in is not really life threatening. If it was, he'd be smart enough to give up on the arrest in order to preserve his life.
If you are done here, it' snot because of liberal idieology, it's because you joined the "I'd rather make up **** instead of actually debate the poitns that are made" bandwagon.
He should shoot back with one hand in a truly life threatening situation?!?!?
Anyone who does that deserves to die for the sake of the gene pool, IMO.
Its ignorant liberal ideologies like this that put our Police Officers and Military personnel in a greater danger of being casualties than we need to be.
Honestly, do you think you would have been able to stop shooting at people who were throwing rocks at you, just because they crossed an imaginary line determining which country each is in?
Even when that "line" also happens to be a river (although it definitely looked more like a small, dried up stream in that video). I do understand that many don't consider rocks a lethal weapon, eventhough they can be. And the case really isn't as clear cut as either side is making it sound. But it certainly isn't honest to expect every person to be able to automatically pause in their shooting, while trying to defend themselves and being outnumbered, just because the suspects crossed the border. Now, I will say, that if the rock throwing had stopped, then he should have stopped shooting, but I have no idea if the rock throwing had stopped from that video. I really don't know if the shooting will be ruled as justified or not, but I really think, with the given statements and evidence we have, that it should be.
Two hands, one hand...
If its a pistol, wtf is the difference?
Im just in a lowly city department and we train to shoot our firearms with one hand......
This is about excessive use of force against a civilian.
So, now you are, the self appointed judge and jury. lol
So, now you are, the self appointed judge and jury. lol
Can you two just stop??? Tuck, CC pays you to be wrong. Now do you job.
Moderator's Warning: |
This is the final warning, the level of civility in this needs to go drastically higher and the hositility drastically lower. It is possible to agree strongly with individuals on topics without resulting to flames |
I'm more interested in US politics than Mexican politics. It's not my place to tell the Mexican government what I think they should be doing, it is my place to tell my own government how I think they should behave. :shrug:
Hey, I gotta suggestion. Telling "your" government how they should behave...
Instead of bullets, YOUR OWN government should supply, the BP with their own rocks, bricks, toilet handles, hammers, cue balls, etc... You know, just so, the BP won't have to resort to "lethal/deadly" force.
We could save lives and show some American PC worldwide
No, it is a point of contention. You need to learn the difference if you are going to be at a debate site.
And if they were on our side, he had every right to open fire.
The point of contention is wrong then. You and Tucker have taken the position that if an Agent is being pelted with rocks, unless the perp is right in front of them, the Agent should do anything BUT use lethal force.
False. Again, the above only proves that you are not really understanding the position that was taken.
The point of contention is wrong then. You and Tucker have taken the position that if an Agent is being pelted with rocks, unless the perp is right in front of them, the Agent should do anything BUT use lethal force.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?