• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

Should you be persecuted in this instance?

Will you be held legally liable?

  • Yes, you still killed the man

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    12

repeter

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
3,445
Reaction score
682
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I saw the other thread about how a raft guide was arrested for supposedly impeding a government operation, so I have another hypothetical scenario.

Say you are driving down a road, and you see a cop stopping a car. The guy who was stopped gets out of the car, pulls a gun out and opens fire on the police officer. At this point, you are about to pass them. If you decided to ram the guy with the gun, and you ended up killing him but saving the life of the officer, who has been shot, and is unable to defend himself, should you be persecuted for manslaughter/homicide?

At least from a moral standpoint, this is perfectly acceptable. The man with the gun was shooting at the officer. You had an opportunity to save a life, and you took it, inadvertenly killing the assailant.

From a legal standpoint, I would think you would be taken to court by the family of the person you rammed, and would probably be guilty of some crime or another, and you would have to serve the sentence.

Would this happen, in a legal sense? Or would you get off, and be hailed as a hero for saving the life of a police officer?
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,596
Reaction score
22,537
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
From a legal standpoint, I would think you would be taken to court by the family of the person you rammed, and would probably be guilty of some crime or another, and you would have to serve the sentence.

Would this happen, in a legal sense? Or would you get off, and be hailed as a hero for saving the life of a police officer?

You could only be taken to court by the family in a civil suit. The State would have to file criminal charges, which would be highly unlikely in this case.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
It took me forever to find this video - which is quite relevant to this entire thread.
Searching through another old forum where this was originally posted on (at least for me) was impossible, and yahoo sucks - but on google it was one of the first links that came up. LOL

Justice: A Journey in Moral Reasoning, Michael J. Sandel
(after watching it, again - they've actually shortened the video alot - down to 25 minutes from an hour - and have edited it to work in personal-thoughts from students. BUT the overall message and point is untouched.)

After watching this - and then thinking over the OP - there is no 'right or wrong' as far as the morality goes of this situation. Either way, someone dies. . . but one death is more acceptable by the vast majority of people . .. thus, making the act less heinous.

Watch the video - it's revealing and worth the time . . . and I'm sure it's not the first time it's been posted.
 
Last edited:

earthworm

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
904
Location
Goldsboro,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The Good Samaritan Law must be expanded/improved to cover these conditions. I can accept an offical statement from the Samaritan to the family of the attempter of murder, thats all....that is enough.... The rights of the "good" must over-rule those of the "bad", even their families.
 

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, I look at this way... if you walk up on someone who is aiming a gun at someone else (cop or not) with an obvious intent to kill or harm, and you're packing as well. Wouldn't you be within your rights to shoot the armed assailant?
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Well, I look at this way... if you walk up on someone who is aiming a gun at someone else (cop or not) with an obvious intent to kill or harm, and you're packing as well. Wouldn't you be within your rights to shoot the armed assailant?

No, especially if it was a cop. Cops are specifically trained to handle these situations. And if you saw a cop legitimately brutalizing a citizen and intervened, you would probably be shot and definitely be prosecuted for it. The same boundary should, if it already doesn't, exist in the other direction...there should be no citizen intervention on behalf of the officer. He's knows what he's doing. You don't.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
119,525
Reaction score
34,963
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Is no one familiar with "Stand Your Ground" laws? They are an extension of Castle Doctrine. In Florida (and about 15 other states with SYG law), it is legal to use deadly force to prevent a forcible felony. This includes the use of a firearm (concealed or not) anywhere that the person can legally carry the weapon.

I don't know how accurate the wiki entry is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine#Stand-your-ground



Regarding the cop example... If someone presumes that a cop is committing a forcible felony, they are a moron and should be prosecuted. But I don't think that's what rivrrat meant. She meant whether or not a cop is the victim, as in... if a civilian were being attacked.
 
Last edited:

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No, especially if it was a cop. Cops are specifically trained to handle these situations. And if you saw a cop legitimately brutalizing a citizen and intervened, you would probably be shot and definitely be prosecuted for it. The same boundary should, if it already doesn't, exist in the other direction...there should be no citizen intervention on behalf of the officer. He's knows what he's doing. You don't.

I think you misunderstood. If I walk up on someone who appears to be intent on killing another person - and/or may be in the process of it - whether the victim is a cop or not, would I not be within my rights to pull out my legally obtained concealed weapon and shoot said attacker to prevent them from hurting someone?

It's basically the same as the OP's situation, only the weapon is a gun and not a car. I think some folks might see the car differently, even though it could be used as a weapon. I just reframing the question, basically.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom