Replying to Avatar The Beave

That's a fair rebuttal of some points. Thank you.

Whereas a citizen involved in a questionable shooting should be given a very generous interpretation of the "I was in fear of my life" defense, an agent of the state should be able to justify their actions by a reading of that precedent that requires a higher burden of proof.

I agree that moving car can constitute deadly force. However this also does not jive with "minimal necessary force." Also, a reasonable person, IMO, would have placed himself in a tactically untenable position in front of a vehicle that is moving. He could have sidestepped it (and, from what I've seen and others have pointed out, did), which goes against the defense of "I was in fear of my life."

For these reasons, I will start to assume malice or incompetence. Either of which makes him culpable for charges of murder or manslaughter.

I do believe in personal accountability. Which is why I rant about qualified immunity needing to be completely rescinded across all levels of "law enforcement."

As far as the woman goes, she made a string ofbad choices. Doesn't mean she deserved to be shot. (Again, based on what I've seen so far. I'm very open to new evidence.)

The result is that that agent is charged and tried and the rest of life goes on. I've been actively defending the precept that "if we still have national boarders, then ICE has a job to do." I'm also still not a fan of government thugs being given free reign. Both of those things are not incongruent.

I do think that every criminal of foreign origin should be returned to sender, by force, and in some cases sans parachute. But again, the easiest way to deal with this is to end all welfare programs at all levels immediately. Once the free money spigot is turned off, then people will either leave on their own, find jobs, or show how awful they might truly be. At which time, they should be booted or shot. (Not necessarily by gubment thugs.)

When the people in the peanut gallery get to insert their arbitrary standards and definitions into the arena, that’s bad for all people.

Rules have to be written for the man in the arena, or else men just abandon the society all together and we go back to the law of the jungle.

Just because one says their arbitrary standard is “common sense” doesn’t make it so.

Logic is hard, and rigorous consistency is even harder, but that’s what it takes to have a society, and exactly why we are fragmenting.

I say this with love and respect because i owe u the truth.

the principles you are espousing in this thread are arbitrary.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Oh I like you.