Claiming, not pointing out. You haven't substantiated your claim. Especially in nations where the government corrupts the judiciary.
Printable View
Claiming, not pointing out. You haven't substantiated your claim. Especially in nations where the government corrupts the judiciary.
Since we're in the business of ludicrous demands why don' you first prove that jury trials work in Pakistan.
After you prove bench trials work in Pakistan.
http://www.bbc.com/news/38334542 For Lewk.
Prove jury trials work in Russia.
? I've never claimed every shot that was fired by a LEO was legit.
But the guy had a weapon at some point. Surely he deserved to be killed...
After you prove bench trials would work in Russia.
I'd still rather take my chances with 12 random men and women in Russia than Putin's cronies as judges. Juries acquit in about 15% of cases in Russia compared to about 1% for judges, so that is a massive improvement.
Well the guy did run from the police. He had a stolen weapon on him and had a pretty troubling arrest record. Can't say 100% for sure but frankly did he 'deserve' to be killed? Based on what we know I'd say the probability is likely yes. Now all of that is independent to weather or not it was a good shoot or not but I bet he would have done more crime in the future and now that won't happen. That's a win - no different than if someone ran a red light and killed him. Was the action legal and right? No. Did it have a happy ending? Seems like it.
Was it raining?
http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com...er-vs-whether/
And you are intelligent.
It should be a forum rule that you can't link to the Daily Mail.
Lewks of the world: stuff like this is unfortunate, but let's not punish people who are responsible for it; it's not like the latter encourages the former.
Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt applies to the police as much as it does suspected criminals. The irony is that the live-streamed video possibly helped the officers defence by showing him live saying that he thought the guy was going for his gun (not concocting that story after the fact).
He did have a gun. He had told the cop he had a gun.
Maybe if Americans didn't have guns like candy then this would be less of an issue.
Right, Rand. Any black man with a (legal) gun is fair game for the police because they see all armed black men as threats (and at least one person on any jury agrees).
I didn't say that.
Yes, Rand, it's all just a giant coincidence that black men keep on getting gunned down by cops.
Twitter Link
No, its not a coincidence. You're acting as if guilty until proven innocent.
In any individual case, it's entirely possible the cop was not guilty of any crime. The idea that they weren't guilty in ANY of the cases beggars belief. This is the same kind of mentality that let lynchers off the hook in the South.
I'm still waiting for what you think should be done about it. You seem eager to unleash big brother and just jail people without jury trials.
Also the "people killed by cops" number is completely meaningless. I want violent criminals to be killed by cops. Like the Bernie bro that tried to assassinate our elected officials, I'm pretty glad he died.
The solution is for you and all those like you to stop treating a badge like it's supposed to provide immunity to prosecution. When it's in the abstract you talk a semi-decent game but when it comes to practice, to actual events, that disappears and you demonstrate that in the real world you don't think it's possible for anything police (or prison guards, etc) have done to constitute a crime. Even when they literally boil people alive.
Which is not a capital offense. What is more, police officers should worry less about the honest people informing them they have a gun and a license to carry.
I think the great irony here is that on the same day a teenage girl was convicted of manslaughter for telling her boyfriend he should kill himself, a police officer was acquitted of manslaughter after he was captured on video killing a man that was posing no threat, firing into a car with his child in the back seat.
So? Quite a lot of people in the US have guns and carry them. Is he allowed to shoot all of them now?
Shitty argument.
Seriously. Stop any random car in an open/concealed carry state and the driver will most likely tell you: "I have a gun." So, what now, genius? Shoot them if they blink in the wrong way?
In fact, some states are shall inform, which mean you must inform an officer you are carrying when you get pulled over. To make things even more complicated there are police officers in states that are NOT shall inform states, (Minnesota is not a shall inform state) that want to be told immediately that you are carrying when interacting with them. In those situations there is literally no way of knowing what the right thing to say is.