|
Post by The Sandmen on Oct 6, 2014 21:04:28 GMT -5
OMG not another warning I'll be quiet I swear!!!!!!! At your third warning, you have to wear a dunce cap for a week!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2014 21:20:57 GMT -5
Fuck da police!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Oct 7, 2014 1:05:55 GMT -5
You can try that, but they will arrest you for indecent exposure and attempted rape.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 5:44:28 GMT -5
I'm 16 so they're the rapists.
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Oct 7, 2014 5:57:18 GMT -5
If a cop's bullet accidentally kills a random civilian while you're robbing a bank, YOU get charged with murder.
So I'm pretty sure your age will not matter.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 6:43:40 GMT -5
That's what I find stupid, a cop should be careful near civilians. If he kills one it's his fault not the robbers.
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Oct 7, 2014 7:32:56 GMT -5
The argument on behalf of LAW (something you apparently want to defend in the future) is that the person committing a crime created the potentially lethal situation and thus is responsible for all that ensues.
Would be like saying if a terrorist organization sets off a bomb, and a man falls down a set of stairs near the explosion in fear that his falling is a cause of not paying attention to the stairs.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 13:49:01 GMT -5
So the cop can just go around and start shooting people in that area then? Stupid if you ask me.
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Oct 7, 2014 14:08:17 GMT -5
Yes, because cops are reckless and enjoy shooting at civilians.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 15:18:57 GMT -5
Some cops are sooo ya.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Oct 7, 2014 15:27:17 GMT -5
Cops need to be accountable for their actions, since they are in a position of authority and power. They are public servants, and they work FOR civilians, not against them. They are highly trained professionals, and should be held responsible when something goes awry. In cases like what you 2 are talking about, I think an automatic charge is clearly wrong, but if the injury/death is the result of a ricochet or something else found to be out of the officer's control, the responsibility should fall on the person committing the crime in the first place. As Mike said, none of this would have come about were a crime not being committed in the first place.
Like the "if you kidnap someone and they die while kidnapped, even through no fault of your own, it's still first degree murder".
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 16:14:53 GMT -5
Say the cop shoots and kills somebody while trying to shoot the robber. Who is to blame the cop or the robber?
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Oct 7, 2014 16:20:14 GMT -5
The world is far more complicated than "who is to blame".
If all protocols were followed, and if the cop was in a position where shooting was deemed necessary, then the robber should be legally responsible for the death. If the cop was using unjust force, then even if he killed the robber, he should be legally responsible for the death and face the ramifications thereof.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 16:24:30 GMT -5
That's what I was saying. If the cop shot when he knew it wasn't safe or right to do so then he should be blamed.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Oct 7, 2014 16:36:16 GMT -5
"Blame" is a high school word. There is no "blame" in the real world. There are concepts like responsibility and accountability, but "blame" is something you do before you get pubes.
|
|