• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Hope this guy gets the max.....

skeith5

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
356
Location
United States
Hmm... tricky position to be in. What will sending him to jail really accomplish? There are 2 young kids who have lost their sister, who will now wonder where there daddy is. You are turning a family, into a single mother household. I guarantee you that Derek has gotten the message, he has no lessons to be learned by going to jail.

I lost a child last year, though no fault of my own, it's a devestating ordeal. If it had been my fault, I can only imagine the pain involved.

I'm not saying that he shouldn't face reprecussions for what he did. He should lose the badge, do some community service, or something else. Sending him to jail will just further hurt the innocent victims in this tradgedy.

Scott
 

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
It seems like this was an accident. Poor family. How devastating.
But we should never miss an opportunity to imprison a citizen, especially a gun owner, it's the American way.
 

Shoobee

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
599
Location
CCCP (Calif)
Calif has specific statutory language on this in its penal code.

Not sure what Wash State has on its books.

It's clearly some kind of negligent homicide.

Society wants to punish these crimes to send a message.

But the deepest punishment was the death of the daughter. Not to mention the likely loss of his job.

Have to wonder if he was drinking when he lay down his service handgun.

You really need a gunsafe if you are going to own guns, especially if there are kids in the house too.
 

Attachments

  • Liberty Centurion.jpg
    Liberty Centurion.jpg
    94.6 KB · Views: 0

Vitaeus

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Bremerton, Washington
RCW 9A.32.070
Manslaughter in the second degree.

(1) A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when, with criminal negligence, he or she causes the death of another person.

(2) Manslaughter in the second degree is a class B felony.

(d) CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE. A person is criminally negligent or acts with criminal negligence when he or she fails to be aware of a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur and his or her failure to be aware of such substantial risk constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation. from http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.08.010

IANAL under the law he made a foolish choice, but he did not perform an action that resulted in the death of the little boy, if he is found guilty of manslaughter, then how is this different from a teenager who gets into your liquor cabinet and gives himself alcohol poisoning? Opportunity is not the same as action. He was foolish, but I don't think we as gun-owners want the State to be able to charge us if someone hurts themselves or others if they get access to our firearms, without our consent.
 

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland

You raelly need to rethink you attitude...you (me and everyone here) do not really be held responsible for what someone else does with a weapon you own, that you did not authorize the use of it....think carefully, without emotion....

What is the difference between your young child taking you firearm without your authoriztion, and a local thug doing the same thing...????

So you want legal precident that if your weapon is stolen, and then used illegally, the owner of the firearm should be held responsible???? Really???> I don't. If someone, anyone, does something illegal with property I own...they should be held responsible. They were the person that conducted the illegal activity.

I know a lot of people do not see what I see here, but for many reasons I pray this officer is aquitted, not just for his good...but for our good. Where do you thing San Fran came up with the argument that if a pistol was not phyiscally on your person, it needed to be locked up???? (that question is being argued in court right now)
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
You raelly need to rethink you attitude...you (me and everyone here) do not really be held responsible for what someone else does with a weapon you own, that you did not authorize the use of it....think carefully, without emotion....

What is the difference between your young child taking you firearm without your authoriztion, and a local thug doing the same thing...????

So you want legal precident that if your weapon is stolen, and then used illegally, the owner of the firearm should be held responsible???? Really???> I don't. If someone, anyone, does something illegal with property I own...they should be held responsible. They were the person that conducted the illegal activity.

I know a lot of people do not see what I see here, but for many reasons I pray this officer is aquitted, not just for his good...but for our good. Where do you thing San Fran came up with the argument that if a pistol was not phyiscally on your person, it needed to be locked up???? (that question is being argued in court right now)

+1

actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea
 

bmg50cal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
306
Location
WA - North Whidbey/ Deception Pass
Well to all who think things should be equal... don't forget had this guy been a serviceman he could be convicted twice both under state law and the UCMJ. If LEOs want to play GI Joe let them be held to a dual standard just like the military, let them be judged under the UCMJ. Birk would be behinds bars.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
The other guy that let this happen just a few short days earlier by the Tacoma Mall was already convicted why did it take this long to charge A guy with A badge. Just asking?

Due process. Just because the other guy waived some of his rights does not mean that this guy has too waive his.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
Well to all who think things should be equal... don't forget had this guy been a serviceman he could be convicted twice both under state law and the UCMJ. If LEOs want to play GI Joe let them be held to a dual standard just like the military, let them be judged under the UCMJ. Birk would be behinds bars.

Ahh, the old military straw man argument.

Let's see; you sign a contract to join the military in which the UCMJ is revealed to be the laws you must follow.

Since he was not a serviceman and is a civilian LEO he gets the same laws, the same Constitution, the same due process as anyone else.

actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea
 

bmg50cal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
306
Location
WA - North Whidbey/ Deception Pass
Ahh, the old military straw man argument. Let's see; you sign a contract to join the military in which the UCMJ is revealed to be the laws you must follow. Since he was not a serviceman and is a civilian LEO he gets the same laws, the same Constitution, the same due process as anyone else. actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea
I'm not making an argument in this case, I'm stating my humble opinion on how I think it should be however flawed my thinking may or may not be. ;)
 

MSG Laigaie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
3,239
Location
Philipsburg, Montana
IANAL under the law he made a foolish choice, but he did not perform an action that resulted in the death of the little boy( not true), if he is found guilty of manslaughter, then how is this different from a teenager who gets into your liquor cabinet and gives himself alcohol poisoning? .........

this way... he left an attractive nuisance in plain sight. An accident? No. Negligence? Yes.

The documents indicate the parents admitted the 3-year-old often tried to get into the home safe that holds Carlile’s guns, that he has his own air soft gun and a toy revolver and that Carlile has shot a BB gun with the boy. During a court ordered interview with police, the 5-year-old allegedly said the 3-year-old always wanted his mother to “get him guns” and that when he played his toy guns, the 3-year-old “Pretends to shoot us.”
Carlile allegedly told officers during an interview, “He’s very fascinated with guns and that’s why I’m beatin’ myself up because I left my damn gun, for forty seconds, in the center….
 

Vitaeus

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Bremerton, Washington
"attractive nuisance" is a civil issue NOT a criminal one, you are mixing which area of the law we are discussing. If his wife or his heirs if he had any wanted to sue, they might well have standing under that argument.
 
Top