13 yr old Defends Self and House from Armed Robbers

[davidmcbeth]

Yeah, they really are the same. The only thing that matters is what a reasonable person would do when faced with the available information. A reasonable person does not have psychic powers and cannot determine magically whether the person breaking down his door is doing so under color of law.

I think a reasonable person may do several things ... including shooting the person behind the door who is on his property. For many reasons.

 

[color of law]

Yeah, they really are the same. The only thing that matters is what a reasonable person would do when faced with the available information. A reasonable person does not have psychic powers and cannot determine magically whether the person breaking down his door is doing so under color of law.

You are taking what I said out of context. I then said: "Even when the cops had no business breaking into the house." In effect making the first sentence a sarcastic statement. Then I went on to say: "At some point the courts must stop allowing cops a pass on relying on a criminal informants. Everything is a double standard."

I think I made my point clear.

Are smiley faces now the proper form of punctuation?????

 

[davidmcbeth]

<snip>

Are smiley faces now the proper form of punctuation?????

NO

http://www.slate.com/articles/techn...moticons_and_emojis_as_evidence_in_court.html

^^ at least from this court's viewpoint

 

[OC for ME]

Don't see the cases as being exactly the same at all. Fredrick did not chase after the officer's vehicle. ...

Escape clause?

Thug shot and killed...good job son.

Cop shot and killed...10 years for you.

 

[OC for ME]

Both those sentences they were thugs.

A cop can never be called a thug...a cop can be called unprofessional, lethally so.

A cop can be called unreasonably unprofessional, lethally so.

A cop can be called egregiously unreasonably unprofessional, lethally so.

But a cop can never be called a thug...there is, I think, a rule about this here on OCDO...somewhere.

 

[davidmcbeth]

A cop can never be called a thug...a cop can be called unprofessional, lethally so.

A cop can be called unreasonably unprofessional, lethally so.

A cop can be called egregiously unreasonably unprofessional, lethally so.

But a cop can never be called a thug...there is, I think, a rule about this here on OCDO...somewhere.

I think that the rule is a generalized rule ... not to call cops, in general, mean names.

I think in specific instances supported by facts and circumstances involved it becomes a legal question. We are free to discuss legal things.

So in threads that discuss specific policemen behavior I just see that if some one says "cops are this or that" I just assume that they are speaking to the ones noted in the thread unless otherwise apparent and not supported by any other factual allegations.

I personally think that people can shoot felons on their land and have seen many court cases supporting this viewpoint...under the citizens arrest powers. What, supposed to just let a killer go just because he reached some property boundary?