User Panel
You have absolutely no idea who I am, or how I would behave. Do not presume to know what I would do. |
|||
|
He is innocent until proven guilty.
That is the subject of this debate, is it not? He incorrectly identified the person as a threat - that does not mean he was wrong to feel threatened.
Some reports say he was in civvies.
I don't recall comparing him to an innocent child. I was comparing your religious defense of the thin blue line in that case to this case.
You're very sure about that, aren't you...
The police officer took an action he knew could have dire consequences. Firing a weapon into the air is considered criminally negligent in most jurisdictions if someone gets hit by the bullet.
The baby's LIFE is over... your perspective and disregard for innocent human life is embarassing to your profession.
Hardly huge enough. If I'd done that, MY career would be over, and I'd probably never get hired by an airline either. Oh by the way, I'd also be in jail - and you'd be only too happy to arrest me.
Lucky for the family of the victim, they have one less mouth to feed.
Your job is not unique in that way.
I'm not interested in vengance - only justice. That you see justice as vengance when it is turned against your "kind" is very telling. Matt |
|||||||||||||||
|
You know, we keep having threads like this, and I'm gonna run out of room on this piece of paper listing the folks that I will not respond to.
|
|
I'm sure the 'vengeance' angle is supposed to make us feel guilty: But I've built up an immunity to that. The issue in this thread isn't even 'Justice', as I see it. I'd just like the assh*les to be held accountable. Five bucks says those policemen will cross the street, and become firemen. As for the hunting accident comparison: Sorry, no cigar. The Cheney hunt didn't take place in a residential area, and his companion was there by choice. [There's a lot of guys shooting 7Mag, '06, on up to some fairly heavy rifles during big game seasons. Killing power for MILES. You just don't lob a slug into the air with no regard for those who might be in harm's way. There really are no excuses. Not even the brainfart excuse. Not with deadly force.] |
|
So the shooter in every hunting 'accident' - fatality or not - should be charged/convicted/sentenced to years in jail/prison? I absolutely agree that there really are no excuses. Unlike some here, what I'm not certain of is what's the appropriate punishment when there was no intent or malice (in any shooting 'accident'). Brian |
|
|
You, sir, get a cookie for the text message comparison. Hell -- Make it a cigar! Unfortunately, two wrongs don't make 'right'. |
|
|
What do you mean, "or not"? You're still with the Apples and Oranges bullsh!t. In a fatality? Only if you want to see a decline in the 'accident' rate. [edit: I'm going to bed. I get a headache when I'm browbeaten with crap logic.] |
|
|
'or not' meant an injury - as in the guy Cheney shot didn't die but spent time in the hospital due to being shot. Brian |
||
|
Superbly said. Thank you. |
||
|
You're right, that child won't be back. So, your premise clearly must be that rehabilitation of criminals is the answer rather than VENGENCE. Not a fan of retributive justice (i.e. vengeance)? Somehow, I doubt that's true except in this one instance. But, you could prove me wrong by posting excerpts of all the letters of recommendation you've written for (non-CI, not an informant) defendants urging the court to sentence them to a work program or educational program rather than prison; with no confinement; oh and a deferred. Also, to keep this above board, please limit your answers to cases where the defendant was involved in a negligent homicide. |
|
|
I agree with this sentiment on accidental shootings 100%, however in this particular case even forgetting these were officers a moment, they were firing in an illegal fashion. Though I may disagree with many laws, this one I don't and was made for just this reason. In any state I have ever lived in or shot in, its been illegal to shoot into the air. Of course in life threatening conditions, it has always been assumed there is an extenuating circumstances. By this conviction, I wouldn't suspect that was the case. Yes, accidents happen and like this often from doing something stupid or illegal. Sometimes they are indeed not prosecuted. I'm pretty certain in this instance the fact the officers involved should technically be enforcing the law they themselves broke played a major factor in the fact they were charged. I can't comment either way on the sentence since I don't know the men, their backgrounds, or family situations. Tj edited: to correct water to air. |
||
|
|
|
If two regular folks (or hunters) were jackassing around near a residential area, shot a couple center fire cartridges into the air (at a squirrel in a tree, whatever) and the result was the death of a stranger, jail time would be appropriate IMO. Obviously, the length of sentence depends on the jurisdiction and the court's past record of sentencing in negligent homicide cases. I know that's a cop out, but how else can one be "fair." This case is so fact specific its difficult to come up with suitable analogies. For people familiar with firearms, the actions of the officers were so mind numbingly reckless, its baffling. Badge makes no difference. |
|
|
Oddly enough, as fate would have it I was previously a probation officer and have written a mountain of letters about the progress of criminals in their search for a better way of life. That has nothing to do with this event. You want your pound of flesh and you didn't get it. You didn't get it because cooler heads were able to seperate emotion from fact. |
||
|
I am aware that officers write letters all the time for Defendants. Ok, so in the case of a negligent homicide of a stranger, you must have written a pre-sentence report arguing for a deferred judgement with no jail? Deflections aside, that was the question. I cannot imagine that recommendation in my jurisdiction. So if that's a regular recommendation for the negligent homicide of a stranger, I would be very surprised. I'm asking for reality and logical consistency. Also, emotion, what are you talking about? Please point out where I haven't kept a cool head, asked for a pound of flesh, or became emotional. I'll help: I have said that I believe that some jail time would be appropriate but that such a sentence should be measured by other negligent homicides in that jurisdiction. Wow, pretty emotional. |
|||
|
Loyalty - even misplaced loyalty, as yours is - is an emotion. It is a learned behavior that can be modified by our choices that result from external stimulus. You are demonstrating the emotion of loyalty. Emotions are only legitimate points of argument if they are backed up by facts (that justify said emotions). We have asked the officers endure the same justice any of us would face. You seem to think (erronously) that any of us would escape jail time for a similar offense. If you truly believe that, I suggest you review case law regarding such instances. No, I will not google them for you. Matt |
|||
|
I have seen people that killed other human beings get less punishment than this and no, they were not LEOs. As an example, I had a case where a teenage female intentionally ran someone off the road in a fit of road rage and killed them. The girl was on prescription antidepressants, had anger management issues, etc. In reality, she was a spoiled brat...but guess what she got? No time...several years of probation/house arrest with a mando counseling every week and to stay on her meds. Was that the TBL The fact of the matter is that as tragic as it was, it was a one in a billion accident. As sad as it is, it would be wrong to seek vengance for the sake of vengance in this case. |
||||
|
It was a preventable accident brought on through criminal negligence by men who should know better. You and I both know it. I do not EVER advocate revenge. If those officers served jail time, it would be justice. Vengance would be the a bullet to the brainpan. Matt |
|||||
|
I fail to see what you recommended in the case of the vehicular negligent homicide, though you appear to indicate that you were displeased with the sentence. The defendant served time on house arrest, which is more than what the officers received. I also see nothing about a deferred judgement. Again, that would be more of a punishment, not less. In sum, that was not an example of less punishment. So, in this instance, your real argument is that this was an accident, pure and simple, with no criminal negligence by the officers. Is that right? Also, who is seeking vengence for the sake of vengence? Heck, what does that even mean? |
|||||
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.