• Cleveland PD arrests gay couple a week after off-duty cop assaults them, tells them "faggots don't d
    81 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Zeke129;34523656]Manslaughter means killing without intent to kill, but with no grounds to have done so If you kill to defend yourself from being killed, according to the law you've committed no crime[/QUOTE] It depends on the force that was used against you usually. For instance shooting a rail old granny that's coming at you with a stick to beat you to death would count as murder probably, since you used obviously excessive force.
[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;34525636]Are you really that dense? Look at criminals. People sell drugs, and kill people. And they can get arrested, wounded or even killed. And they still do it. Having the chance of being suspended and thrown in jail might stop come corrupt cops. But not all of them, that is just common sense.[/QUOTE] The case here is not corruption because these cops probably didn't do it for profit, they did it because of their views. Problems like this take many generations to iron out because they sometimes tend to pass from parent to child. Most societies have all kinds of forms of underlying "attitudes" that may not always be obvious.
The only way I could see to actually justify killing in case of unlawful arrest etc would require you to film the whole thing But then you'd probably go in jail for filming an officer on duty since I remember that being illegal in some state
every time a fruit goes rotten it must be disposed of
And in other news, 1 out of every 20 arrests in Rio de Janeiro ends in a death of the suspect.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;34523620]the US supreme court ruled that you are allowed to resist unlawful arrest up to and including taking the officer's life but this is impossible to do since if you kill a cop in self defense there will be many more there to kill you[/QUOTE] Where did you get this from? I have never heard of this. [editline]3rd February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Starpluck;34525558]That law is extremely dated (from 1900) and is no longer the case today as it has been superseded countless times.[/QUOTE] Nevermind.
[QUOTE=ruarai;34525979]Why would that be illegal? Just sounds silly..[/QUOTE]It's illegal in the UK (last I was aware anyway) and many officers simply react with hostility to being filmed. It's happened more than one time recently.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;34525960]And in other news, 1 out of every 20 arrests in Rio de Janeiro ends in a death of the suspect.[/QUOTE] Things could be worse but they could also be better.
I have a feeling there is more to this story. Anyone can claim anything and take it to court. Not saying the officers are innocent. But is there any proof of what happened to these two at all? Otherwise, it's just "He said she said."
[QUOTE=Starpluck;34525558]That law is extremely dated (from 1900) and is no longer the case today as it has been superseded countless times.[/QUOTE] Do you have the ruling that has superseded it I was aware of it being from 1900 and even posted as such, but wasn't able to find anything that claimed it's no longer valid [editline]3rd February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Lachz0r;34523782]noones saying all cops are bad.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;34523844]They aren't all bad.[/QUOTE] Stellar rebuttal
I am in cleveland right now. The cops around here seemed like they were always nice to everyone. Never thought they'd do anything like that. :(
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;34523570]To protect and serve![/QUOTE] Police departments stopped using that motto due to some home invasion case, where officers were too negligent to investigate. Read up [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia]Warren v. District of Columbia[/url].
[QUOTE=Zeke129;34528015]Do you have the ruling that has superseded it I was aware of it being from 1900 and even posted as such, but wasn't able to find anything that claimed it's no longer valid[/QUOTE] Top of these comments summarize it pretty well [url]http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/mc1x4/til_the_supreme_court_has_sided_with_citizens_to/[/url]
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;34528212]Police departments stopped using that motto due to some home invasion case, where officers were too negligent to investigate. Read up [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia]Warren v. District of Columbia[/url].[/QUOTE] What the fucking shit What the fuck is wrong with our system God motherfucking damn What the fuck What the fuck
[QUOTE=Starpluck;34528310]Top of these comments summarize it pretty well [url]http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/mc1x4/til_the_supreme_court_has_sided_with_citizens_to/[/url][/QUOTE] "has since been superseded by statute in many states" Wouldn't those statutes be declared illegal should it ever go to the supreme court Granted, dead men can't appeal to the supreme court but technically speaking
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;34528212]Police departments stopped using that motto due to some home invasion case, where officers were too negligent to investigate. Read up [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia]Warren v. District of Columbia[/url].[/QUOTE] Wow, why the [B]FUCK[/B] weren't they stripped of their privilege to be a cop?! If you get a report that someone is breaking into someones house you'd best skip being polite and get the fuck in there.
Shed tear at op's article and Jaguar's article. Jesus fuck that's depressing.
What in the fuck, what makes people want to be so bigoted like that? What in the hell makes these people think it is ok?
[QUOTE=MR-X;34531003]What in the fuck, what makes people want to be so bigoted like that? What in the hell makes these people think it is ok?[/QUOTE] Old values survive for generations.
[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;34525636]Are you really that dense? Look at criminals. People sell drugs, and kill people. And they can get arrested, wounded or even killed. And they still do it. Having the chance of being suspended and thrown in jail might stop come corrupt cops. But not all of them, that is just common sense.[/QUOTE] I wasn't aware criminals had the oversight of the state. Try again. [QUOTE=Starpluck;34528310]Top of these comments summarize it pretty well [url]http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/mc1x4/til_the_supreme_court_has_sided_with_citizens_to/[/url][/QUOTE] Those comments ignore the fact that what individual states do is irrelevant, as a case needs to come up which actually challenges those statutes before they have to be changed, and the original case is still cited and considered valid as of 1982 (United States v. Danehy). There has been no reversal. Don't ask Reddit for legal advice.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34532670]I wasn't aware criminals had the oversight of the state. Try again. Those comments ignore the fact that what individual states do is irrelevant, as a case needs to come up which actually challenges those statutes before they have to be changed, and the original case is still cited and considered valid as of 1982 (United States v. Danehy). There has been no reversal. Don't ask Reddit for legal advice.[/QUOTE] I don't think it would be smart to trust any advice from Reddit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.