Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Police shooting in Wisconsin,protests erupt

Page 9 of 22 [ 340 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 22  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

TheRobotLives
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,092
Location: Quiet, Dark, Comfy Spot

29 Aug 2020, 2:23 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1298530439389487105

Looks pretty flaming for a trashbag.

It doesn't matter, like the other things you mentioned.

Self-defense is defense to an imminent threat.

At the time Rosenbaum was killed, he posed no threat, had no weapon, and was not even near the kid.


_________________
Then a hero comes along, with the strength to carry on, and you cast your fears aside, and you know you can survive.

Be the hero of your life.


Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

29 Aug 2020, 2:27 pm

...have I fallen into a parallel universe where 10 feet is far away, and a person running directly at you after throwing an improvised explosive at you AND having repeatedly assaulted you and tried to take your gun is not an "imminent threat"?


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Jiheisho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2020
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,507

29 Aug 2020, 2:27 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:
it was after the guy who was unarmed attempted and failed to take his gun from him twice, which is already assault.


I thought trying to disarm someone is self defense? But killing someone that did not harm you is self defense?



vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

29 Aug 2020, 2:28 pm

^^^
Self defense is to a reasonable belief of an imminent.
In the middle of a riot with people throwing bombs at you,what is a person to think.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


Jiheisho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2020
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,507

29 Aug 2020, 2:29 pm

vermontsavant wrote:
Jiheisho wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
TheRobotLives wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
Having a gun does not make you the aggressor. Running at someone and firing a gun, on the other hand, does. Which is what Rosenbaum did.

No, it's reported that Rosenbaum didn't have a weapon.

He threw a plastic bag. That is all.
In a heated situation with limited time to assess,the baggie could have contained a bomb,remember your in the mist of a riot.A bag plastic or paper or cloth could easily contain a bomb!


No one is arguing that the white shooter was an idiot that would first think that a trash bag would contain a bomb and not trash (although assuming that he did think is being generous). And that really is the problem: he went there looking for a fight. He was prepared to shoot someone. When you engage in a protest and assume you will need to use force, then there is no self-defense claim.
His lawyers could argue in the mist of a riot a bag's contents could be a bomb,it's possible,likelihood is not an issue,only is it possible,this is what lawyers argue in court.

If something is possible the jury by law must take into consideration.When a forensic criminalist testifies about a DNA match they usually say something like the odds of someone else having the same DNA is 1 in 5.7 million or something.
If the best a medical witness could say is that the DNA is exclusive to 1 in 10,000 then the prosecution wouldn't even put him on the stand.Because 1 in 10 thousand makes it possible someone else left the DNA,POSSIBLE is a big word in court.


His lawyers can argue anything. They could argue insanity.



Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

29 Aug 2020, 2:36 pm

Jiheisho wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
it was after the guy who was unarmed attempted and failed to take his gun from him twice, which is already assault.


I thought trying to disarm someone is self defense? But killing someone that did not harm you is self defense?


Trying to take the gun from someone who has done nothing beside "have a gun" is not self-defense. Someone assaulting you repeatedly, throwing an explosive at you, and then charging you doesn't really have a case of innocence even if he failed in all those things.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

29 Aug 2020, 2:36 pm

Jiheisho wrote:

His lawyers can argue anything. They could argue insanity.
He will get good lawyers for sure and they will muddy the waters with the confusion of a riot.And from video I've seen and things discussed on this thread top quality attorney's should be able to manufacture reasonable doubt


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

29 Aug 2020, 2:37 pm

He's got the same attorney as the Sandmann kid.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

29 Aug 2020, 2:43 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:
He's got the same attorney as the Sandmann kid.
L.Lin Wood offered his services,I wasn't aware he had formally accepted yet.He may shop around being the high profile nature of the case,but yes Wood is a good choice he also represented Richard Jewell and the Ramsey's.

Maybe he waiting for Jose Baez to call?


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


Jiheisho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2020
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,507

29 Aug 2020, 2:44 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:
Jiheisho wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
it was after the guy who was unarmed attempted and failed to take his gun from him twice, which is already assault.


I thought trying to disarm someone is self defense? But killing someone that did not harm you is self defense?


Trying to take the gun from someone who has done nothing beside "have a gun" is not self-defense.


A gun is not threatening? And the person could not have thought the white shooter was imminent threat?



Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

29 Aug 2020, 2:45 pm

Ah, I thought that was already decided.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

29 Aug 2020, 2:47 pm

Jiheisho wrote:
A gun is not threatening? And the person could not have thought the white shooter was imminent threat?


A gun is not inherently threatening, no. Especially since the kid clearly knew how to handle one safely. Unlike the geniuses waving their pistols around in the crowd. Hell, theres even a working hypothesis by the coroner that the shot in Rosenbaum's back (which is the one that killed him) came from another shooter.

And why do you keep saying white? Even if that was remotely relevant, the kid is listed as hispanic.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Jiheisho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2020
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,507

29 Aug 2020, 2:56 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:
Jiheisho wrote:
A gun is not threatening? And the person could not have thought the white shooter was imminent threat?


A gun is not inherently threatening, no. Especially since the kid clearly knew how to handle one safely.


What about in the middle of a protest when you are not there to support that protest? Could it be considered threatening?

Well, that white kid certainly knew how to kill people. But I am not sure the first rule of gun safety is to carry a loaded gun in a crowd.



Jiheisho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2020
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,507

29 Aug 2020, 2:57 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:
Jiheisho wrote:
A gun is not threatening? And the person could not have thought the white shooter was imminent threat?


A gun is not inherently threatening, no. Especially since the kid clearly knew how to handle one safely. Unlike the geniuses waving their pistols around in the crowd. Hell, theres even a working hypothesis by the coroner that the shot in Rosenbaum's back (which is the one that killed him) came from another shooter.

And why do you keep saying white? Even if that was remotely relevant, the kid is listed as hispanic.


So race cannot be a motivating factor?



Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

29 Aug 2020, 3:04 pm

Jiheisho wrote:

What about in the middle of a protest when you are not there to support that protest? Could it be considered threatening?

Well, that white kid certainly knew how to kill people. But I am not sure the first rule of gun safety is to carry a loaded gun in a crowd.



No, that's being smart.


No, the first rule of gun safety is that all guns are always loaded.

the second rule of gun safety is that you don't point the gun at anything you are not willing to destroy. And lo and behold: even in the midst of a violent mob, only the three people that actually did attack him were killed or injured.


Quote:
So race cannot be a motivating factor?


Are you saying BLM are racists? I'm not arguing, I'm just making sure.


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Jiheisho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2020
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,507

29 Aug 2020, 3:12 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:
Jiheisho wrote:

What about in the middle of a protest when you are not there to support that protest? Could it be considered threatening?

Well, that white kid certainly knew how to kill people. But I am not sure the first rule of gun safety is to carry a loaded gun in a crowd.



No, that's being smart.


No, the first rule of gun safety is that all guns are always loaded.

the second rule of gun safety is that you don't point the gun at anything you are not willing to destroy. And lo and behold: even in the midst of a violent mob, only the three people that actually did attack him were killed or injured.


Quote:
So race cannot be a motivating factor?


Are you saying BLM are racists? I'm not arguing, I'm just making sure.


Wow, man, you are really fringe. And you don't know the first thing about gun safety.