Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[Endus]

you have a legal right to take back your property... if they put up a fight instead of handing it over, they're the ones that are committing an additional crime... and opens up to the one taking their property back claiming self-defense...

And them "putting up a fight" is a second crime, not the theft of property.

And whether or not lethal force is justifiable is where the proportionality comes in. If the thief punches you and runs away, no, you don't get to kill them, legally speaking.

and you're not going to get charged with murder if someone dies as a result of fighting you when they stole your stuff and you tried to take it back... even a man that went out on his porch and shot a 15-year old dead and seriously wounded another got off with manslaughter and aggravated assault and he stayed out of prison as well... they didn't even attack him and he didn't go to prison for it...

Gonna have to cite your sources, dude.

[Elegiac]

you have a legal right to take back your property...

You have a legal right to seek restitution not to start a war to take back your property, Menelaus.

We live in a society. This isn't the Bronze Age.

[Endus]

you try to take your stuff back from someone when they won't give it to you and see what happens... the more force they use to stop you from taking it back, the more you are allowed to use against them...

Like I said; you keep imagining that the thief will escalate violence to a level that would justify lethal force.

When your original argument was that just for stealing your stuff, you could kill them.

You keep misrepresenting your own position. Your argument here has nothing to do with the theft. Yes, if someone tries to kill you, you can defend yourself with lethal force.

If they grab your photos and run, and you grab your rifle and shoot them, that's 2nd degree murder. Blatantly and obviously. Zero defense.

[Endus]

nope...

i said even if it means their death... that included people trying to fight because i'm trying to, with the right of the law, take back what's mine...

At this point, you're just lying.

You're assuming they try and fight you, rather than just running away. You keep trying to use an argument for self defense on the fighting you to the death part, and conflating that with some right to use lethal force for the stealing your stuff part.

They aren't the same argument, or the same thing.

Guy steals your stuff and runs. You don't get to fight them. What now?

[Edge-]

nope...



i said i would try to take it back even if it means their death... that included people trying to fight because i'm trying to, with the right of the law, take back what's mine...

Yo, got any examples of what you claim is legal like, actually being legal?

Or is this all fanfiction to justify your apparent eagerness to kill someone over some photos?

[Elegiac]

Yo, got any examples of what you claim is legal like, actually being legal?

Or is this all fanfiction to justify your apparent eagerness to kill someone over some photos?

The latter, considering this is the same person recirculating propaganda brought to you by French fascists.

[Endus]

nope... i just quoted my original post what i said...

To quote it again;

someone steals my childhood photos and refuse to give them back i would try to take it back by force from them even if it means their death.

Literally nothing in that post about the thief attacking you and forcing you to defend yourself.

Just "guy stole from me" straught to "I murder that guy".

You've tried to insert "well if he fought me and I felt threatened enough to warrant lethal force" into what you originally stated, but it is not anywhere in that original post. Just the theft was what you felt justified your use of lethal force.

And that isn't how the law works anywhere in the developed world. Not even Sweden.

[Edge-]

you seriously lack reading comprehension lol...

Hey, maybe you're missing my posts. Were there any cases where the situation you described occured? What were the charges? If there were court rulings, what were they?

Because right now your argument is, "It's legal because I say it is, just trust me, guy.".

[Endus]

you seriously lack reading comprehension lol...

For not imagining stuff that's literally not anywhere in the post in question?

Your original argument was just that theft entitled you to kill the thief. Nothing else.

I can't build responses on the secret thoughts you keep in your head. I have to go by what you actually put into words.

[Edge-]

Aight cool, I'll stop quoting you if it bugs ya. Just glad we got to the bottom of you making shit up to justify your desire to kill other people.

[Endus]

"even if it means their death" doesn't mean "i'm certainly going to kill this person"... which you are claiming i'm saying lol...

It says you're willing to kill someone just for taking childhood photos of yours.

That's not legally defensible anywhere in the developed world. You'd be charged and convicted of murder. Because that's what you're describing. Yes, even in Sweden.

[Elegiac]

"even if it means their death" doesn't mean "i'm certainly going to kill this person"... which you are claiming i'm saying lol... it means that's a possible outcome of a confrontation...

Then it would be defending yourself against assault, not "taking back your property".

And you have the gall to bitch about other people's reading comprehension.

[Elegiac]

at worst it would be what's called dråp here

Oh so it's not murder it's just manslaughter, which is totally better.

Lol.

[Endus]

at worst it would be what's called dråp here if they die as a result of me trying to take my stuff back... at best i'd be walking free...

Literally cite any comparable case. Just one.

[Elegiac]

this isn't even a case where someone was taking property...

Sweaty, this isn't a comparable case. This is aggravated home defense with a history of incidents, not you having a license to murder someone because they decided your shitty photographs were worth stealing.

[Elegiac]

they just showed up and shouted stuff and he walked outside with his rifle and shot them

No, they didn't. From your own source:

The shootings came when a gang of teenagers went to the man’s house in Rödeby in the middle of the night last October, following telephone threats against the family’s 19 year old son. The family had long claimed that they were harassed by the gang, without any intervention by the local police.

Do you ever get tired of just making shit up? Clearly not given you're far more fascinated with the logistics of the killing than the context surrounding it.

[Elegiac]

i'm not making anything up... the article just isn't particularly loaded on what went down...

"Citing" a source which points out that the killing was unjustified and that the court's decision might have been incorrect to support your claim that it's okay to murder people over property damage is a bold strategy, Cotton, let's see how that works out for you.

Also, you claimed "they just showed up" when your own source points out a history of aggravated interactions. It's not a comparable case, it's you making up bullshit as usual. Sit down.

[downnola]

What kind of wild ride are we on where people are getting riled up to hypothetically murder someone over old polaroids? See a therapist already, shit.

[Santti]

What kind of wild ride are we on where people are getting riled up to hypothetically murder someone over old polaroids? See a therapist already, shit.

I'm guessing it's some kind of juvenile idea of masculinity and power-fantasy.

[Deus Mortis]

How is he not fired and charged with violating her Civil Rights, yet?

Like, all three of these officers need to be fired and never hold a law enforcement job ever again. They can work as a security guard at a parking lot if they are desperate to wear some kinda badge.

Sorry if I misinterpreted your post, but when being arrested you actually do not have to be read your Miranda rights. Contrary to most television shows, you only have to be read them if you're being asked questions/interrogated. Even when the suspect starts talking you can somewhat lead them with statements that boarder a question without actually breaking the rules.