Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: Do we have a problem with police brutality / violence in the US of A?

Voters
20. You may not vote on this poll
  • Absolutely. It's a problem

    14 70.00%
  • No. Police are doing their job the best they can

    6 30.00%
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 129
  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    10,749
    Quote Originally Posted by lol, please View Post
    Who cares about the judge decision here (here being, the acknowledgement of this being a murderous act.)

    Just because you get acquitted by law doesn't make it not murder. There just wasn't enough for a conviction.

    Don't confuse legal / illegal with right / wrong.

    We murdered many people over OIF and OEF. I would know. Just because we as soldiers were protected by (shady) government officials and the Geneva convention, doesn't make it not murder.

    I've asked this question to peoples face before and never get a response worth contemplating: what separates men like me from men like the guy who shot up the theater during the Batman movie? The flag on my shoulder? Don't be naive. If the victims were innocent, and the pleasure or fulfillment was the same, there is no difference. That's something I will toil with internally all my life. One man's patriot is another man's terrorist and vica versa.

    Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk
    We are a country of laws, not morals. For the reason you stated, the only thing that matters is whether or not someone illegally commits murder. I can easily make up plenty of good moral reasons why I should be able to kill someone. Thatís because morality is subjective. Unlike the law, which is objective.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    10,749
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    the jury is wrong. The ****ing cop murdered him. Convictions are overturned every day.

    When police are allowed to walk after committing acts like that, it's no wonder people lose more faith in cops by the day.
    And my opinion is Rian Johnsonís first venture into the Star Wars universe was a masterpiece.

    The cop wasnít ďallowed to walk.Ē He faced a jury of his peers, who heard all of the evidence and found him not guilty. Thatís the justice system.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,182

    Do we have a police brutality/violence problem in the US of A?

    Yes people understand that the justice system is what decided he is innocent here. People are saying the justice system does not always get things right.

    If I plan and kill someone tomorrow but you can't find enough to convict (let's say someone screwed up and key evidence is inadmissible), I still committed murder. I am just not convicted of it due to the justice system.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    21,354
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    Itís funny how juries are only wrong when you seem to think they are wrong. Yes, on occasion, juries get it wrong. But in most cases they get it right.

    My point is, that the jury is more well informed and unbiased than anyone, especially on this forum, to make a decision and they did. Their decision may not be infallible but it certainly carries enough weight that this dude cannot be tried for murder again.

    Nothing is painfully obvious in the video, hence 12 complete strangers disagreeing with your outlook.
    Absolutely not, all I've ever said was that juries can get it wrong, they are not infallible. That was a point that up until this post, you seem to disagree with.

    You freely admit that juries get it wrong and then say "but they decided here, so that's final". You are saying that we should trust them because they are more well informed and unbiased than anyone else about the case despite having just freely admitted that juries can get it wrong.

    Their weight is not what means he can't be tried for murder again by the way, the systemic rule against double jeopardy is what means he can't be tried for murder again (and even then, if new evidence is introduced that contradicts the acquittal, the case can indeed be re-tried).
    Last edited by valade16; 01-02-2018 at 06:08 PM.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    21,354
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    We are a country of laws, not morals. For the reason you stated, the only thing that matters is whether or not someone illegally commits murder. I can easily make up plenty of good moral reasons why I should be able to kill someone. Thatís because morality is subjective. Unlike the law, which is objective.
    Again, you demonstrate your misunderstanding of the legal system. The juries decision was subjective, in that it was their opinion of the evidence. The law as written is objective, as interpreted is subjective.
    Last edited by valade16; 01-02-2018 at 06:08 PM.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    21,354
    Just so we are clear, here is what I could find of Arizona Second Degree Murder specifications:

    http://statelaws.findlaw.com/arizona...urder-law.html

    1) Intentionally causing the death of another person;

    2) knowing that his conduct will cause the death or serious physical injury

    3) Under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, a person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death and thereby causes the death of another person.


    The jury not convicting him simply means they didn't have enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt for the above 3 specifications.

    It doesn't mean they felt what he did was right, or proportional. They could believe that he should not have done what he did, and still found him not guilty.

    There is a wide chasm between not convicting him of second degree murder and believing what he did was OK. Joey is trying to assert that by them doing the former, they believe the latter and he can't possibly know that.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    10,749
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Absolutely not, all I've ever said was that juries can get it wrong, they are not infallible. That was a point that up until this post, you seem to disagree with.

    You freely admit that juries get it wrong and then say "but they decided here, so that's final". You are saying that we should trust them because they are more well informed and unbiased than anyone else about the case despite having just freely admitted that juries can get it wrong.

    Their weight is not what means he can't be tried for murder again by the way, the systemic rule against double jeopardy is what means he can't be tried for murder again (and even then, if new evidence is introduced that contradicts the acquittal, the case can indeed be re-tried).
    Well of course 12 humans can make a mistake. A shark can also attack you. The odds of a jury getting it wrong are not high or at least not based on anything other then opinion. As someone above stated, most jurors take their position seriously. Itís extremely difficult for 12 strangers to come up with a unanimous decision and be wrong.

    And saying ďso theyíve decided so itís finalĒ is reality. Itís extremely difficult to overturn a juries decision, especially with murder charges. He can go as far as confessing and it still wouldnít matter. The evidence would have to be overwhelming. In this case, they have footage of him shooting the guy so I seriously doubt some evidence even could exist.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    10,749
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Just so we are clear, here is what I could find of Arizona Second Degree Murder specifications:

    http://statelaws.findlaw.com/arizona...urder-law.html

    1) Intentionally causing the death of another person;

    2) knowing that his conduct will cause the death or serious physical injury

    3) Under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, a person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death and thereby causes the death of another person.


    The jury not convicting him simply means they didn't have enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt for the above 3 specifications.

    It doesn't mean they felt what he did was right, or proportional. They could believe that he should not have done what he did, and still found him not guilty.

    There is a wide chasm between not convicting him of second degree murder and believing what he did was OK. Joey is trying to assert that by them doing the former, they believe the latter and he can't possibly know that.
    But we are discussing the law, not morality. The cop can be the biggest piece of **** in the world and the jury can believe that. But that doesnít make him guilty of murder according to the law.

    You canít change the law for specific cases because if thatís the case, thereís going to be a lot more people in jail.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    21,354
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    Well of course 12 humans can make a mistake. A shark can also attack you. The odds of a jury getting it wrong are not high or at least not based on anything other then opinion. As someone above stated, most jurors take their position seriously. Itís extremely difficult for 12 strangers to come up with a unanimous decision and be wrong.

    And saying ďso theyíve decided so itís finalĒ is reality. Itís extremely difficult to overturn a juries decision, especially with murder charges. He can go as far as confessing and it still wouldnít matter. The evidence would have to be overwhelming. In this case, they have footage of him shooting the guy so I seriously doubt some evidence even could exist.
    Ironic you claim any counter to your point is opinion after saying an opinion. Do you have anything other than opinion to back up your assertion?

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    21,354
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    But we are discussing the law, not morality. The cop can be the biggest piece of **** in the world and the jury can believe that. But that doesnít make him guilty of murder according to the law.

    You canít change the law for specific cases because if thatís the case, thereís going to be a lot more people in jail.
    No, people in this thread have been discussing both, about that very video. You want to turn it into strictly a discussion of the law so that you don't have to address the morality of the situation.

    Legally, everyone here agrees, he was found not guilty. You are the only one acting like that means what he did was 100% OK.

    Since we are all in agreement on the legality of the juries decision, would you care to address the morality and/or your thoughts on the situation?

  11. #101
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    35,939
    That cop is a cowardly little ***** on a power trip. Wish I could say the footage was shocking.

    "there's no scraps in my scrapbook"

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    10,749
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Ironic you claim any counter to your point is opinion after saying an opinion. Do you have anything other than opinion to back up your assertion?
    Yes, the legal system.

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    10,749
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    No, people in this thread have been discussing both, about that very video. You want to turn it into strictly a discussion of the law so that you don't have to address the morality of the situation.

    Legally, everyone here agrees, he was found not guilty. You are the only one acting like that means what he did was 100% OK.

    Since we are all in agreement on the legality of the juries decision, would you care to address the morality and/or your thoughts on the situation?
    In my first post about the video I said the cop acted like an idiot. What else needs to be said?

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    21,354
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    Yes, the legal system.
    What about the legal system? Based on how often they get it right and wrong? Do you even know the numbers?

    What would be a good success or accuracy rate for a jury, to you? Like if they got it right 55% of the time would that be acceptable? If not, what number would be acceptable?

  15. #105
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    21,354
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    In my first post about the video I said the cop acted like an idiot. What else needs to be said?
    After having gone back and looked, you did indeed say the cop acted like an a-hole in your second response of the video.

    But I'm trying to figure out your larger point. Do you think what he did is acceptable? Should that be how cops handle those situations? If not, and the cop incorrectly handled that situation in your mind and will not face any sort of penalty for his actions, doesn't that lend credence to people who say that police aren't held accountable and don't face consequences for their actions? Doesn't it lend credence to the OP's assertion that there is a police violence problem if a cop can act like a-hole, kill a person, and not face any punishment for it?

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •