Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

More Shooting Stuff: Murder or DefenseFollow

#52 May 03 2014 at 8:23 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Do you read Bob Loblaw's Law Blog?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#53 May 03 2014 at 8:46 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
No, because that guy is terrible.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#54 May 03 2014 at 1:01 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
Quote:
If any of this sounds like reasonable self-defense or defense of dwelling to any of you, I don’t suppose there’s anything I could say that would change your mind.

But I can assure you that it doesn’t sound like reasonable self-defense or defense of dwelling to the law of self-defense. It sounds like deliberate and premeditated murder.

The law of self-defense is not some “murder algorithm” by which you can lawfully take another person’s life just because their conduct has checked off particular boxes. The use of deadly force is always, ALWAYS premised on necessity.

Preparing a killing zone beforehand and waiting patiently for your prey to enter that zone does not ring of necessity. It rings of premeditation.


Anyway, some stuff to consider.[/quote]

Dunno, the necessity is to get rid of the intruder. Do I need to go to jail because I am actually following DHS directives and am prepared for the end of the world?

____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#55 May 03 2014 at 1:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
angrymnk wrote:
Dunno, the necessity is to get rid of the intruder.

Well, no. Per the other cites, necessity would be to prevent serious harm/death to you or prevent a (new) felony that can only be prevented via use of deadly force. At least if you don't want to be convicted of murder.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#56 May 04 2014 at 9:23 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
I don't see it. And frankly, it's a nearly impossible legal standard to uphold. But that's what some people seem to be trying to argue here.

Nope, it's really easy, actually. If you demonstrate mens rea around killing someone, then kill them, it's murder. If you don't, it's not. Property rights don't shield you from that. What's the difficult part? There is no state where this isn't murder, it's murder federally, it's a fucking slam dunk case in every jurisdiction. In Florida? Clearly murder. Texas? Murder. Wyoming? Murder. Iowa? Murder.

I bring up Iowa because when you take Torts in law school there's a famous case, Katko v. Briney, which took place in Iowa. You remember that from law school right? HAHAHAAHahahahaha, ahahhaha...hahah. I kid, I kid. Anyway, you'll pretend to have heard of it and understand it, so let's all play along. Guy thinks people are stealing from his unoccupied hunting camp. Has "No trespassing" signs, it's clearly marked as his property. Yadda. He keeps finding things missing. So eventually he gets the bright idea of setting up a shotgun aimed at the door with a tripwire attached to the door (it's more complex than that, but that's the idea). Guy comes to rob the house, gets shot. The robber sues for the tort of being injured. Court rules he *can* recover damages from the owner of the property? Why?

Dun dun dun: Very famous legal phrase incoming:

"the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property"

So, not really related to this case directly, but still a good story. The guy that got shot was awarded $30k.

The primary issue for this case is the lack of jeopardy of the murderer. If he had gone through less pains to make himself *safe* he might plausibly have been seen to be acting absent mens rea and thus likely outside of criminal culpability. Clearly that wouldn't have been as satisfying, though. Primary problem for him was magical broken thinking of the sort you peddle where it didn't occur to him that this was clearly murder. If he had better understood the law, he would have disabled the intruders and effected a citizens arrest. Released the video, and been a hero far and wide, possibly working it into a Fox News contributorship.

Too fucking stupid, though. Wanted to Rambo it up and get his man card, I guess. Now he'll probably be raped in prison by men very similar to those he murdered. Man, prison rape is the funniest! Sorry, Rambo!
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#57 May 04 2014 at 9:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
If he had better understood the law, he would have disabled the intruders and effected a citizens arrest.


Or gotten a dog, or fixed his garage door/window. Not to engage in victim blaming, but if your garage has been broken into before, there are obvious steps you can take before you set up a death trap.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#58 May 04 2014 at 11:46 AM Rating: Good
**
505 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Man, prison rape is the funniest! Sorry, Rambo!


They say the only thing worse than being gang raped in prison is...realizing you like it.
____________________________
Never regret.To regret is to assume.
#59 May 04 2014 at 1:40 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
I bring up Iowa because when you take Torts in law school there's a famous case, Katko v. Briney,


They even teach that one over here, mostly I think because it's pretty funny. Come to think of it, almost all the US cases we covered seem to have been selected to paint your country as a land of entitled psychopaths. This one, the Pepsi Jet case, the severed finger case... Good times.
#60 May 04 2014 at 1:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
We ARE a nation of entitled psychopaths. Why do you think we couldn't get along in any of our mother countries?

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#61 May 05 2014 at 6:21 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
He had cameras and digital recorders all over the house. The guy could have easily prevented a break-in with a bit of this technology and/or a loud dog.

Quote:
“It’s all fun, cool, exciting, highly profitable, until somebody kills you,” Smith can be heard whispering on the audio recording.
Quote:
Because I try to be a decent person, they think I’m a patsy, I’m a sucker. They think I’m there for them to take advantage of — is that the reward for being a good person?” Smith whispers in the recording.


Smiley: looney
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#62 May 05 2014 at 7:11 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Samira wrote:
We ARE a nation of entitled psychopaths.
More sociopaths, really.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 320 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (320)