2 Sides To Police Shootings

Aussie

Ima da Sheriff
Staff member
You can wallow in your game of semantics all you want................More teachers than you are aware of are walking the halls of American schools armed, & most of those schools have signs posted at their entrances stating such. The criminal cowards are more apt to pass up those schools than take the chance that the teacher they might encounter in the hall is armed......just might shoot him/her before they achieve their heinous glory.


As far as one of those teachers going rogue & taking out a few kids......everyday is an unknown......these days present their own challenges. Freedom & Liberty has it's price, & when the authorities (the school authorities, not the government) permit a select few teachers & or security to be armed in their schools, they know the potential risks and are willing to accept them.....don't expect them to get on the phone & call ScoMo, or any other Australian, or 'Sleepy Joe' Biden & Kamalatoe for permission to do so any time soon....... :50/50
That school must have atrocious outcomes in Grammar! Anyone see the error?
 

DreamRyderX

Active member
That school must have atrocious outcomes in Grammar! Anyone see the error?
Those that need to understand the message will, & so will the coward criminals......that's all that counts.......Most importantly, the teachers have the Right to Defend their students if necessary, because when the police are needed immediately, they won't arrive until it's probably too late......Parkland saw the cops arrive in a short few minutes.......well after the students were already shot dead, or dying of their fatal wounds......
 

hatty

cynical profane bastard
My guns were designed to protect life.
lol! you have got to be kidding?!...... they were designed for one reason and one reason alone............

The opposite of what you just wrote!

you americans are a bit dense at times

If protecting life means shooting someone, being robbed at gunpoint, raped at gunpoint, shot by a cop or your own child, or having them pick it up and shooting your other child........

or one day you just feel a bit sad.

I wouldn't feel that fucking protected!!! especially as your firearms, as you claim are locked in a safe...... so when some cunt with the tools you love, bursts into your house in the middle of the night and all your firearms are locked in a safe....... "aaahhh fuck Audrey.... what was the combination again?..... hold on armed home invader while i spend the next 5 minutes opening the safe" just sit tight.

It isn't fucking protection

just innocent dead people..... protection my arse!
 
Last edited:

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
As for disrespecting a corpse...?? Were you being sarcastic JS.? I can only assume you mean't it as a wry comment on the vagaries of power in play in our society
No , I was serious ... disrespecting a corpse has nothing to do with self defense. It becomes about revenge.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Let's say my attempt to scare him off fails, and I have to shoot. The police come and investigate. It is a clear-cut case of self-defense. The police do not arrest me, and they do not recommend charges against me, and the District Attorney agrees. Guess what? This gets reported as a burglary or attempted robbery or whatever applies, but not an assault or murder with a firearm. The burglary or attempted robbery will be cataloged into the data system, but not the shooting.
All homicides are investigated. But not all homicides are crimes(justifiable, excusable, accidental). Police can't just take your word, that everything you say is the truth. Like police, criminals also lie. Hence why, an incident report with all relevant details and evidence must be filed. The cops may decide not to arrest you at the scene. But, the DA can certainly decide to issue an arrest warrant later.

Let's just define what is reported, and in what category.

"The definition of Homicide excludes the following situations: deaths caused by negligence, suicide, or accident; justifiable homicides; and attempts to murder or assaults to murder, which are counted as Aggravated Assaults.".

"Justifiable homicide—Certain willful killings must be reported as justifiable or excusable. In the UCR Program, justifiable homicide is defined as and limited to:

The killing of a felon by a peace officer in the line of duty.
The killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.

Because these killings are determined through law enforcement investigation to be justifiable, they are tabulated separately from murder and nonnegligent manslaughter.
More information about justifiable homicide is furnished in the Expanded Homicide Data section and in Expanded Homicide Data Table 14, “Justifiable Homicide by Weapon, Law Enforcement, 2015–2019,” and Expanded Homicide Data Table 15, “Justifiable Homicide by Weapon, Private Citizen, 2015–2019.”.


As you can see, the incidents you mentioned, ARE reported and tabulated. Under "supplementary homicides", if a homicide is the result. Or, under "aggravated assault", if a homicide is NOT the result. So, unless you can provide some other evidence, homicides(justifiable or not), will NOT be categorized as a burglary, or an attempted robbery.


Read the category about using a gun to threaten someone("scare them off"). So yes, these stats ARE tabulated. That is, if the agencies choose to report them. Since all crime reporting by LEA's is completely voluntary.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
You can wallow in your game of semantics all you want................More teachers than you are aware of are walking the halls of American schools armed, & most of those schools have signs posted at their entrances stating such. The criminal cowards are more apt to pass up those schools than take the chance that the teacher they might encounter in the hall is armed......just might shoot him/her before they achieve their heinous glory.


As far as one of those teachers going rogue & taking out a few kids......everyday is an unknown......these days present their own challenges. Freedom & Liberty has it's price, & when the authorities (the school authorities, not the government) permit a select few teachers & or security to be armed in their schools, they know the potential risks and are willing to accept them.....don't expect them to get on the phone & call ScoMo, or any other Australian, or 'Sleepy Joe' Biden & Kamalatoe for permission to do so any time soon....... :50/50
So, you can use semantics and misinformation, to inflate and misrepresent the number of states, that are allowing school staff members to carry and use guns on school grounds. But I can't use semantics to correct you? Kind of a double standard, right?

Do you really think that Stephen Paddock gave a shit, how many people were armed, when he killed 60 people, and wounded 411 more people in Vegas? Of course not.

Do you think that Adam Lanza would gave a shit if the entire Sandy Hook ES was armed or not? Of course not. In fact, instead of 28 people dead, there could have been a lot more people killed in the crossfire.

How would cops be able to determine who the shooter is, how many shooters there are, and who are not the shooter(s)? Especially, since most are already frightened of unarmed people. Also, if criminals know that you are armed, they will just be MORE prepared, and come with bigger guns. Arming everyone is NOT the answer. IMHO

You are delusional, or just watch too much tv. Especially, if you think that a few warning signs outside the school, would ever deter anyone, who is gladly willing to sacrifice his/her life to kill everyone in the school.

You also need to learn the meaning of the 10th Amendment. You would then know WHY, it is unnecessary for the states to get permission from the fed. government to arm its schools.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
My guns were designed to protect life.

There is a big difference between what a gun is designed to do, and what is the purpose of a gun. One is objective, and the other is subjective. A car is designed to transport people from point A to point B. But with over 30K people killed each year by cars, one could argue that its purpose is to kill people. A ladder is designed for one purpose, but it kills 300 people, and injure over 160K people every year(in the US). Is its purpose also to kill people?

Guns are designed to create a small explosion, to throw out a small missile, in as flat a trajectory as possible, for as far a distance as possible, to cause as much physical damage to a target as possible. This is what the physics and mechanics allow a gun to do.

I say, that one purpose of a gun, is to kill other living lifeforms, whenever the trigger is pulled. This causes severe, or fatal impact trauma to any living organism. These are the 2 indisputable fact about the design of a gun, and the inevitable outcome whenever a gun is used.

The only way a gun can protects life, is when it acts as a shield, or, to not have one in the first place.

If protecting a life involves taking a life, then this is just another euphemism, like "collateral damage", or, "terminate with extreme prejudice". Even committing a crime under duress, or threat of one's own life, is limited to taking another life.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
We have over 1.6 million civilians legally carrying concealed handguns in Texas. The crime conviction rate for licensed concealed carriers is far less than 1/10 of the rate of crime convictions for the average Texan. We aren't the problem and are often the solution or at least a deterrent to crime. Licensed gun carriers kill about the same amount of criminals as the police do every year in TX. I'm talking about "justifiable homicide". I don't like to see anybody die, but if I must choose between a criminal or a victim then the criminal made his own bed.

Texas keeps really good statistics.

experienced are you..? in firing a weapon at a human.? Shot someone have you.? note i said shot not killed...

Had due cause did you.? Hmm?
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
You can equate your family's lives with the lives of criminals, but I don't.
I think you misunderstand me. What I was saying was, that if someone puts a gun to your head, and tells you to shot and kill your friend, YOU WILL BY CULPABLE IF YOU DO. Even with a gun at your head, the LAW says that you can be excused for doing anything UNDER DURESS, except take a life.

Since I don't know which post you are responding to, can you please point out WHERE I was equating my families lives, with the lives of criminals?
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
You really need to get the story correct, before coming to the wrong conclusions. She was sentenced to 9 years for Manslaughter. And, 18 months for Interfering with a Corpse. Both of which she actually did. Clearly the facts did NOT support her claim of self-defense. Or, Justifiable Manslaughter/Homicide.
That wasn't MY post .. tyvm (thank you very much) .. did I just make tyvm up.?
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
No , I was serious ... disrespecting a corpse has nothing to do with self defense. It becomes about revenge.
Prosecutors LOVE to use 'revenge' as motivation.. it suits their view, and their brief.
I respectfully disagree with your point, EVEN IF you took it from trial records .. it just means she needed a better Legal rep.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
experienced are you..? in firing a weapon at a human.? Shot someone have you.? note i said shot not killed...

Had due cause did you.? Hmm?

From their deafening silence,

I seriously doubt that any of these gun-rights advocates, have ever used their guns in self-defense.
I seriously doubt that any of them have even been threaten with a gun.
I seriously doubt that any of them have ever been a victim of any gun violence.
I seriously doubt that any of them have ever used their gun to protect their family or friends.
And, I seriously, seriously doubt, that any of them have ever killed anyone with a gun.

If they have, then they would never use a gun again!! Unless, this is their true nature anyway. Even psychopaths, mass murders, and terrorists, given enough time, will feel guilt and remorse for their victims.
 

Texan

Active member
From their deafening silence,

I seriously doubt that any of these gun-rights advocates, have ever used their guns in self-defense.
I seriously doubt that any of them have even been threaten with a gun.
I seriously doubt that any of them have ever been a victim of any gun violence.
I seriously doubt that any of them have ever used their gun to protect their family or friends.
And, I seriously, seriously doubt, that any of them have ever killed anyone with a gun.

If they have, then they would never use a gun again!! Unless, this is their true nature anyway. Even psychopaths, mass murders, and terrorists, given enough time, will feel guilt and remorse for their victims.
Since I've never seen an upholstered gun outside of a gun range and never been threatened with a gun in my 54 years in America, maybe the 2A isn't the problem.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
Prosecutors LOVE to use 'revenge' as motivation.. it suits their view, and their brief.
I respectfully disagree with your point, EVEN IF you took it from trial records .. it just means she needed a better Legal rep.
prosecutors love to use it because there is no other logical reason for it. Desecrating a corpse has nothing to do with self defense. It's already dead. It's about lashing out for past grievances ..
 
Top