2 Sides To Police Shootings

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
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.
That was interesting about the FBI stats. I didn't know they counted justifiable homicides.

I couldn't find the part about threatening (scaring them off).

I would think that the 1510 justifiable homicides would be fewer than the justifiable woundings of attackers but I don't know if those are counted anywhere. I know they happen, though. It is not uncommon for the criminal to check into a hospital after being wounded, often leading to their arrest. And I would think there would be an awful lot of missed shots/warning shots that drove off attackers. I know that this also happens. And I suspect there are a lot more mere displays of firearms that have discouraged attackers as well.

And then of course there are all of the crimes that simply are not even attempted because of the possibility that the potential victim is armed, but it is impossible to prove a negative.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
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 ..
I'd like to reply .. but perhaps now isn't the time.
Just to say, you have a very limited imagination.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
it is a very British thing to do.. make SURE your enemy will never return.
a primal thing.. nothing as simply explained as 'revenge'.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
it is a very British thing to do.. make SURE your enemy will never return.
a primal thing.. nothing as simply explained as 'revenge'.
If they're dead they can't return. No matter how much they might wish to. We're not talking about shooting or stabbing someone 'once more' to make sure they're dead. She dragged the body for a mile with the car.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
I'm talking about fear.
Fear must be overcome, whatever it takes.
YOU have NO idea... just some outrage. Religious is it.? The outrage.?

Is that worse than castrating the rapist after he is dead.?
Or the same.? Just wondering.
 

mothra

Administrator
Staff member
If they're dead they can't return. No matter how much they might wish to. We're not talking about shooting or stabbing someone 'once more' to make sure they're dead. She dragged the body for a mile with the car.

I'm trying to remember the case, didn't he threaten her daughter?

I know it's extreme but surely it falls under "crimes of passion"? I can understand why someone would be so royally pissed off that they would resort to such a thing.

I think she should have been ordered to undergo intensive therapy, not a given a custodial sentence.
 

SethBullock

Moderator
Staff member
I'm trying to remember the case, didn't he threaten her daughter?

I know it's extreme but surely it falls under "crimes of passion"? I can understand why someone would be so royally pissed off that they would resort to such a thing.

I think she should have been ordered to undergo intensive therapy, not a given a custodial sentence.
I can understand it too.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
YOU have NO idea... just some outrage. Religious is it.? The outrage.?
Outrage? The only outrage is you .. As soon as anyone disagree with you you lose the plot and start attacking them. And not just with me or on this topic either. I'm not outraged, I just don't agree that mutilating a corpse has anything to do with self defence.

Is that worse than castrating the rapist after he is dead.?
Or the same.? Just wondering.
Lets clarify something here before I answer ... are you saying that you think anyone disagreeing with you is comparable to mutilating a corpse?

I'm trying to remember the case, didn't he threaten her daughter?
I'm not sure as it was a while ago but I think you are correct.

I know it's extreme but surely it falls under "crimes of passion"? I can understand why someone would be so royally pissed off that they would resort to such a thing
and more often than not, crimes of passion are punishable by law.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
I'm trying to remember the case, didn't he threaten her daughter?

I know it's extreme but surely it falls under "crimes of passion"? I can understand why someone would be so royally pissed off that they would resort to such a thing.

I think she should have been ordered to undergo intensive therapy, not a given a custodial sentence.
Post #236 on this thread. I listed 3 reference sites for this incident. Why is mutilating/disrespecting a corpse so relevant here? I would have thought, that being sentenced to 9 years for manslaughter, a bit MORE relevant. Seems more adjunct than relevant, IMHO.
 
Last edited:

pinkeye

Wonder woman
I agree. Seems Mr Smith has some major issues with mutilating corpses.. not so much why , tho.

Bit off-topic yeah.?
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
I couldn't find the part about threatening (scaring them off).
They are listed under "Aggravated Assault". If you point a gun at someone, threaten someone with a gun, or shoot and miss someone with a gun(to scare them off), it is still listed under "Aggravated Assault". The reason why, is that if you would have completed the assault, it would have led to death or grievous bodily injuries. Of course, we are assuming that law enforcement agencies actually loges the incident, and reports it to the FBI. This is NOT always the case.

Aggravated Assault is the the unlawful ATTACK by any person(s) on another person(s), with the intention of causing grievous bodily injuries or death. Whether the assault is actually carried out, justified or not is irrelevant. It only matters what the OUTCOME would be, IF the assault was actually carried out. Throwing a ping pong ball at someone and missing, is very different than throwing a bottle of acid at someone and missing. Just as threatening someone with a feather-duster, is very different than threatening them with a gun.

Whether these actions are deemed justified or unjustified, attempted or carried-out, will all be determined later by a police investigations, or by the courts. NOT by speculations, or any other self-confirming unsupported personal beliefs. But all, should be logged as stats.

Clearly we can't provide stats on the number of people who have THOUGHT about committing crimes. But, then changed their minds for WHATEVER REASONS! Or, the number of missed and warning shots that were taken. Which would be a nightmare to discern anyway. But we CAN make valid and logical interpretations, about the data/stats that we do know.

So, you certainly could by right about your assumptions. But, more importantly, you could also be wrong. But without data and stats, it is all just a belief/opinion.

My point was, that most people who claim that people should carry guns to protect themselves, their families, others, and their property, are usually people who have no actual experience to support their claims/assertions. They simply parrot platitudes, and fear mongering sound bites, to justify their own self-serving narratives. Most people don't even know someone close to then, who was a victim of gun violence(other than suicide). Everything they've learned, comes from the tube, or from the NRA! In fact, once you eliminate all suicides, gang-related, crime-related, cop-related, race-related, domestic-related, and poverty-related homicides, there is absolutely no reasons left, to justify the need for over 400M guns in America.
 

Texan

Active member
Yep, if you eliminate all crime, then there is no reason to carry a gun. There is still a right to keep and bear arms.
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Yep, if you eliminate all crime, then there is no reason to carry a gun. There is still a right to keep and bear arms.
Firstly Texan, It was a Supreme Court Ruling(actually 2 rulings) that allows CITIZENS to possess guns on their person, or in their homes. NOT THE 2ND AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION. This ruling was an extension of the right to privacy, guaranteed by the 14th AMENDMENT. This right to privacy, legally allows women to get an abortion, men to watch porn, and all citizens to own and possess guns. NOT THE 2ND AMENDMENT! Which clearly referenced a well-regulated and ready STATE militia.

Secondly, my comments were only to illustrate just how logically flawed any arguments is, that claim guns are needed to protect citizens from becoming victims of crimes. Or, that they must carry a gun for self-defense. You may feel that without a gun, you will become a helpless victim of crime. But unfortunately, the stats/data just don't support this fear.

I think that many people need guns to placate their fears, insecurities, anxieties, and low self-esteem. And, many are far too immature to understand the huge responsibility that goes with owning a gun. Think about the person who was bullied most of his life. Should he/she own a gun?

Here are some statistics for your perusal about gun deaths between 2015-2019.

 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
of more concern should be that you don't have an issue with it
you think?

why?
corpses are by definition, DEAD.

Only the hypothetical family and friends may have an issue. Culturally..?
...
perhaps. So what is your concern about this specifically.?
 

mothra

Administrator
Staff member
Yep, if you eliminate all crime, then there is no reason to carry a gun. There is still a right to keep and bear arms.

Yeah but the kicker is, in your country that applies to the mentally ill, the desperate, the bad guys, those in immediate crisis, etc.

Your suicide rate by gun should be enough for you to want to regulate them. Apologies, but i hold a rather dim view of people who would prioritise their "rights", written long ago for different weaponry under different conditions, over the very safety of their fellow citizens.

But i swear, there's no reasoning with you Americans about your guns., You're all mad.
 

DreamRyderX

Active member
Yeah but the kicker is, in your country that applies to the mentally ill, the desperate, the bad guys, those in immediate crisis, etc.

Your suicide rate by gun should be enough for you to want to regulate them. Apologies, but i hold a rather dim view of people who would prioritise their "rights", written long ago for different weaponry under different conditions, over the very safety of their fellow citizens.

But i swear, there's no reasoning with you Americans about your guns., You're all mad.
The unfortunate deaths of the innocent lend all Americans a reason, a reason for the living........to pause, reflect, & mourn for those fallen.....those fallen that will surely be deeply missed.....but they change nothing, except the redoubling of efforts & resolve to continue on........our ability to carry on against all adversity makes us stronger..... for it will surely come to pass our way again........

I said it before, & I will say it again......

After the period of mourning has subsided, Americans will always stand up tall, dust themselves off, pay homage to those fallen, & undaunted, they will move forward with their Freedoms & Liberties intact, prepared to take on the challenges of whatever might come their way..........never forgetting those that have passed.........it's the American Way, & always has been for hundreds of years........The Price of Freedom never comes without a cost, & dear as it may be, it is a price that must be paid so all posterity can live on in the warmth of the Freedom & Liberty we Americans hold now, & have always held dearest......



So call us Americans what you may.............after all it must be frustrating that you have no real say in the matter that can possibly affect the Rights WE Americans have.......so so frustrating.......for you.

It is WE the American People who have the Right to Keep & Bear Arms.........not you.....Our Constitution affirms our natural Right to self-defend......does yours?........nope.......but you don't care do you......I pity all you beautiful, kind, & gentle people for that.

The Right to Keep & Bear Arms is OUR American Right, & only We the American People have anything to say about it, & many, many millions upon millions of us will never trade in our Freedom & Liberty......regardless our cost!

So, get used to the idea......no amount of whinging downunder can affect OUR American Rights.....Zero.....Zilch....Nada.....

That said, I so do respect your opinion, as I respect the Right of all persons to speak their mind, no matter how irrelevant & immaterial your words are regarding the matter of American Rights!
 
Last edited:
Top