Crime Texan wouldn't mind his own business... SHOOTS a thief DEAD

dirtypablo said:
Also lol at you morons talking shit about the fact that @Siver! is from the UK. You idiots do realize that the UK has substantially less violent crime than the US, right? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that their population isn't full of people obsessed with the glorification of violence?
Click to expand...
Well for one, they don't. UK has more than double the non-homocide violent crime rate of the US.
 
dirtypablo said:
Do you understand that this isn't a formal debate where every post needs to be a logical proof?

I was giving examples of the type of stupidity that is rampant on this forum, the fact that you took that as a logical proof is just one more example of that stupidity.



And oh look, another example.
Click to expand...

Oh did the UK not have a global empire of genocide and slavery? Teach me, oh wise one.
 
Cajun said:
Guess chase unless challenged. But even without knowledge of texas laws, would have to lean on @nhbbear here. Most cops shooting suspects in the back don't fare well but I don't know that law here. Ultimately I feel no pity on the robber. But reminds me of the guy in Texas that shot the robbers while watching the neighbors house while out of town. Knowing when to use deadly force is a thing.
Click to expand...

I am playing catch-up here on a lot of posts. I ruptured two discs in my back. This is after I had back surgery a few years ago and had to retire from being a cop. I am not getting paid atm and I am in constant pain. Have been in the emergency room 3 or 4 times since November. As someone who has been shot at and stabbed and seen years worth of death and carnage, I am absolutely not one bit embarrassed to admit and discuss my issues with PTSD and depression. Due to that and being in tons of pain, I backed out of all social media for some stretches of time. One asshole, @Joshuaace was even insulting me about the depression non-stop. I knew the right call was to just walk away for a while. I am doing a bit better now both physically and mentally. I get minor surgery in 22 days after getting MRIs, physical therapy, and have been able to be a little active in the gym. This has drastically improved my mental state as well. Still not getting paid and it hurts financially.

Ok, so, shooting someone in the back is covered mainly under two cases under the fourth amendment (any use of force is considered a “seizure” under the 4th amendment to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures). Those two cases (there are others, but these are the biggies) are graham v Connor and Tennessee v garner. Without a giant ass post explaining the graham factors(there are 6-7 depending on who you ask or quantify them) use of force has to be proportional to the threat facing the officers or the general public. This is ALWAYS viewed through the lens of a “reasonable officer” and ALWAYS based upon only the information available to the officer at that very moment and NEVER allowing the use of “20/20 hindsight.” What this means is that if a suspect pulls a bb-gun on an officer and the officer shoots the person dead, you can’t go back and say “it was only a toy!!!!”

TN v garner covers the use of deadly force and came about after cops shot a fleeing felon in the back as he ran away. Due to this case, officers can only shoot a fleeing subject if they are an active and immediate threat to another person/officers/community. You could easily shoot an active shooter in the back if they were fleeing without much of an issue. It won’t affect the idiots protesting, but it should matter when discussing charges against an officer.

You have to keep in mind that these two cases apply when looking at criminal charges against an officer. They do not necessarily stop a lawsuit or prevent a city from settling a lawsuit. Different states also have different laws and different departments have different policies that also may affect how the officer is judged.

As for self-defense involving a civilian, that is entirely dependent upon the state laws. Whether it is a castle doctrine or stand your ground state matters.

Hope this clears this up, at least in terms of police action. Disclosure, I did not read the op yet or read the thread. Don’t know if I will have that chance as I have physical therapy in fifteen mins. I should have time after that, but generally, people ask me for clarification on police issues. That is my area of focus. As for civilians, the state laws govern whether it is self defense or a crime. I know my state codes and know the difference between the murder charges and manslaughters, batteries/assaults type of thing, but don’t know each and every state code or departmental policies, and rarely do I try to look those up for each, individual case.
 
nhbbear said:
I am playing catch-up here on a lot of posts. I ruptured two discs in my back. This is after I had back surgery a few years ago and had to retire from being a cop. I am not getting paid atm and I am in constant pain. Have been in the emergency room 3 or 4 times since November. As someone who has been shot at and stabbed and seen years worth of death and carnage, I am absolutely not one bit embarrassed to admit and discuss my issues with PTSD and depression. Due to that and being in tons of pain, I backed out of all social media for some stretches of time. One asshole, @Joshuaace was even insulting me about the depression non-stop. I knew the right call was to just walk away for a while. I am doing a bit better now both physically and mentally. I get minor surgery in 22 days after getting MRIs, physical therapy, and have been able to be a little active in the gym. This has drastically improved my mental state as well. Still not getting paid and it hurts financially.

Ok, so, shooting someone in the back is covered mainly under two cases under the fourth amendment (any use of force is considered a “seizure” under the 4th amendment to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures). Those two cases (there are others, but these are the biggies) are graham v Connor and Tennessee v garner. Without a giant ass post explaining the graham factors(there are 6-7 depending on who you ask or quantify them) use of force has to be proportional to the threat facing the officers or the general public. This is ALWAYS viewed through the lens of a “reasonable officer” and ALWAYS based upon only the information available to the officer at that very moment and NEVER allowing the use of “20/20 hindsight.” What this means is that if a suspect pulls a bb-gun on an officer and the officer shoots the person dead, you can’t go back and say “it was only a toy!!!!”

TN v garner covers the use of deadly force and came about after cops shot a fleeing felon in the back as he ran away. Due to this case, officers can only shoot a fleeing subject if they are an active and immediate threat to another person/officers/community. You could easily shoot an active shooter in the back if they were fleeing without much of an issue. It won’t affect the idiots protesting, but it should matter when discussing charges against an officer.

You have to keep in mind that these two cases apply when looking at criminal charges against an officer. They do not necessarily stop a lawsuit or prevent a city from settling a lawsuit. Different states also have different laws and different departments have different policies that also may affect how the officer is judged.

As for self-defense involving a civilian, that is entirely dependent upon the state laws. Whether it is a castle doctrine or stand your ground state matters.

Hope this clears this up, at least in terms of police action. Disclosure, I did not read the op yet or read the thread. Don’t know if I will have that chance as I have physical therapy in fifteen mins. I should have time after that, but generally, people ask me for clarification on police issues. That is my area of focus. As for civilians, the state laws govern whether it is self defense or a crime. I know my state codes and know the difference between the murder charges and manslaughters, batteries/assaults type of thing, but don’t know each and every state code or departmental policies, and rarely do I try to look those up for each, individual case.
Click to expand...

Why are you crying and lying about me in a thread I'm not participating in? You are acting like a 3rd grade girl. "boo hoo, he....sob....sniffle..called me Bird Brain." Show TS some respect and don't derail his thread with your pettiness.

Meanwhile there is a video in YOUR thread awaiting a response from you. The Girl has been in jail for months. The Police that shot at her haven't been charged with anything. You are the self proclaimed expert on the use of force. Do a little research on Kyrieanna Liles and tell me why she is in jail and not the Stormtroopers that opened fire on her. But please do it in the thread you abandoned.
 
nostradumbass said:
Well for one, they don't. UK has more than double the non-homocide violent crime rate of the US.
Click to expand...
... [T]he incidence of serious violent crime per capita is between three and seven times as high in the United States as in England and Wales. This parallels the comparative data on homicide; existing comparisons with Canada and New Zealand lend further weight to the claim that levels of serious violence in the United States are distinctively high.
 
I Am Legion said:
I see citizens stepping up against crime every day in NY. We are headed towards vigilante justice because the liberal DAs have let us down.
Click to expand...

ba0571efe127ae32689af7443d2b7163


I watched the video.

(1) Damn, that guy is a good shot to hit a dude running like that so cleanly. It's a tough shot.
(2) Yeah... that dude was retreating, but who knows if he would have stopped and shot? It's not a clean shoot, but may be hard to make a case.
 
Shooting someone over stealing a wallet is insane. A wallet isn't more important than a life, and theft isn't the crime that murder is. There is no moral consistency.
 
Last edited:
Damn. Legality of the shoot aside, that was a damn good shot. Hitting someone running perpendicular to you is one of the hardest things to do with a gun

On topic I don’t think that was self defense. Robber was fleeing so not an immediate deadly threat to himself or the guy he robbed even if robber had just assaulted someone with a gun

If the shooter thus far has been smart and said absolutely nothing to the police, I think a good lawyer might be able to argue the shooter feared that after seeing the robber assault someone with a deadly weapon that he was running in another persons direction whom he feared grivieous bodily harm for.

In Texas, a plea of self defense means the prosecution must prove you, or someone else, was not in immediate bodily danger. That’s harder for prosecution than states where the defendant has to prove they were acting in defense.
 
Last edited:
650lb Sumo said:
... [T]he incidence of serious violent crime per capita is between three and seven times as high in the United States as in England and Wales. This parallels the comparative data on homicide; existing comparisons with Canada and New Zealand lend further weight to the claim that levels of serious violence in the United States are distinctively high.
Click to expand...
Right, we're not talking about black people killing each other, we're talking about violent crime, which the UK refers to as "injury against the person".

PolitiFact even ran to the defense of the UK, and the best they could do was more than double the rate for fewer categories. And that's without mentioning that our black population that we have 40 million of compared to UK's 2 million iscat such a preposterous rate that it doubles the entire national rate.


THIS IS just England and Wales, not even counting Scotland, which would make it higher.

www.statista.com

Violent crimes in England and Wales 2023 | Statista

Violent crimes in England and Wales increased to more than 2.11 million offences in 2022/23, according to police recorded crime statistics, a huge increase of more than 1.5 million when compared with 2012/13, when there were just 601,141 violent crime offences.
www.statista.com www.statista.com

(We should note that the United Kingdom includes Scotland and Northern Ireland, but the numbers in the meme appear to be based only on crime in England and Wales, which are calculated separately.)

For England and Wales, we added together three crime categories: "violence against the person, with injury," "most serious sexual crime," and "robbery." This produced a rate of 775 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

For the United States, we used the FBI’s four standard categories for violent crime that Bier cited. We came up with a rate of 383 violent crimes per 100,000 people
 
Richmma80 said:
So a man steals a cheap wallet, but this Texas guy SHOOTS him dead. Then flees the scene.

The kicker is this murderer is NOT charged for killing another human being.

Texas needs to change their backwards laws from the 1800s


Click to expand...

Steals a cheap wallet really means commits armed robbery and pistol whips the victim.
You’re a piece of shit for siding with criminals.
 
Sano said:
Shooting someone over stealing a wallet is insane. A wallet isn't more important than a life, and theft isn't the crime that murder is. There is no moral consistency.
Click to expand...

My brother in Christ, my breakfast is more important than some people's lives. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
nostradumbass said:
Right, we're not talking about black people killing each other, we're talking about violent crime, which the UK refers to as "injury against the person".

PolitiFact even ran to the defense of the UK, and the best they could do was more than double the rate for fewer categories. And that's without mentioning that our black population that we have 40 million of compared to UK's 2 million iscat such a preposterous rate that it doubles the entire national rate.


THIS IS just England and Wales, not even counting Scotland, which would make it higher.

www.statista.com

Violent crimes in England and Wales 2023 | Statista

Violent crimes in England and Wales increased to more than 2.11 million offences in 2022/23, according to police recorded crime statistics, a huge increase of more than 1.5 million when compared with 2012/13, when there were just 601,141 violent crime offences.
www.statista.com www.statista.com

(We should note that the United Kingdom includes Scotland and Northern Ireland, but the numbers in the meme appear to be based only on crime in England and Wales, which are calculated separately.)

For England and Wales, we added together three crime categories: "violence against the person, with injury," "most serious sexual crime," and "robbery." This produced a rate of 775 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

For the United States, we used the FBI’s four standard categories for violent crime that Bier cited. We came up with a rate of 383 violent crimes per 100,000 people
Click to expand...

(1) You're doing the thing the gun nuts do when confronted with gun crime statistics, saying people's deaths don't count because they weren't human if they were black, Democrat voters, Republican voters but lived in a Democrat city etc. You just limited it to black in this case. Violent crimes by blacks don't count!

(2) Why exclude murder from violent crimes anyway? Pretty spurious.

(3) Your link doesn't say any of what you said. It does show a 250% increase in recorded violent crime in England and Wales in ten years, which is probably mostly due to them changing the definitions or investigating more, that kind of thing. I doubt the level of violent crime has increased that much.

(4) I don't accept the premise that Scotland has higher violent crime than England & Wales.

(5) You would have to have learning difficulties to believe that the UK has more than double the violent crime rate the US has. The alternative being you are pretending to believe that to defend your ideology.

(6) It seems that what you would think is the main problem with this kind of comparison, is in fact a major problem - the stats aren't immediately comparable. Presumably if you're a legit academic with a research team and special software etc. you can dig down and get some rough but useful comparisons out of them. But I checked the UN page on Violent and Sexual Crime and here are their stats (I included Iceland and Guatemala for comparison as very safe and very dangerous countries). Note that at least on my computer there is something wrong with the display of the page so I can't scroll right to the right hand edge of the table. I can get almost there and I took the most recent stats I could see.

Also the categories are the same, but some countries have more listed and some fewer. Some have the crime listed but the entire row is blank - underlining the problems with comparisons. I've only included Serious Assault and Rape because those are the only ones the USA has listed.

Violent Offences - Rate per 100,000 population

Serious Assault

England and Wales 925
Guatemala 129
Iceland 35
USA 244

Sexual Violence: Rape

England and Wales 99
Guatemala 42
Iceland 75
USA 43

Do you believe that the Serious Assault rate is 279% higher in the UK than the USA, and 617% higher than in Guatemala? Do you believe that the rape rate is 74% higher in Iceland than in the USA? The England and Wales Serious Assault figures are also more than ten times higher than those for Scotland and Northern Ireland and the rape figures are about double.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LeonardoBjj
Economy Why a small China-made EV has global auto execs and politicians on edge
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
2K
Big Nasty Edison
Big Nasty Edison

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,147
Messages
55,470,174
Members
174,787
Latest member
Biden's Diaper

Share this page

Back
Top