FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[ISiddiqui]

A) It does not. And if Victim was white and Criminal was black it would not matter to society either.

B) Anything Victim may or not be able to do does not make him responsible or accountable or to blame for the situation that caused his death. (And again if Victim was white and Criminal was black that's exactly how it would be seen by society and in court determinations)

Let's say there was a cop who was walking in a heavily black neighborhood and accosts someone and calls him the n-word and says a few choice racist statements about how n-words shouldn't exist. A bunch of other black people hear him and confront the cop and kill him for it. You think people are going to say the cop has accountablily for his statements and that he got himself killed? Hell no.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

I would. Still wouldn't justify his death.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

But of course by your arguments, you would have to say the cop did nothing wrong since he was killed, right?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[ISiddiqui]

Nope. I would say the cops statements and actions do not mean he bears any responsibility for his murder.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Nope. I would say the cops statements and actions do not mean he bears any responsibility for his murder.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I would say most people would disagree with you.

We have a responsibility to not put ourselves in potentially harmful situations. If you were out with a friend and they had too much to drink, you chose to get in the car with them anyway and get paralyzed in a wreck. You aren't responsible for the crash, but you are responsible for the choice you made getting in that car.

[GrantDawg]

The officer is solely responsible for the kids death, and has been charged as such. I still don't know who is suggesting otherwise.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[ISiddiqui]

Lathum just said my hypothetical loud racist cop bears some responsibility for his death. Do you agree? Or do you believe his killers have sole responsibility for his death?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

The killer's bear all responsibility. Being a racist prick doesn't justify being murdered. Being murdered does not justify being a racist prick.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Lathum just said my hypothetical loud racist cop bears some responsibility for his death. Do you agree? Or do you believe his killers have sole responsibility for his death?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I never said that. I said the hypothetical cop has a responsibility to make decisions that don't put him in a dangerous situation.

Do you not think we have a responsibility to keep ourselves out of potentially dangerous situations?

You have a kid. When he is a teenager are you going to teach him not to get in the car with someone who has been drinking? You going to teach him to wear a seatbelt? To not take a bus to a strange area even though his friends want to?

What if you have a daughter? You going to teach her not to walk alone in a poorly lit area? Not to park in a dark lot? Not to get in a car with strange boys?

[ISiddiqui]

So if being a racist prick doesn't justify being murdered and the killers bear all responsibility (I agree, btw) why bring up the cop was a racist prick? Why talk about his responsibility to not be a racist prick when his murder is being discussed? What does it help?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So if being a racist prick doesn't justify being murdered and the killers bear all responsibility (I agree, btw) why bring up the cop was a racist prick? Why talk about his responsibility to not be a racist prick when his murder is being discussed? What does it help?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Because if he wasn't a racist prick he would still be alive.

I mean, that is indisputable. It doesn't absolve or excuse the people who killed him, but it also doesn't change the fact that he put himself in that position.

[Lathum]

To bring it back to Daunte Wright. Do you think if he had complied he would have been killed?

If the answer is no, then you are saying his actions contributed to his death. It in NO WAY excuses the cop, or justifies it one little bit. It doesn't mean he deserved it, and it isn't victim blaming as much as you want it to be. It simply shows there is accountability on all sides.

[ISiddiqui]

When he is a teenager are you going to teach him not to get in the car with someone who has been drinking? You going to teach him to wear a seatbelt? To not take a bus to a strange area even though his friends want to?

Your teenage son gets into a car accident because he's a passenger with someone who's been drinking. He loses a leg. You tell him, you aren't responsible for the crash but you are responsible for making the choice to get into the car..

Any reasonable person is going to think you hold him partially responsible for losing his leg. You after all held him responsible for the action that led to the chain of action that led to him losing his leg.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Your teenage son gets into a car accident because he's a passenger with someone who's been drinking. He loses a leg. You tell him, you aren't responsible for the crash but you are responsible for making the choice to get into the car..

Any reasonable person is going to think you hold him partially responsible for losing his leg. You after all held him responsible for the action that led to the chain of action that led to him losing his leg.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I believe the choices people make have consequences that they are responsible for. You don't. We clearly are never going to see eye to eye on this.

[ISiddiqui]

it isn't victim blaming as much as you want it to be. It simply shows there is accountability on all sides.

I literally showed you a definition that a synonym of accountability is blameworthiess (by Roget's 21st Century Thesaurus).

Here is the point that I am getting to with GD. Doing things that may or may not increase the likelihood of certain actions (such as getting in a car with a drunk) does not make one responsible, accountable, or blameworthy of every ultimate consequence (such as losing a leg). The responsibility lies on the one who does the ultimate act.

Perhaps the issue is you don't know what you're saying when you try to say he's has some accountability (blame, responsiblity) for his actions here - I mean if he has accountability for his actions, what is that accountability. The cop's response to his actions, right? You try to box up accountability for his actions without seeing where that ends up leading. Or you may not have realized accountability and blameworthiness are synonyms and meant something else entirely.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[ISiddiqui]

I believe the choices people make have consequences that they are responsible for.

So Wright made a choice to flee (for whatever reason). The consequence ended up that he got shot by the officer (who confused her taser and her gun). Wright therefore was responsible for that consequence of his choice, right?

GD, I believe you are arguing something entirely different.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I believe the choices people make have consequences that they are responsible for. You don't. We clearly are never going to see eye to eye on this.

The rapist is obviously in the wrong but she did make the choice to wear a short skirt.

[Lathum]

You are being too results oriented. The result of his actions are far disproportionate but that doesn’t excuse his actions or absolve him of his part in them.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The rapist is obviously in the wrong but she did make the choice to wear a short skirt.

Completely different scenario and you can go fuck yourself trying to paint me with that brush.

[Brian Swartz]

Qwikshot, thank you for your thoughtful post which has unfortunately been missed in the crossfire.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Completely different scenario and you can go fuck yourself trying to paint me with that brush.

Read your post. You said actions have consequences. So when does that apply? When it is a minority being murdered or in general? You're cherry picking.

And part of the problem is that there are no consequences for cops. He blatantly lied on his police report, his superiors lied to the media, and a prosecutor lied to a judge. Where are their consequences?

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Here is the point that I am getting to with GD. Doing things that may or may not increase the likelihood of certain actions (such as getting in a car with a drunk) does not make one responsible, accountable, or blameworthy of every ultimate consequence (such as losing a leg). The responsibility lies on the one who does the ultimate act.
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

My understanding (quite possibly incorrect) is that in the US you be convicted of murder just by being in the car with someone who murders someone, if the prosecutors can prove it was reasonable to think that something bad was going to happen?

[AlexB]

FWIW I think it is probably is definitions that are being mostly argued here

It’s impossible to say that the actions of Daunte Wright in trying to flee arrest did not play a part in the way that events unfolded - if he had stayed then he wouldn’t have been shot at that moment.

That doesn’t make him responsible or accountable, or that he deserved to be shot, but in terms of the old role playing books, it does mean that his action action to flee meant the story turned to page 60 instead of turning to page 50 if he had stayed put

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So if being a racist prick doesn't justify being murdered and the killers bear all responsibility (I agree, btw) why bring up the cop was a racist prick? Why talk about his responsibility to not be a racist prick when his murder is being discussed? What does it help?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Because he was. Facts don't stop being facts.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Here is the point that I am getting to with GD. Doing things that may or may not increase the likelihood of certain actions (such as getting in a car with a drunk) does not make one responsible, accountable, or blameworthy of every ultimate consequence (such as losing a leg). The responsibility lies on the one who does the ultimate act.

Perhaps the issue is you don't know what you're saying when you try to say he's has some accountability (blame, responsiblity) for his actions here - I mean if he has accountability for his actions, what is that accountability. The cop's response to his actions, right? You try to box up accountability

Again, I have said this over and over. A person is responsible solely for his actions, and the bad actions of another person doesn't erase that. Wright made a bad action in trying to flee. The officer still didn't have a right to shoot him.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I literally showed you a definition that a synonym of accountability is blameworthiess (by Roget's 21st Century Thesaurus).

Also, let's point out legally that the way your definition are being used do not hold up. Let's say two people get into a fight that was clearly started by one. Then let's say that non-instigator beats him till he is defenseless then pulls a knife and stabs the instigator. Only one of them is going to be charged with assault with a deadly weapon and possible attempted murder. Does that mean the stab victim is suddenly innocent? Because one committed a greater crime does not obsolce the other of the lesser crime.

[ISiddiqui]

Because he was. Facts don't stop being facts.

So someone is shot by the cops. His history of drug use is brought up even though it didn't seem to have any effect on the shooting. Facts don't stop being facts?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[ISiddiqui]

FWIW I think it is probably is definitions that are being mostly argued here

It’s impossible to say that the actions of Daunte Wright in trying to flee arrest did not play a part in the way that events unfolded - if he had stayed then he wouldn’t have been shot at that moment.

That doesn’t make him responsible or accountable, or that he deserved to be shot, but in terms of the old role playing books, it does mean that his action action to flee meant the story turned to page 60 instead of turning to page 50 if he had stayed put

Well put. 100%

(Although, granted, especially with that video from Chicago last night, even complying with orders doesn't protect you)

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well put. 100%

(Although, granted, especially with that video from Chicago last night, even complying with orders doesn't protect you)

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

That Chicago video is beyond disturbing and I also agree with Alex, I don't see any disagreement in acknowledgement of both the tragedy and ultimate culpability of these shootings being due to flaws in system.

Police are required to be so much more in their jobs than simply enforcers of the law anymore and there is laundry list of reform items needed to make sure they can function in their roles effectively and safely, for them and the general public.

[bob]

Maybe I am mistaken, as I was watching the video on my phone, but wasn't Adam Toledo turning with the gun in his hand? If so, I'm not shocked that a cop would fire.

Edit: Reading online maybe I'm wrong. As always this stuff is politicized and I don't want to watch the video myself so someone else that knows the facts please correct me if I am wrong.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by bob

Maybe I am mistaken, as I was watching the video on my phone, but wasn't Adam Toledo turning with the gun in his hand? If so, I'm not shocked that a cop would fire.

Been reading but didn't actually watch it. The link below seems to support he had a weapon in his hand "1 second" before turning around. He didn't have a weapon when he turned around but the video indicates he had a weapon just before turning around (which I assume means he tossed it as he was turning around). See approx 30-55 secs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCyvrsVchxs

More discussions to follow I'm sure


.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by AlexB

My understanding (quite possibly incorrect) is that in the US you be convicted of murder just by being in the car with someone who murders someone, if the prosecutors can prove it was reasonable to think that something bad was going to happen?

I think this goes on a state by state basis. If you're part of a felony act that results in a murder, everyone involved in the felony can be charged. For example, if a bank robber shoots someone during a robbery, the get-away driver can be charged with murder even though he himself didn't kill anyone.

In story linked below. Two men invaded a home. One was shot dead by the homeowner. The other invader is now charged with murder for the killing, not the homeowner.

https://apnews.com/article/d3317345a...f4b83802e3d57f

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I think this goes on a state by state basis. If you're part of a felony act that results in a murder, everyone involved in the felony can be charged. For example, if a bank robber shoots someone during a robbery, the get-away driver can be charged with murder even though he himself didn't kill anyone.

In story linked below. Two men invaded a home. One was shot dead by the homeowner. The other invader is now charged with murder for the killing, not the homeowner.

https://apnews.com/article/d3317345a...f4b83802e3d57f

These are sort of in line with what I was trying to get at, and make me think that the arguments from yesterday are more about definitions and nuance rather than them being diametrically opposed to each other.

[ISiddiqui]

I want to note that I've never been in favor of Felony Murder statutes. Many other countries have abolished it due to it's unfairness (it was abolished in England and Wales in 1957).

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Ksyrup]

I'm sure I've told this story before, but in law school one of my classmates worked the night shift at Steak & Ale (that is a sentence typed by an old person). He was married with 2 kids, so he had to work to support his family even though students technically weren't allowed to work during the 1L year.

Anyway, one night after he closed up, he was kidnapped at gun point by 2 guys who wanted him to go to his bank and drain his account. He didn't have his bank card with him, so they forced him to drive home to get it. Knowing that his wife and 2 young kids (I believe one was a newborn) were at home, he knew he couldn't go home so as he drove onto the on-ramp to I-10, he saw a semi parked on the shoulder, floored it, and drove straight into the back of it going 70+ mph.

He was wearing his seatbelt and survived. The dude in the passenger seat died. His buddy in the back survived. Backseat kidnapper was charged with felony murder and convicted.

[RainMaker]

Did anyone at the insurrection get charged with felony murder?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I'm sure I've told this story before, but in law school one of my classmates worked the night shift at Steak & Ale (that is a sentence typed by an old person). He was married with 2 kids, so he had to work to support his family even though students technically weren't allowed to work during the 1L year.

Anyway, one night after he closed up, he was kidnapped at gun point by 2 guys who wanted him to go to his bank and drain his account. He didn't have his bank card with him, so they forced him to drive home to get it. Knowing that his wife and 2 young kids (I believe one was a newborn) were at home, he knew he couldn't go home so as he drove onto the on-ramp to I-10, he saw a semi parked on the shoulder, floored it, and drove straight into the back of it going 70+ mph.

He was wearing his seatbelt and survived. The dude in the passenger seat died. His buddy in the back survived. Backseat kidnapper was charged with felony murder and convicted.

I told my wife and daughter this. Never get in a car with a bad guy. If you are in a car with a bad guy and driving, have your seatbelt on and run into something.

I'm glad it worked out for your friend. He made the right call to avoid going home.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So someone is shot by the cops. His history of drug use is brought up even though it didn't seem to have any effect on the shooting. Facts don't stop being facts?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Is it still a fact? It wouldn't justify him being killed. If a person just got through raping puppies, zipped up his pants, walked out into the street, and some cop decided to shoot him, it would not be a justified shooting. The guy still raped a puppy.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Did anyone at the insurrection get charged with felony murder?

They should have been.

[ISiddiqui]

Is it still a fact? It wouldn't justify him being killed. If a person just got through raping puppies, zipped up his pants, walked out into the street, and some cop decided to shoot him, it would not be a justified shooting. The guy still raped a puppy.

Does the raping puppies have anything to do with his murder? So who cares? Why bring it up unless you want to say he deserves to die for it?

So you are cool when people bring up every single bad thing a person who has gotten shot by the police has done? Because they are "the facts"? How about in rape instances where people want to talk about all the people the victim has slept with? Facts are facts.

Just because something is "a fact" doesn't make it relevant or helpful.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by AlexB

FWIW I think it is probably is definitions that are being mostly argued here

It’s impossible to say that the actions of Daunte Wright in trying to flee arrest did not play a part in the way that events unfolded - if he had stayed then he wouldn’t have been shot at that moment.

That doesn’t make him responsible or accountable, or that he deserved to be shot, but in terms of the old role playing books, it does mean that his action action to flee meant the story turned to page 60 instead of turning to page 50 if he had stayed put

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well put. 100%

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

This is what I have been saying this whole time, and you keep playing these dumb semantic games. You agree with me, so I am done.

[Edward64]

FWIW, I don't buy its "definitions".

There is a fundamental difference here. Some see everything as black and white (no pun intended), others see it more nuanced.

But whatever. Easy out.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

This is what I have been saying this whole time, and you keep playing these dumb semantic games. You agree with me, so I am done.

Yet you were defending Lathum who said Wright did have accountability and then quite clearly said he had responsiblity for the consequences of his choices. So I'm not sure exactly what you've been saying the whole time.

[GrantDawg]

There were things I agreed with Lathim with, or thought I did. We diverged somewhere in the middle of this.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Imagine doing all this and only getting a $30k bond.

Louisville police officer arrested, accused of woman’s assault | Lexington Herald Leader

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Imagine doing all this and only getting a $30k bond.

Louisville police officer arrested, accused of woman’s assault | Lexington Herald Leader

That is awful, but then I have no idea what standard bond is for a case like this. Seems low, but then people fighting for the end of money bonds all together. I don't know what the process here is in determining bond (is it the crime, or based on worth?).
This guy is accused of killing two people and got out on $500,000 bond, which seems low to me. It seems Kentucky doesn't allow bail-bonds, so it might be that bonds there are just lower because of that.

[GrantDawg]

The more I think about it, it probably is a combination of issues. Being cop maybe one, but someone with no history of violent crimes, in a state that generally has lower rates, and it is a domestic abuse which generally has lower bond rates as well.

[Vegas Vic]

You can always count on Maxine Waters to throw gasoline on the fire.

The judge in Derek Chauvin's murder trial in the death of George Floyd criticized recent comments by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., saying her words could be grounds for the defense to appeal a verdict.

Chauvin trial judge says Maxine Waters' 'confrontational' protest remarks could fuel appeal

[GrantDawg]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/20/polit...ice/index.html

[Ksyrup]

So Florida's new anti-riot bill... yeesh. A three-person protest is now defined as a "riot" and a third degree felony.