Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/17/2014 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 11:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 10:18:00 AM (view original):
The fact that you are responsible for your safety doesn't absolve others when they act negligently and injure you. They can still be held criminally responsible.

I would prefer not getting shot at all over wrongfully getting shot.  I'm going to do what I think is best to avoid getting shot.

But maybe that's just me.

No ****.

But, again, the fact that everyone would prefer not to be shot doesn't absolve the cop of his responsibility to not illegally shoot people.

Let me play along with your premise . . .

Given that we live in a country where cops illegally shoot people when they do stupid things . . . is it a good idea to do stupid things in front of a cop with a gun?

Fixed this for you.

"Given that we live in a society where men sexually assault women who wear short skirts...is it a good idea to wear short skirts?"

The answer to that would be "Probably not, if you're going to be in an area where such sexual assaults have a higher likelihood of taking place".

It's called "common sense".

Let me expand on this.

I work in downtown Hartford, CT.  When I drive in to work in the morning, around 7:00am-7:15am or so, I'm driving through a part of the city that has a reputation for higher crime than other parts of the city and surrounding towns.  Most of the crimes in that part of town occur in the evening.  If I have a reason to come to downtown Hartford in the evening, I'm not driving my "usual" route through the bad part of town.

That's called "common sense".

Posted by moy23 on 12/17/2014 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Who is Jones?

The guy who the cop illegally shot in South Carolina.

Didn't take long to see the officer has already been fired from his job and charged criminally, no?

"The 31-year-old former trooper is charged with assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature, a felony that carries up to 20 years in prison. He was released after paying 10 percent of a $75,000 bond."

Maybe he is innocent, maybe guilty. The court will decide this one.... But this shows cops ARE held accountable for their 'illegal' actions.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Sudden movement into his vehicle.

The cop asked him for his license. He reached into the car to get it.

Instead of a binary, lets assign blame on a percentage scale. Let's agree that Jones could have reached into the vehicle slower. How much of the blame does he deserve for that?

I say 5%.

The cop gets the remaining 95% of the blame for shooting him and probably deserves to go to prison.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/17/2014 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 11:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 10:18:00 AM (view original):
The fact that you are responsible for your safety doesn't absolve others when they act negligently and injure you. They can still be held criminally responsible.

I would prefer not getting shot at all over wrongfully getting shot.  I'm going to do what I think is best to avoid getting shot.

But maybe that's just me.

No ****.

But, again, the fact that everyone would prefer not to be shot doesn't absolve the cop of his responsibility to not illegally shoot people.

Let me play along with your premise . . .

Given that we live in a country where cops illegally shoot people when they do stupid things . . . is it a good idea to do stupid things in front of a cop with a gun?

Fixed this for you.

"Given that we live in a society where men sexually assault women who wear short skirts...is it a good idea to wear short skirts?"

The answer to that would be "Probably not, if you're going to be in an area where such sexual assaults have a higher likelihood of taking place".

It's called "common sense".

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Sudden movement into his vehicle.

The cop asked him for his license. He reached into the car to get it.

Instead of a binary, lets assign blame on a percentage scale. Let's agree that Jones could have reached into the vehicle slower. How much of the blame does he deserve for that?

I say 5%.

The cop gets the remaining 95% of the blame for shooting him and probably deserves to go to prison.

I'm not giving the cop a free pass on this one.  I already said that the shooting was likely not justified.

But I'd say that Jones gets more than 5% of the blame.  If he was a little smarter in the way he responded to the cop's request, i.e. "no sudden movements", then the likelihood of his getting shot decreases significantly.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/17/2014 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 11:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 10:18:00 AM (view original):
The fact that you are responsible for your safety doesn't absolve others when they act negligently and injure you. They can still be held criminally responsible.

I would prefer not getting shot at all over wrongfully getting shot.  I'm going to do what I think is best to avoid getting shot.

But maybe that's just me.

No ****.

But, again, the fact that everyone would prefer not to be shot doesn't absolve the cop of his responsibility to not illegally shoot people.

Let me play along with your premise . . .

Given that we live in a country where cops illegally shoot people when they do stupid things . . . is it a good idea to do stupid things in front of a cop with a gun?

Fixed this for you.

"Given that we live in a society where men sexually assault women who wear short skirts...is it a good idea to wear short skirts?"

The answer to that would be "Probably not, if you're going to be in an area where such sexual assaults have a higher likelihood of taking place".

It's called "common sense".

Let me expand on this.

I work in downtown Hartford, CT.  When I drive in to work in the morning, around 7:00am-7:15am or so, I'm driving through a part of the city that has a reputation for higher crime than other parts of the city and surrounding towns.  Most of the crimes in that part of town occur in the evening.  If I have a reason to come to downtown Hartford in the evening, I'm not driving my "usual" route through the bad part of town.

That's called "common sense".

Sweet.

But, if for some reason you do need to go through the bad part of town in the evening, are you to blame if you get shot/robbed/raped?

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/17/2014 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Who is Jones?

The guy who the cop illegally shot in South Carolina.

Didn't take long to see the officer has already been fired from his job and charged criminally, no?

"The 31-year-old former trooper is charged with assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature, a felony that carries up to 20 years in prison. He was released after paying 10 percent of a $75,000 bond."

Maybe he is innocent, maybe guilty. The court will decide this one.... But this shows cops ARE held accountable for their 'illegal' actions.

mike/tec are arguing that this cop didn't commit a crime.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Sudden movement into his vehicle.

The cop asked him for his license. He reached into the car to get it.

Instead of a binary, lets assign blame on a percentage scale. Let's agree that Jones could have reached into the vehicle slower. How much of the blame does he deserve for that?

I say 5%.

The cop gets the remaining 95% of the blame for shooting him and probably deserves to go to prison.

I'm not giving the cop a free pass on this one.  I already said that the shooting was likely not justified.

But I'd say that Jones gets more than 5% of the blame.  If he was a little smarter in the way he responded to the cop's request, i.e. "no sudden movements", then the likelihood of his getting shot decreases significantly.

Or, you know, the guy with the gun could have just not shot him. That would have helped.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Sudden movement into his vehicle.

The cop asked him for his license. He reached into the car to get it.

Instead of a binary, lets assign blame on a percentage scale. Let's agree that Jones could have reached into the vehicle slower. How much of the blame does he deserve for that?

I say 5%.

The cop gets the remaining 95% of the blame for shooting him and probably deserves to go to prison.

I'm not giving the cop a free pass on this one.  I already said that the shooting was likely not justified.

But I'd say that Jones gets more than 5% of the blame.  If he was a little smarter in the way he responded to the cop's request, i.e. "no sudden movements", then the likelihood of his getting shot decreases significantly.

Or, you know, the guy with the gun could have just not shot him. That would have helped.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/17/2014 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 11:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 10:18:00 AM (view original):
The fact that you are responsible for your safety doesn't absolve others when they act negligently and injure you. They can still be held criminally responsible.

I would prefer not getting shot at all over wrongfully getting shot.  I'm going to do what I think is best to avoid getting shot.

But maybe that's just me.

No ****.

But, again, the fact that everyone would prefer not to be shot doesn't absolve the cop of his responsibility to not illegally shoot people.

Let me play along with your premise . . .

Given that we live in a country where cops illegally shoot people when they do stupid things . . . is it a good idea to do stupid things in front of a cop with a gun?

Fixed this for you.

"Given that we live in a society where men sexually assault women who wear short skirts...is it a good idea to wear short skirts?"

The answer to that would be "Probably not, if you're going to be in an area where such sexual assaults have a higher likelihood of taking place".

It's called "common sense".

Let me expand on this.

I work in downtown Hartford, CT.  When I drive in to work in the morning, around 7:00am-7:15am or so, I'm driving through a part of the city that has a reputation for higher crime than other parts of the city and surrounding towns.  Most of the crimes in that part of town occur in the evening.  If I have a reason to come to downtown Hartford in the evening, I'm not driving my "usual" route through the bad part of town.

That's called "common sense".

Sweet.

But, if for some reason you do need to go through the bad part of town in the evening, are you to blame if you get shot/robbed/raped?

Present me a situation in which I "need" to go through the bad part of town in the evening rather than around it.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Sudden movement into his vehicle.

The cop asked him for his license. He reached into the car to get it.

Instead of a binary, lets assign blame on a percentage scale. Let's agree that Jones could have reached into the vehicle slower. How much of the blame does he deserve for that?

I say 5%.

The cop gets the remaining 95% of the blame for shooting him and probably deserves to go to prison.

I'm not giving the cop a free pass on this one.  I already said that the shooting was likely not justified.

But I'd say that Jones gets more than 5% of the blame.  If he was a little smarter in the way he responded to the cop's request, i.e. "no sudden movements", then the likelihood of his getting shot decreases significantly.

Or, you know, the guy with the gun could have just not shot him. That would have helped.

Sure.  But, according to you, cops like to shoot black people.  So maybe that should factor into your thought process if you're black and are facing an armed cop.

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/17/2014 12:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Sudden movement into his vehicle.

The cop asked him for his license. He reached into the car to get it.

Instead of a binary, lets assign blame on a percentage scale. Let's agree that Jones could have reached into the vehicle slower. How much of the blame does he deserve for that?

I say 5%.

The cop gets the remaining 95% of the blame for shooting him and probably deserves to go to prison.

I'm not giving the cop a free pass on this one.  I already said that the shooting was likely not justified.

But I'd say that Jones gets more than 5% of the blame.  If he was a little smarter in the way he responded to the cop's request, i.e. "no sudden movements", then the likelihood of his getting shot decreases significantly.

Or, you know, the guy with the gun could have just not shot him. That would have helped.

Sure.  But, according to you, cops like to shoot black people.  So maybe that should factor into your thought process if you're black and are facing an armed cop.

So you're saying black people have to take extra steps to ensure their safety from being discriminated against from law enforcement.

You understand the protests a little better now, right?

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/17/2014 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 11:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/17/2014 11:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/17/2014 10:18:00 AM (view original):
The fact that you are responsible for your safety doesn't absolve others when they act negligently and injure you. They can still be held criminally responsible.

I would prefer not getting shot at all over wrongfully getting shot.  I'm going to do what I think is best to avoid getting shot.

But maybe that's just me.

No ****.

But, again, the fact that everyone would prefer not to be shot doesn't absolve the cop of his responsibility to not illegally shoot people.

Let me play along with your premise . . .

Given that we live in a country where cops illegally shoot people when they do stupid things . . . is it a good idea to do stupid things in front of a cop with a gun?

Fixed this for you.

"Given that we live in a society where men sexually assault women who wear short skirts...is it a good idea to wear short skirts?"

The answer to that would be "Probably not, if you're going to be in an area where such sexual assaults have a higher likelihood of taking place".

It's called "common sense".

Let me expand on this.

I work in downtown Hartford, CT.  When I drive in to work in the morning, around 7:00am-7:15am or so, I'm driving through a part of the city that has a reputation for higher crime than other parts of the city and surrounding towns.  Most of the crimes in that part of town occur in the evening.  If I have a reason to come to downtown Hartford in the evening, I'm not driving my "usual" route through the bad part of town.

That's called "common sense".

Sweet.

But, if for some reason you do need to go through the bad part of town in the evening, are you to blame if you get shot/robbed/raped?

Present me a situation in which I "need" to go through the bad part of town in the evening rather than around it.

Who cares why you are there. The question is, if you are there, for whatever reason, are you to blame if someone shoots/robs/rapes you?