Your wife is wise and sounds like my mom. She would have told me in German or Russian though.
EDIT: I may have missed but as of this morning he's been charged with murder.
https://news.yahoo.com/police-shooti...162349996.html
Last edited by Zincwarrior; 10-15-2019 at 07:37 AM.
So, if a doctor operates on you and screws it up, you're good with not seeking redress because you didn't go to med school and you've never held a scalpel and carved into a living human?
If a pilot screws up and crashes, killing a bunch of people, you're OK with that because you don't know how to fly, let alone hand-fly an instrument approach to minimums?
Is it fair to criticize a politician if one has never run for office?
Because, it seems to me, that is the standard that you're advocating.
If we have to march off into the next world, let us walk there on the bodies of our enemies.
I agree as long was there was threat.
In my CCW class, the instructor repeatedly said this,
Use firearm only when your or your loved ones' life is in danger, kidnapping, sexual assault or threat of serious bodily harm.
I hope cops' training has a lot more than this on using firearm.
You can't go to homes and shoot people because you think you are scared or I just came from 24 hour shift and I can kill you and get away free.
I agree mistakes happen.
All I'm saying is when mistakes happen, they should be accountable.
If the mistake is "Oops I punched you in the face", okay fine (PD's have been sued for that too and victims own in many cases) but if the mistake is "Oops, I killed your mom because I thought I was in danger" is not a get out of jail ticket.
Last edited by Mystery; 10-15-2019 at 10:01 AM.
LE training on the UOF does include more than this.
However, we are a nation of laws, not of men. What matters is the law, and under the US Constitution and subsequent clarifications by the US Supreme Court we are held to the "Reasonable man" standard. A perceived threat of bodily harm using the facts available to the person at the time of shooting is what we are judged by, not the actual threat of bodily harm as viewed through the lens of 20/20 hindsight following an investigation.
With that said, it seems like the prosecutor's office does not feel the officer has met the reasonableness standard in this situation, so I'm not sure the reason for all the angst in this thread as if the system is broken and cops are corrupt. What is unfortunate (in my opinion) is Texas' very broad definition for Murder. Usually Murder 1 & 2 in most states require an element of criminal intention, and in many states both Guyger and this officer, as well as any civilian who made a mistake would be held to some sort of lesser negligent homicide charge. I'd hate to see you charged under this standard just the same as any LEO.
Last edited by TGS; 10-15-2019 at 10:08 AM.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
Your comments to TC215 and I seem to contradict each other. Do you really think you should go to jail if you shot someone who threatened you with a fake gun, for instance? Under your standard, it seems that would be unreasonable since in 20/20 hindsight there was no actual threat of bodily harm to you.
How familiar are you with use of force law beyond what you learned in your CCW class?
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer