- Banned
- #2,141
They're not always.No it isn’t.
It is why prisoners who kill other prisoners are charged with murder. Self defense goes out the window.
It depends entirely on the circumstances.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
They're not always.No it isn’t.
It is why prisoners who kill other prisoners are charged with murder. Self defense goes out the window.
Who was running like hell away from the conflict?
Answer that right now, or fuck off.
They're not always.
It depends entirely on the circumstances.
What murder?Ok. And why don’t we view the people in pursuit as trying to effect a citizens arrest of a murder they just saw committed?
From the link;Not according to the Federal Courts.
No Right To Self-Defense in Prison
John Rowe is an Indiana state prisoner. A prisoner named Michael Evans was moved into a cell next to Rowe and Rowe complained to staff, who did nothing. Evans sent Rowe a note demanding sexual favors. The next morning E...preprison.com
The Federal Courts upheld the policy as constitutional that Inmates have no right to self defense.
One court, not "the courts"....... one, who clearly got it wrong.Not according to the Federal Courts.
No Right To Self-Defense in Prison
John Rowe is an Indiana state prisoner. A prisoner named Michael Evans was moved into a cell next to Rowe and Rowe complained to staff, who did nothing. Evans sent Rowe a note demanding sexual favors. The next morning E...preprison.com
The Federal Courts upheld the policy as constitutional that Inmates have no right to self defense.
Be careful what you wish for, because if the system gets that corrupted, then we'll simply stop using it or deferring to it. We'll just ignore it entirely and do things the way we see fit.
And then what are you going to do?
One court, not "the courts"....... one, who clearly got it wrong.
Only one person was chasing Rittenhouse at that point. Your desperation to add others is noted.Sure. He was just running along, behind the violent ex con who WAS chasing Rittenhouse.
How many people were along side him, or right behind him? Where exactly at this time where the other two guys that Rittenhouse had to shot as they attacked him? Peacefully taking a nap further down the road until they heard shots?
I don't think so.
You use these words, like you are just plopping them into slots in a sentence diagram, with no real understanding of their actual meanings.
I believe he was committing crimes and was not supposed to be there and was looking for trouble. So he wasnt legally justified in shooting those people.Do you believe that Rittenhouse was justified in protecting himself?
Correct, because the police had told everyone to leave.He did not have permission to be on the property he was “defending”. That is trespassing
Who ran headfirst into conflict by crossing state lines and trespassing with an illegal weapon to seek out the protestors?Who was running like hell away from the conflict?
Stop being cutesy and discuss this like a big kid.What murder?
The system only exists as long as we see it as legitimate.That is the system we have.
Doctors are prohibited from practicing medicine in states they are not licensed in. So are Nurses and Paramedics.
Police authority ends at the State Line. Unless special authority is granted the cops power to arrest is nonexistent.
The same is true of Lawyers. A lawyer in Texas is not permitted to practice law in Arkansas unless he is granted permission from the court or admitted to the BAR in Arkansas.
This is the world we live in. It has been this way for a very long time.
Let’s say that the shooting never happened. Let’s say that someone heard Kyle say he was a paramedic. They come to him with a life threatening wound. He fumbles around and the patient does because Kyle isn’t a Paramedic and has no clue what he is doing. At the least he can expect to be charged. Practicing medicine without a license. Misrepresenting his skills and qualifications would certainly put him on that path.
Because doing the wrong thing will guarantee the patient dies.
Let’s say that someone is brought to Kyle with a gunshot wound to the chest. Kyle whips out a pressure dressing. He just killed that patient. The patient suffocates because he can’t breathe. He would have been better off without Kyles help.
And Kyle would not be protected by Good Samaritan laws. Because he represented himself as a Paramedic.
No need.Ok. Find the decision that overturned it. Because as of now that is the law of the land.
Too much of a stretch there.Who ran headfirst into conflict by crossing state lines and trespassing with an illegal weapon to seek out the protestors?
I saw a couple killings, I didn't see any murders.Stop being cutesy and discuss this like a big kid.
Too much of a stretch there.
The system only exists as long as we see it as legitimate.
When that ends, so does the system.
Irrelevant to his claim of self-defense.But that is what happened. Kyle crossed state lines.
Even if true, it is irrelevant to his claim of self-defense.He got his hands on a weapon he knew he was not permitted by law to have.
Even if true, it is irrelevant to his claim of self-defense.He went into an area he knew he wasn’t supposed to be in. Is any of that not true?