Who-all Should Be Disarmed?

I

imp

Senior Member
Maybe we need to disarm the cops also? imp

Cop who fatally shot motorist in back cleared of all charges

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — A small-town police officer who fatally shot an unarmed motorist in the back as he lay facedown on the ground was acquitted Thursday at her murder trial.


A Dauphin County jury found Lisa Mearkle not guilty of third-degree murder and voluntary and involuntary manslaughter charges in a shooting captured by a camera attached to her stun gun.
The video, which was played to jurors, showed the Hummelstown police officer shocking 59-year-old David Kassick after he fled from a traffic stop before shooting him twice in the back.


http://news.yahoo.com/cop-fatally-shot-motorist-back-cleared-charges-195948504.html













[h=2][/h]










 

If we only knew. imp
 

Small town Pennsylvania, anywhere in Pennsylvania and I'm not surprised. One of those states where cops feel they are da law. People who should not be allowed to possess firearms-
Convicted violent felons, not ever.
People convicted of domestic violence should be banned from owning a weapon perhaps a minimum of 15 years after release.
If someone has been in a psychiatric unit even overnight I would say five to ten years before they can legally buy a weapon, if they are a "frequent flyer"...that is they have had repeated stays for mental health issues. Then they should not be legally allowed to possess a weapon for life, period.
 
fureverywhere said:
Small town Pennsylvania, anywhere in Pennsylvania and I'm not surprised. One of those states where cops feel they are da law. People who should not be allowed to possess firearms-
Convicted violent felons, not ever.
People convicted of domestic violence should be banned from owning a weapon perhaps a minimum of 15 years after release.
If someone has been in a psychiatric unit even overnight I would say five to ten years before they can legally buy a weapon, if they are a "frequent flyer"...that is they have had repeated stays for mental health issues. Then they should not be legally allowed to possess a weapon for life, period.
Click to expand...

And right now our current gun laws would prevent the psychiatric ones from getting a gun. But the medical laws prevent that knowledge from being released to the gun dealers. I hope soon they will correct that situation and allow medical records to be released to the ones responsible for allowing the gun authorizations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imp
It seems only realistic that everyday folks should feel police officers should be the least likely to commit criminal acts. Sure, occasionally one out of thousands "snaps". That may be what happened here. But, seems like a lot more than one out of many, are exercising restraint and command tactics beyond the level called for, far too often. Is this just my observation? imp
 
BobF said:
And right now our current gun laws would prevent the psychiatric ones from getting a gun. But the medical laws prevent that knowledge from being released to the gun dealers. I hope soon they will correct that situation and allow medical records to be released to the ones responsible for allowing the gun authorizations.
Click to expand...

BUT...Don't you know that labeling someone as being Mentally Ill is a violation of their "right" to privacy...and SO Politically Incorrect. Instead, they are still able to buy guns and go on a rampage...as nearly every one of these mass shootings in recent years has shown. Instead of Lobbying for better treatment for the mentally ill, the Bleeding Hearts think that banning guns is the answer. Kind of reminds me of the movie Dumb and Dumber.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imp
Maybe the perp shouldn't have run, especially as he was loaded with alcohol and "unspecified" drugs ...


That being said, I watched the video - a very confusing one. It wasn't clear to me that the downed perp presented a threat, but then again I wasn't there.
 
My first instinct was to think that she was overly fearful but I couldn't see anything that the man on the ground did that would support that theory. I also thought she might have been on her own but that clearly wasn't the case either. I think she executed him.
 
His hands appeared to be in plain view - in fact, were jerking around because of the Tazer. Maybe she mistook that as furtive moves for a gun.

Again, cops live in a very different world than us - they're bound to react differently. And she was what, a 10- or 15-year veteran? Usually you have pretty good instincts by then ... I would have given her the benefit of the doubt, given the circumstances.
 
True, but we have seen some innocents who went to jail exonerated recently, especially by DNA evidence...
 
The lack of intellect is part of being human and, also, emotional, age, and other factors...
 
Warrigal said:
Common sense works better than intellect in some situations i.e. judging the guilt or otherwise of one of your peers.
Click to expand...

Are you sure you want to stand by that assertion?

Being on a jury is like sitting down to assemble a jigsaw puzzle - a feat of the mind, not the heart. Intellect (intelligence) is a far more appropriate tool for matching up pieces than whatever common sense one might possess.

There have been many, many cases where emotions have swayed the common sense of the jury, whereas if they had been using cold, hard logic they would have come to the proper pronouncement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top