Police shooting black man in the back ... again (Kenosha, WI)

#1,027
#1,027
Rickyvol77 said:
so what? more people are killed in bar fights with punches to the head, and hitting their head on the concrete sidewalks than by guns in bar fights...
Guns are an inanimate object, some people are criminals, some are victims, some are idiots, some are defenders....the gun isn't the issue, the 500 criminals looting, burning buildings, smashing cars and assaulting people are the root cause of the issue
Click to expand...

Really, you think if you take an equal number of bar fights with and without guns that you'll get MORE death and bodily injury in those WITHOUT guns?
 
#1,030
#1,030
evillawyer said:
Do you think the situation, absent the Rambo toy strapped around his neck, would have escalated so quickly and had the same ending without the gun? I don't.

It's really a simple proposition. Take 100 bar fights. Give those involved in 50 of them guns, and those involved in the other 50 no guns. Let's see which of the two groups result in more death and severe injuries. That's my point. Remove the guns, and there's a net benefit for safety overall. Guns are an accelerant when emotions get heated.
Click to expand...

Everyone has a right to bear arms . How about give them all firearms and move out of the way . Stay out of their business and let them work it out . I’ll bet you have less deaths when they all know each and everyone there has one .
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77
#1,031
#1,031
evillawyer said:
Do you think the situation, absent the Rambo toy strapped around his neck, would have escalated so quickly and had the same ending without the gun? I don't.

It's really a simple proposition. Take 100 bar fights. Give those involved in 50 of them guns, and those involved in the other 50 no guns. Let's see which of the two groups result in more death and severe injuries. That's my point. Remove the guns, and there's a net benefit for safety overall. Guns are an accelerant when emotions get heated.
Click to expand...
Yeah it would have been a lot worse. The guy without the gun now gets the crap beat out of him and ends up dead or hospitalized as we have seen many victims end up.

This wasnt a bar fight between you and one other guy because you bumped into each other. This was you sitting down to have dinner and a gang comes over, starts beating you and wants to burn your house down.

Your idea of "better" has a lot more victims and criminals in it.

Until the rioters get put down they arent going to stop.

I guarantee you "lefty", the guy who got shot, days of burning stuff and chasing down people with his own gun are done. If you had your way the victim would be in the hospital and lrfty would be out there burning more stuff down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RikidyBones, davethevol and ButchPlz
#1,032
#1,032
k-town_king said:
As was his right. I would pull mine out if some punk with a rifle was trying to intimidate us from exercising our constitutional rights.

The guy came looking for trouble and started shooting when pressed. Punk move
Click to expand...
They actually both have that right. Only one attempted to violate the rights of another

When did arson, assault, attempted murder, etc get added to the Constitution?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, 825VOL, jaybird_1981 and 10 others
#1,037
#1,037
k-town_king said:
As was his right. I would pull mine out if some punk with a rifle was trying to intimidate us from exercising our constitutional rights.

The guy came looking for trouble and started shooting when pressed. Punk move
Click to expand...
He only started shooting after they ran him down and punched him in the back.

And under this logic they guy who got shot was also looking for trouble if he was armed as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, tntar heel and Rickyvol77
#1,039
#1,039
0nelilreb said:
Everyone has a right to bear arms . How about give them all firearms and move out of the way . Stay out of their business and let them work it out . I’ll bet you have less deaths when they all know each and everyone there has one .
Click to expand...

It's really a prisoners dilemma problem. The best societal outcome is where no one has guns. But since anyone can have a gun, lots of people get them because they don't know if others are packing. If others are packing, they think they'll be safer if they're packing too. But this ends up causing a proliferation of guns and a suboptimal outcome.

.
 
#1,041
#1,041
RockyTop85 said:
No doubt there a balance among several competing interest, but IMO, the trend of trying to perform that balance from the victim’s* perspective is a very large part of the problem.

The idea of a criminal legal system isn’t to make the victim whole or fill some void in them. There are other processes for attempting to approximate that.

The purpose is to serve the communal interests of deterring crime, reforming criminals, protecting the public, maintaining credibility etc. So when you correctly frame the structure of the system from that perspective, both sides have an interest in “favoring“ the defendant to maintain the credibility and integrity of the government. (See e.g. CCP).

The reason is that the victim cannot be made whole. The victim who seeks to fill the void is insatiable. This is why the system should be viewed as a community function, not a service to victims.

Unfortunately, that type of dispassionate logic doesn’t win elections, and we’ve had enough generations of politicians running on the passions aroused by the system’s inability to quench the pangs of victimhood that I think society has legitimately gotten to the point where I’m wrong and you’re right, at least in terms of the values in which our system is now rooted.

* - FWIW, I agree with your point about perspectives and it’s definitely still valid even though I’m taking issue with what I think is more of a causal detail than a central pillar of what you’re saying.
Click to expand...
I'm totally on board with your responses, I see nothing "wrong" with them at all.

I think the biggest beef I have with our CJ system is that there is a double standard and I'm not talking race. I'm talking economics, in that the rich usually don't go to prison, and if they do, they don't go to the "bad" places. Justice, or the semblance of it, too many times, can be bought. $ buys good defense, no $ gets public defenders (not a slam on PD, there are really some good ones) but a team generally beats one person particularly when that one person has a swamped case load and little resources compared to what $ can access. This can apply to DA's as well.

The capabilities of an attorney, whether it be for the defense or the prosecution, usually has an inordinate role to play in the verdict. $ can buy you a great firm with top of their field attorneys. Only the rich can afford this.

The case load for both PD's and DA's is ridiculous. Their budgets are limited. Throw in the lack of enough judges and courtrooms to handle all the cases that would go to a jury explains why the vast majority of cases are plead out. The system is set up for that to occur.

These are all problems. Unfortunately, I don't have a solution to them nor do I know of anyone who does. So onward through the fog we go.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, tntar heel and RockyTop85
#1,042
#1,042
evillawyer said:
It's really a prisoners dilemma problem. The best societal outcome is where no one has guns. But since anyone can have a gun, lots of people get them because they don't know if others are packing. If others are packing, they think they'll be safer if they're packing too. But this ends up causing a proliferation of guns and a suboptimal outcome.

Click to expand...

That’s one way to look at it . It’s wrong but still .
 
#1,044
#1,044
evillawyer said:
It's really a prisoners dilemma problem. The best societal outcome is where no one has guns. But since anyone can have a gun, lots of people get them because they don't know if others are packing. If others are packing, they think they'll be safer if they're packing too. But this ends up causing a proliferation of guns and a suboptimal outcome.
Click to expand...
How many legal gun owners commit crimes using that gun? How many illegal gun owners commit crimes using that gun?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, 10nacvols, 84Volfan and 3 others
#1,046
#1,046
utvolpj said:
Don't need to be one when your life is threatened for exercising those Constitutionally protected rights

Now answer my question
Click to expand...
allvol123 said:
Self defense .
Click to expand...


Why was he there? Was that his home or business that was threatened?

Nope, just showed up to a protest to start crap because he owns a gun. he didn't expect or maybe he wanted to get beat up. Either way he purposely created the situation and conflict.
 
#1,048
#1,048
k-town_king said:
Why was he there? Was that his home or business that was threatened?

Nope, just showed up to a protest to start crap because he owns a gun. he didn't expect or maybe he wanted to get beat up. Either way he purposely created the situation and conflict.
Click to expand...
Wait you said they were just exercising their constitutional rights. Why are homes and businesses being threatened? Is that in the Constitution and I missed it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, LouderVol, tennvols77 and 3 others
#1,049
#1,049
k-town_king said:
Why was he there? Was that his home or business that was threatened?

Nope, just showed up to a protest to start crap because he owns a gun. he didn't expect or maybe he wanted to get beat up. Either way he purposely created the situation and conflict.
Click to expand...

Is that the rioters business and cars they are burning or did they just show up because they want to purposely create a situation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, Behr, Rickyvol77 and 2 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top