Pardons, Commutations and Dropped Prosecutions Catch-All

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 234
  • Views: 5K
  • Politics 
ZZLPHeels said:
Super, you are supposed to be an attorney. The details matter. Can you please tell us all which person this particular officer hurt when he returned fire? Not understanding an argument and then shouting "racism" to cover your tracks isn't a good look.
Click to expand...
Can you tell me which person Kathy Boudin killed in the Brinks Armored Truck incident? She got life in prison. She didn't fire a shot.

What I am telling you is that the fact that his shots missed is not relevant. Because it is not relevant to the charge. I understand your argument just fine. There is no universe in which you would advance a legal argument I can't understand. Good lord, man. The problem isn't my understanding.

Answer the question: should attempted murder be a crime? You're not answering because you know this fatally undermines your argument here and you don't want to admit it.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
We can both agree that he knows the law, then, as is evident by his decision not to bring charges against officers that returned fire after being fired upon.
Click to expand...
WTF is wrong with you? Did you hit your head last night?

Daniel Cameron didn't fail to bring charges because he didn't know the law. He failed to bring charges because he was running for governor in Kentucky. It's similar to the reason that Clinton flew back to Arkansas to observe the death penalty for Ricky Ray Rector, if I remember the name correctly.
 
superrific said:
Can you tell me which person Kathy Boudin killed in the Brinks Armored Truck incident? She got life in prison. She didn't fire a shot.

What I am telling you is that the fact that his shots missed is not relevant. Because it is not relevant to the charge. I understand your argument just fine. There is no universe in which you would advance a legal argument I can't understand. Good lord, man. The problem isn't my understanding.

Answer the question: should attempted murder be a crime? You're not answering because you know this fatally undermines your argument here and you don't want to admit it.
Click to expand...

Returning fire after being fired upon isn't attempted murder, as is evident by the fact that the only cop charged who opened fire that night was the one who only hit drywall.
 
superrific said:
WTF is wrong with you? Did you hit your head last night?

Daniel Cameron didn't fail to bring charges because he didn't know the law. He failed to bring charges because he was running for governor in Kentucky.
Click to expand...

That's certainly an opinion.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
Returning fire after being fired upon isn't attempted murder
Click to expand...
But the fact that attempted murder is a crime punishable by life completely undercuts your contention that somehow he should get off just because he missed.

I'm not going to argue with you about this any further. It's demeaning. Watching grass grow would be more productive than talking to a mook who is completely ignorant but thinks that somehow he's wonderfully informed.
 
superrific said:
But the fact that attempted murder is a crime punishable by life completely undercuts your contention that somehow he should get off just because he missed.

I'm not going to argue with you about this any further. It's demeaning. Watching grass grow would be more productive than talking to a mook who is completely ignorant but thinks that somehow he's wonderfully informed.
Click to expand...

Ok, well enjoy watching this guy get sentenced to a day in prison tomorrow. That's probably a day more than he deserves.
 
BlooVooDoo said:
One day might be enough if they put him in general population. 🤞
Click to expand...
Actually, reading further it appears as if the one day would count as time served, as he spent about 8 hours getting processed when he was initially booked. Even better.
 
superrific said:
In this expression, shooting first isn't relative to another person; it means you shoot before thinking.
Click to expand...
Ok, still not seeing a relation between the two posts. Additionally, when you are being shot at, taking time to think before shooting back is a luxury that you may not have.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
Ok, still not seeing a relation between the two posts. Additionally, when you are being shot at, taking time to think before shooting back is a luxury that you may not have.
Click to expand...
Bullshit. Just stop the bullshit. The point here is that you think any collateral damage is acceptable in self-defense. You're making that very clear in both your attitudes in Gaza and in this thread. That is not a reasonable position, which is why your view is illegal in every developed world country, to the best of my knowledge. It certainly is not the content of international law, which is why Israel is committing a genocide. Don't bother to respond to this point because I'm not going to read it and neither will anyone else because your ignorance of these matters is a matter of record, including by your own admission.

You also make it extremely clear that your sympathies go to the white person in every encounter. That's just the way it is. Maybe that's conscious or maybe it's not, but either way you should probably do something about it if you want anyone to care what you think. You've been incredibly diminished in my view from this exchange.
 
superrific said:
Bullshit. Just stop the bullshit. The point here is that you think any collateral damage is acceptable in self-defense. You're making that very clear in both your attitudes in Gaza and in this thread. That is not a reasonable position, which is why your view is illegal in every developed world country, to the best of my knowledge. It certainly is not the content of international law, which is why Israel is committing a genocide. Don't bother to respond to this point because I'm not going to read it and neither will anyone else because your ignorance of these matters is a matter of record, including by your own admission.

You also make it extremely clear that your sympathies go to the white person in every encounter. That's just the way it is. Maybe that's conscious or maybe it's not, but either way you should probably do something about it if you want anyone to care what you think. You've been incredibly diminished in my view from this exchange.
Click to expand...
The “you disagree with me so you must be racist” trope is so tired and so beneath you. Not really worthy of a response because I know that you aren’t serious.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
As is stands, the prospect of a life sentence for an alleged crime that didn't even injure a single person is preposterous.
Click to expand...
Earlier this year, Nicholas Roske pleaded guilty for attempted murder of Brett Kavanaugh despite not firing a shot and calling the cops on himself. What sentence would you recommend?
 
1moretimeagain said:
Earlier this year, Nicholas Roske pleaded guilty for attempted murder of Brett Kavanaugh despite not firing a shot and calling the cops on himself. What sentence would you recommend?
Click to expand...
Probably some inpatient mental health treatment for that guy. Not familiar with the details of that case though.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
The “you disagree with me so you must be racist” trope is so tired and so beneath you.
Click to expand...
Good thing I wasn't asserting that. You could agree with me and be racist, or disagree without. My observation is that you consistently find a way to side with white people in conflict with non-white people, and you end asserting weird, clearly unreasonable theories in order to do so. Like I said, maybe it's conscious and maybe it's not. Either way, it's not a good look.

That was also a side point. The main point is that it's legit BSC to exonerate an officer who fires a dozen shots blindly into an apartment building with no clue was inside just because he was lucky enough not to have hit anyone.
 
superrific said:
Good thing I wasn't asserting that. You could agree with me and be racist, or disagree without. My observation is that you consistently find a way to side with white people in conflict with non-white people, and you end asserting weird, clearly unreasonable theories in order to do so. Like I said, maybe it's conscious and maybe it's not. Either way, it's not a good look.

That was also a side point. The main point is that it's legit BSC to exonerate an officer who fires a dozen shots blindly into an apartment building with no clue was inside just because he was lucky enough not to have hit anyone.
Click to expand...
Constantly? Surely you have examples to back this up? Also bold of you to just assume that Israelis are all white.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top