Jump to content

scottsins

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    1658
  • Joined

Everything posted by scottsins

  1. What a convenient bitch-assed way to bow out of the thread after multiple posts not coming anywhere NEAR addressing the legal analysis which refutes your theory. You didn't just ghost the thread. You set of some false martyrish "high road". Weak
  2. PM Troph. She knows this shit and deals with it regularly in her practice. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  3. I have no issue with the conclusion that Brooks was under the influence, but I would point out that the “breathalyzer” test referenced is not admissible in court at all, because it does not meet minimal standards of reliability and accuracy.
  4. Is your theory about “leftist DA’s” deliberately trying to have cops walk away unscathed, as a result of their over-charging, in order to spark violence? If so, WOW. They may be politically motivated to “go for more”, but your explanation is literally not even fathomable, because you ignore how LESSER INCLUDED CHARGES work in Minnesota. I won’t get into the details since most people here are familiar, but if you are saying that Floyd’s killer is going to walk because he was charged with 2nd degree, just name a dollar amount and we can book this wager however you want. They could up it to the most severe charge that they have on the books and he STILL isn’t walking out of that courtroom a free man.
  5. Not sure if it’s what you are after, but from April 10 - June 10, overall U.S. deaths totaled 109k more than the same period of last year.
  6. Wow. They really take that oath seriously.
  7. The indictment contains a bunch of lesser insiders so I’m thinking that something will land.
  8. Who the fuck arms themselves and goes out solo to “protect a sculpture”? Obviously doesn’t merit being surrounded and jumped (if that’s the whole story), but seriously. WTF?
  9. #horselivesmatter Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  10. This sounds like very plausible analysis, but if you throw around terms like “every jurisdiction” and “clear” from a legal standpoint”, you need to cite statutes and case law. I would pick at one piece of your analysis regarding “attempted aggravated assault” though. The hypothetical you describe would just be aggravated assault (assuming a taser qualifies) and not “attempted”, under Texas law. ETA: The scenario you describe would almost always be prosecuted under the deadly conduct statute, and it would not be uncommon for it to be a misdemeanor.
  11. So tasers should be classified and treated as deadly force? So cops should only use them when confronted with deadly force? They shouldn’t use them to subdue unarmed fleeing/resisting individuals?
  12. Yeah. You see him point a bright yellow taser.
  13. I mean, I’m not behind the banning of the Eyes, but your post implies that this THE THING (singular) that they chose to go after, out of “all of the change the athletes could ask for”. That implication is fucking inaccurate and stupid AF. It’s one of 8 bullet points of asks from a list of proposals specific the The University and athletics. It’s like if they abandoned these goals than suddenly their main goal of “no more police murdering blacks” would magically come to fruition.
  14. They tried to taze him but he took one cop’s taser, ran and then attempted to taze a cop while running away from him. Said cop then Un-holstered his pistol and opened fire. I mean, the cop KNEW it was a taser because it was just taken from his partner while the two of them struggled with the suspect.
  15. Paywall Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  16. His social media stuff is so off putting and creepy. The legion of Tom Segura podcast listeners trolling his comments sections is worth the squeeze though. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  17. Weird. That glib response doesn’t seem to be given in by those same people in response to #bluelivesmatter, even without the “too” added to the end. I wonder why that is.
  18. Literally NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. Strawman trolling at its worst.
  19. So you DO want them tear gassed because they MIGHT become violent? Also, they were NOT going to be attacked like that, but for the president’s need to go to a photo-op, so your justification is totally irrelevant.
  20. I mean, I assume you are familiar with the need and drive to scream “FUCK YOU” at someone who has treated you like garbage, right? Rage may not be an objective. Fine. So what? People still express rage, anger, etc. and without some white boarded bullet point plan of action sought. If that’s what a lot of these people are doing, what’s the problem? Asking what the point is just seems like a useless exercise, BUT... There are organized group led demonstrations being conducted by people with specific objectives. I am kinda shocked that any average American couldn’t spitball 3 or 4 random “asks” when it comes to the way that some of us are policed. You/your friends really can’t think of anything that they might want out of this?
  21. I don’t anyone is claiming that those idiots are the same who are actually protesting for the cause, so no reason to expect their actions to line up with some legitimate objective.
  22. Haven’t caught up since late last night. Have we dealt with earlier posts about that “guy in Dallas being beat to death because he is white” bullshit, or is straight not trolling from garbage twitter accounts still rampant here? #justaskingquestions
×
×
  • Create New...