maybe she had drawn her weapon because someone was trying to break into her house? just hypothetizing here.


[x] no more hesitation works, police did not hestitate

incidentally, she was the person who CALLED the cops, because someone broke in. Which just goes to show, you should never call the cops. They might rape you, they might murder you, but however it plays out, it's not going to be good.

I'd shoot anyone I felt threatened by. I don't know the specifics here so it's hard to comment.

I wouldn't just shoot her if I responded to a scene saw her, yelled "drop the gun" and she just kept wandering around the backyard.

If she turned toward me and I saw the gun moving toward me, I'd shoot.

So it's like a video game? The people who call the cops have like a bright yellow highlighter around them, letting the cops know "That's who you're to make contact with".

I always wondered what those Oakleys were for.

I love the progression here of:
"LOL DUMB PIGS, mistaking a knitting needle for a gun!"

She had a gun....

"IT WAS HER HOUSE, she CALLED THE COPS! Don't EVER CALL THE COPS! They might RAPE you!"

This guys honestly both more fun to argue with and easier to win with than Boro..

This one would work better in the cold dead hands thread. This never would have happened if there were better background checks and magazine size restrictions!

I don't understand how people can believe it's okay to just gun down an 80 year old lady. Don't you have a grandmother?

Well, most of of us read on a little better level than you so we're not seeing an 80 year old woman "just shot". It's a bit more complex than that.

Unless you want to go back to that conversation about how you believe certain groups are exempt from ever having deadly force used on them, regardless of their actions, which I think we all poles LOL'd pretty hard at.

With a gun in her hand she is more dangerous than anybody on the planet who isn't holding a gun. Those things are equalizers.

OF4's brand of bullet: I'm fired by a 83 year old granny. I think I will refuse to hurt anyone.

Right... maybe it was an ambush! A terrified old lady called the cops, hoping to off a bunch of them when they showed up. That sort of complexity?


Or maybe a criminal tried to attack her, she fended him off with her gun, but unfortunately was no match for the other more coordinated criminals, who's extensive training in officer safety and no more hesitation (tm) seminars taught them it's better to murder than ask questions.

What exactly is a "No More Hesitation" seminar and how many have you attended?

So what do you suggest should happen if an 80+ year old lady can't continue to pay rent? Are you still sticking with your no-violence stance then... or is that somehow 'different' in your book and violence, as in an eviction, is then justified?

Wall her up in there until she starves.

haha total troll getting what he wants

I don't support non-violence. While I admire pacifists, I am not a Tolstoyian and believe that violence is under some circumstances legitimate. Specifically to repel aggression. Someone who has decided or is unable to pay their rent, but chooses to remain living in an apartment or house anyway, is trespassing on their landlords property, like any other squatter. The landlord has the right to expel these individuals from their property, just as any property owner has the right to expel anyone who trespasses. If you deny this right, then you also deny your own right to expel someone who trespasses on property that you yourself own or have leased - in short, how could you kick a homeless bum out of your own apartment, if you do not grant this right universally to all who own property?

So it's ok for you to gun down an 80 year old woman sometimes, but not the cops?

CSB

But why should someone be unable to pay their rent? The phenomenon of homelessness is entirely preventable. It is precisely state intervention in the economy, most notably in the labour and housing markets, that causes this issue. 'quality' regulations ensure that housing is expensive, that the housing which those at the very lowest income levels in our society could afford is illegal to construct. Unemployment, which is certainly a significant cause in evictions is also entirely preventable. But what causes unemployment? Is it a lack of inflation, as the Keynesians claim? Or is the brutal inner workings of capitalism itself? Not at all. There are no shortages or gluts on the market. The real problem with unemployment is the minimum wage. When the market is prevented from clearing, by establishing a minimum price, this results in a glut which in the case of the labour market, we label unemployment. This is entirely preventable, simply by abolishing the minimum wage. Of course there are other types of unemployment and disemployment caused by other labour regulations (i.e. the prohibitions on child labour and the criminalization of working excessive hours in a day or a week), and of course all of these regulations should be abolished as well. The solution is simply deregulation.

Instead of blaming the landlord, for evicting the old woman who cannot pay her rent, we should ask 'why can't she pay her rent'. The source of all economic ills is the state. The state, which has savaged the economy, through it's endless plunder and theft. The state which hobbles free enterprise, at every turn. When you consider the opportunity costs inherent in the ridiculous waste that is government expenditure, when you consider how much more prosperous we would all be if we were free, then you understand how radically different society would be without the state, without it's endless and needless regulation, taxation and general intereference in the lives of individuals.

Or we could go your way and abolish private property. Heard that worked out pretty well the last couple dozen times it was attempted.

I'm amazed you haven't found some way to rationalize the penultimate story I posted here, DBJr, the one where a woman called the cops, was raped by the first cop who responded, and then jailed by his cop buddies for complaining about the rape, and these scum the DA decided it wasn't worth prosecuting. I'm sure you can think up something if you wrack your brain hard enough.

No, I don't defend everything, that's the weak ass argument of someone with reading difficulties.

If he really did it, there's no excuse for it. They're scum.

However, I also believe the DA's burden of proof should be the same for him as any other man. No more, no less. "He Said/She Said" rapes with no witnesses and no evidence are hard to prove. That's knowledge, guy. Not theory, not dormroom bull****, knowledge.

You seem to have some difficulty behaving responsibly and rationally, and I think a good bit of that transfers over into your political beliefs, thoughts on government/law enforcement etc..

No, this is a false equivalence.

A home invasion != an unlawful detainer. A home invasion is a crime, quite often a violent crime. An absentee landlord is not suffering a home invasion, any violent crime, or even a criminal offense at all whenever someone overstays their rent. Overstaying rent is not even trespassing. In fact it is only a civil matter, a tort, called unlawful detainer.

The only violence, and the only home invasion involved in an unlawful detainer, is during the eviction. Just that simple.

It always cracks me up with these dogmatic libertarian types... oh we don't believe in a world ruled by violence... well except we do, much more strict and deadly violence in fact... property rights uber-ales. They'd shoot there own 80 year old grandma if she didn't pay them their rent!

Popehat is always awesome, but Ken White crushed it today:

I started to bold text but realized I had only left out a couple of words.

So a murder case rests on the head on an ex cop serving time for perjury?

That's gotta be a wet dream for the defense.

Afraid not: