• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

FSTO said:
Sorry Fishbone, but that was second degree murder.

manshoorylaw.com

Degrees of Murder Explained: 1st vs 2nd vs 3rd Degree

Learn the difference between 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree murder, including key elements, intent, penalties, and sentencing. Read our full guide.
manshoorylaw.com manshoorylaw.com

Second Degree Murder​

2nd-degree murder or second-degree manslaughter is still a very serious crime but is a step down in severity when compared to the 1st degree. In general terms, a 2nd-degree murder is one that doesn’t have any kind of premeditation and may only have been intended to cause harm, rather than death.

  • Intentional Killings Without Premeditation
One of the defining aspects of a second-degree manslaughter or murder charge is that there isn’t any sort of plan or premeditation on behalf of the killer. Even if they intend to kill someone at the moment of the crime, it may simply occur in the heat of the moment and isn’t something that they planned out in advance.
According to VP Vance he likely had a hair trigger to begin with. That in no way absolves him of the crime.

  • Intent to Cause Only Serious Bodily Harm
This is another factor that might define second-degree murder. The defendant might not have actually intended to kill their victim. Instead, they may have only had the intent to cause serious bodily harm.
Did he intend to shoot her when he left his vehicle no, but it was not accidental either.
  • Extreme Indifference to Human Life
Another type of second-degree murder is when a victim dies because the defendant showed an extreme level of indifference for their life.
When he said "F**king B**tch after he pumped three bullets into her, walked over to the car and glanced at the dead body and provided no aid, and then followed up with a circling of the finger over his head as if to say, "We're done here, lets GTFO!" That is the definition of indifference to human life.
Click to expand...

OK, we'll agree to disagree shall we? I'm not ready to melt the tar yet.
 
QV said:
You should take your argument up with Andrew McCarthy.

One thing is for certain: confronting and harassing LEO who are in the execution of their duties (whether you agree with that or not) will likely end badly for you one way or the other.
Click to expand...
So you feel that a woman trying to leave the area should be shot 3 times in the face…got it!
 
Halifax Tar said:
There is vide with an view from an elevated position down the street, where I can see he probably thought she was trying to run him down because she does strike him wither her vehicle and he seems to slide down the driver side making the shots.

I dunno.

What I do know is as tensions rise I don't expect to less and less of these.
Click to expand...

QV said:
You should take your argument up with Andrew McCarthy.

One thing is for certain: confronting and harassing LEO who are in the execution of their duties (whether you agree with that or not) will likely end badly for you one way or the other.
Click to expand...


A couple few years ago I was doing work up training for Bosnia and we were given an example about rules of engagement.

The story went that there were 3 British soldiers on a check point and a car raced toward them. They all opened fire. One of the soldiers stopped shooting as the vehicle passed them, the other 2 continued to shoot. We were told the the one soldier who stopped shooting didn't get in trouble but the two soldiers who continued to shoot once yhe car was passed them were charged (murder or attempted murder or some such thing).

I'm not sure if that reqlly happened but the lesson stuck with me.

I've listened to some LEO debates on this shooting and some are claiming there is a separation between the officer shooting her through the windshield and shooting her through the passenger window. Other LEOs are saying the shootings will be viewed as one incident and 2 separate engagements.
 
Jarnhamar said:
A couple few years ago I was doing work up training for Bosnia and we were given an example about rules of engagement.

The story went that there were 3 British soldiers on a check point and a car raced toward them. They all opened fire. One of the soldiers stopped shooting as the vehicle passed them, the other 2 continued to shoot. We were told the the one soldier who stopped shooting didn't get in trouble but the two soldiers who continued to shoot once yhe car was passed them were charged (murder or attempted murder or some such thing).

I'm not sure if that reqlly happened but the lesson stuck with me.

I've listened to some LEO debates on this shooting and some are claiming there is a separation between the officer shooting her through the windshield and shooting her through the passenger window. Other LEOs are saying the shootings will be viewed as one incident and 2 separate engagements.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I'm not going to get too deep into arguing this one way or another - I don't have the interest or inclination to follow it close enough to do that.

Amidst the pitch forks, I thought it relevant to point out that even a Trump hating former Assistant US Attorney has said, so far, it looks like self defense.
 
Jarnhamar said:
A couple few years ago I was doing work up training for Bosnia and we were given an example about rules of engagement.

The story went that there were 3 British soldiers on a check point and a car raced toward them. They all opened fire. One of the soldiers stopped shooting as the vehicle passed them, the other 2 continued to shoot. We were told the the one soldier who stopped shooting didn't get in trouble but the two soldiers who continued to shoot once yhe car was passed them were charged (murder or attempted murder or some such thing).

I'm not sure if that reqlly happened but the lesson stuck with me.

I've listened to some LEO debates on this shooting and some are claiming there is a separation between the officer shooting her through the windshield and shooting her through the passenger window. Other LEOs are saying the shootings will be viewed as one incident and 2 separate engagements.
Click to expand...
Back in the days of yore the rule was engage the target until they were no longer a threat. That is up to interpretation and the context of what sore of environment you're in.
 
OldSolduer said:
Back in the days of yore the rule was engage the target until they were no longer a threat. That is up to interpretation and the context of what sore of environment you're in.
Click to expand...
These debates always get spicy. Maybe they are doing the "move" portion of "fire & movement"?
 
Jarnhamar said:
A couple few years ago I was doing work up training for Bosnia and we were given an example about rules of engagement.

The story went that there were 3 British soldiers on a check point and a car raced toward them. They all opened fire. One of the soldiers stopped shooting as the vehicle passed them, the other 2 continued to shoot. We were told the the one soldier who stopped shooting didn't get in trouble but the two soldiers who continued to shoot once yhe car was passed them were charged (murder or attempted murder or some such thing).

I'm not sure if that reqlly happened but the lesson stuck with me.

I've listened to some LEO debates on this shooting and some are claiming there is a separation between the officer shooting her through the windshield and shooting her through the passenger window. Other LEOs are saying the shootings will be viewed as one incident and 2 separate engagements.
Click to expand...

My distrust and dislike for LEOs is pretty well documented on these means.

But I will admit that it's really easy to watch a bunch of videos after the event tell someone what they should have done instead.

And I don't think people can disconnect their personal politics from issues like this.

Sadly as I said before I don't expect this will be last time...
 
  • Like
Reactions: QV
QV said:
These debates always get spicy. Maybe they are doing the "move" portion of "fire & movement"?
Click to expand...
In the Cold War era in an all out war we were trained to shoot them til they stopped, whether they were running away or not.

As for UN ROE in Cyprus I like to make the joke "you better have a sucking chest wound before you load your weapon".

UNPROFOR changed all that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QV
brihard said:
Trump is unhappy that the CEO of Exxon apparently called Venezuela “uninvestable” when he summoned oil execs to meet last week regarding the future of Venezuela’s oil industry. In consequence, he may exclude Exxon from this investment opportunity.

www.reuters.com

Trump says he might keep Exxon out of Venezuela after CEO called it 'uninvestable'

Exxon CEO Darren Woods told Trump that Venezuela would need to change its laws.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...

Halliburton CEO sitting beside Trump when he told him tha they pulled out of Venezuela back in 2019. Trumps asks, “why did you pull out?” Halliburton CEO pauses for a moment, then diplomatically says, “because of the sanctions…”

Perhaps learning from the USMCA “We have to fix it. Whoever did this didn’t know what they were doing!” facepalm-worthy forgetting his own policy, Trump didn’t pursue “sanctions from who?”
 
Jarnhamar said:
A couple few years ago I was doing work up training for Bosnia and we were given an example about rules of engagement.

The story went that there were 3 British soldiers on a check point and a car raced toward them. They all opened fire. One of the soldiers stopped shooting as the vehicle passed them, the other 2 continued to shoot. We were told the the one soldier who stopped shooting didn't get in trouble but the two soldiers who continued to shoot once yhe car was passed them were charged (murder or attempted murder or some such thing).

I'm not sure if that reqlly happened but the lesson stuck with me.

I've listened to some LEO debates on this shooting and some are claiming there is a separation between the officer shooting her through the windshield and shooting her through the passenger window. Other LEOs are saying the shootings will be viewed as one incident and 2 separate engagements.
Click to expand...
I ran the Bosnia Training Advisory Team (1 RGJ less the CO) in the UK preparing a BG (Royal Horseguards) to head over there as part of IFOR) and we ran lots of ROE scenarios, but I found that the NITAT (Northern Ireland) scenarios and TTPs to be less than fully pertinent. I attended said training about 6-8 months later as 1 RGJ prepped to deploy as part of SFOR and I found that the ROE scenarios had been updated - the sign of a learning organisation.
 
Last edited:
QV said:
Here are some bad dudes ICE recently nabbed in sanctuary city Minnesota.

www.foxnews.com

ICE arrests in Minnesota surge include numerous convicted child rapists, killers

ICE arrested convicted criminals in Minnesota, including alleged child rapists and killers with decades-old deportation orders still roaming free.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

These guys were grabbed yesterday: ‘Worst of the worst’: ICE arrests child predator, violent criminals amid surge in anti-agent attacks

Who's arguing this??
Click to expand...
Nobody’s arguing the apprehension of actual criminals, at least nobody here. Some of us take issue with them approaching random people and threatening them with unlawful detention if they don’t produce proof of citizenship without any probable cause to do so, knowing that there’s no legal requirement to do so. Some of us take issue with them conducting unlawful forced entries of residences without warrants letting them do so. Some of us are concerned at threats and violence from ICE to people exercising first amendment rights to protest and to observe law enforcement in public spaces.

Those are all reasonable things to be concerned with, as those behaviours from law enforcement are characteristic of a police state with declining individual freedoms.
 
It's a pendulum thing again. The farther something goes one way, the harder it needs to swing back to eventually correct.
 
QV said:
It's a pendulum thing again. The farther something goes one way, the harder it needs to swing back to eventually correct.
Click to expand...
Or maybe, just maybe, an ideal solution might be found in the middle of the extremes?

Like with the Venezuela thing, you can have wrong/bad ways (ICE, POTUS47 version) to do things that many agree should be done (get rid of criminals, and enforce deportation orders). Something, something, walk, chew gum ....
 
QV said:
It's a pendulum thing again. The farther something goes one way, the harder it needs to swing back to eventually correct.
Click to expand...
A pendulum analogy fails immediately as soon as energy is being added to the object in motion. Pendulums don’t have net acceleration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yrys
US invades Mexico (Playa Bagdad)
Replies
18
Views
4K
brihard
B
Edward Campbell
    • Wow
    • Like
    • Sad
PAK National Arrested in QC Plotting Attack in NYC
2
Replies
35
Views
19K
OldSolduer
OldSolduer
George Wallace
SEP 2024 - Kiel Institute Report - "Fit for war in decades: Europe's and Germany's slow rearmament vis-a-vis Russia"
2
Replies
26
Views
16K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
    • Insightful
    • Like
Analysis of US Wishlists 2025
Replies
0
Views
8K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Retired AF Guy
    • Like
Departmental Results Report 2022-2023
Replies
2
Views
12K
daftandbarmy
daftandbarmy
Back
Top