User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:02:21 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Word of the day: Polemic I love it when people who cannot acknowledge their own subjective bias use straw man arguments to discredit other people's thoughts on a subject, which is always stated in a manner that suggests emotion is being used in place of logic. And that, the polemicist believes to be true, because his subjective perceptions disallow him from reasoning that any contrary position to his has any logical merit based on critical evaluation of circumstances, both relevant to the point of discussion as well as surrounding factors that have bearing on the topic. No, instead their thoughts must originate from illogical and emotional reactions, and the discourse must be won by the fragile polemicist, as defeating the enemy is the only objective, as opposed to coming to some higher understanding... that is, unless the higher understanding is the intellectual capitulation of the opponent. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The amount of veteran posters on here calling for someone to be locked in a cage based on emotion, not rule of law, is sad. Very reminiscent of militant BLM people calling for "justice" or gun grabbers calling for confiscation. Word of the day: Polemic I love it when people who cannot acknowledge their own subjective bias use straw man arguments to discredit other people's thoughts on a subject, which is always stated in a manner that suggests emotion is being used in place of logic. And that, the polemicist believes to be true, because his subjective perceptions disallow him from reasoning that any contrary position to his has any logical merit based on critical evaluation of circumstances, both relevant to the point of discussion as well as surrounding factors that have bearing on the topic. No, instead their thoughts must originate from illogical and emotional reactions, and the discourse must be won by the fragile polemicist, as defeating the enemy is the only objective, as opposed to coming to some higher understanding... that is, unless the higher understanding is the intellectual capitulation of the opponent. I had to google that word, thanks for teaching me something new 
Most of the posts I've made in this thread don't have any personal opinion. That one does, and of course I'm biased. Everyone enters the debate with bias. doesn't make me wrong, tho |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:06:05 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nope. In this case it's a wry commentary on the facts. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You mean 'facts'. The DA said the officers story was a lie (not substantiated by the investigation, witnesses, or car telemetry), not me. From the linked article: In a statement taken at the scene, Wood claimed that Olin had veered into his lane. The DA reported that the opposite was true. That does not say the DA said the officer lied. Not substantiated by investigation now means intentional lie? Really? It probably was just an honest misunderstanding since he was driving his car down the bike path. I think that's supposed to be a witty retort but frankly I'm not positive............. Nope. In this case it's a wry commentary on the facts. Bike path /=/ bike lane Most of you know I ride bicycles and am one of the evil libtard bicycles belong on the road not the sidewalk brigrade. Does it cause some of you think when I'm saying no charges against someone that killed a cyclist who by all reports was following the rules of the road? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:06:39 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The facts of this case apparently don't support that charge. It's that simple. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You may be right. But the Deputy didn't break that law, and I'd like to think you're not in favor of ex post facto prosecution. Accountability will be had in civil court, I'd wager. Where did I say he should be ticketed for operating his computer? I'm saying that he should be tried for driving in the bike lane and killing a rider in a reckless and negligent manner. The facts of this case apparently don't support that charge. It's that simple. The officer drove into the bike lane and hit a rider with a vehicle that was in control and had no mechanical failures. What facts do you see that remove that from the realm of negligance? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:06:49 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you're involved in a fatality on duty you don't write a report and do the investigation yourself. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Police falsifying their reports is not a crime in CA? I find that difficult to believe. If you're involved in a fatality on duty you don't write a report and do the investigation yourself. We weren't allowed to do the report on any accident we were involved in at work, Sgt. or Lt. had to do it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:09:07 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I appreciate the answers, thank you. Does involuntary manslaughter enter the equation? We know he didn't intend to strike the bicyclist. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nope, I'm not shocked. Not one bit. Oh really.............. Three easy questions, Brian. Do you think the officer should be charged? No - I don't think PC has been met for voluntary manslaughter. I don't recall hearing of manslaughter charges for no LE drivers when distracted by things like adjusting the radio - actions that are not specifically prohibited by statute. Maybe they're out there. What charge? See above What should happen to the officer for outright lying? How can I be more clear than what I've posted multiple times already in this thread? If he or any other cop knowingly lied fire him/them. The "evidence" presented in this thread so far does not meet the "knowingly" threshold. I appreciate the answers, thank you. Does involuntary manslaughter enter the equation? We know he didn't intend to strike the bicyclist. I don't think so but I'm not a lawyer - and it appears at least some of the lawyers in this thread think it might be a possibility. Obviously, the DA doesn't think it does. RDP had a pretty good reply on it within the last couple of pages. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:12:33 PM EDT
[#6]
So if I nail someone in my car because I was texting/emailing for work, it would be ok?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:13:14 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So if I nail someone in my car because I was texting/emailing for work, it would be ok? Are you a CA cop? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:13:18 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I had to google that word, thanks for teaching me something new
Most of the posts I've made in this thread don't have any personal opinion. That one does, and of course I'm biased. Everyone enters the debate with bias. doesn't make me wrong, tho Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amount of veteran posters on here calling for someone to be locked in a cage based on emotion, not rule of law, is sad. Very reminiscent of militant BLM people calling for "justice" or gun grabbers calling for confiscation. Word of the day: Polemic I love it when people who cannot acknowledge their own subjective bias use straw man arguments to discredit other people's thoughts on a subject, which is always stated in a manner that suggests emotion is being used in place of logic. And that, the polemicist believes to be true, because his subjective perceptions disallow him from reasoning that any contrary position to his has any logical merit based on critical evaluation of circumstances, both relevant to the point of discussion as well as surrounding factors that have bearing on the topic. No, instead their thoughts must originate from illogical and emotional reactions, and the discourse must be won by the fragile polemicist, as defeating the enemy is the only objective, as opposed to coming to some higher understanding... that is, unless the higher understanding is the intellectual capitulation of the opponent. I had to google that word, thanks for teaching me something new
Most of the posts I've made in this thread don't have any personal opinion. That one does, and of course I'm biased. Everyone enters the debate with bias. doesn't make me wrong, tho It's fun to say aloud too. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:15:36 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The officer drove into the bike lane and hit a rider with a vehicle that was in control and had no mechanical failures. What facts do you see that remove that from the realm of negligance? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You may be right. But the Deputy didn't break that law, and I'd like to think you're not in favor of ex post facto prosecution. Accountability will be had in civil court, I'd wager. Where did I say he should be ticketed for operating his computer? I'm saying that he should be tried for driving in the bike lane and killing a rider in a reckless and negligent manner. The facts of this case apparently don't support that charge. It's that simple. The officer drove into the bike lane and hit a rider with a vehicle that was in control and had no mechanical failures. What facts do you see that remove that from the realm of negligance? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile The LA District Attorney probably needed an 800-1000 page report to answer a similar question. It wouldn't be reasonable for me to give you an accurate answer based on your stated scenario. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:16:14 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We weren't allowed to do the report on any accident we were involved in at work, Sgt. or Lt. had to do it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Police falsifying their reports is not a crime in CA? I find that difficult to believe. If you're involved in a fatality on duty you don't write a report and do the investigation yourself. We weren't allowed to do the report on any accident we were involved in at work, Sgt. or Lt. had to do it. Same with us, but we call the highway patrol to do ours |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:20:08 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's fun to say aloud too. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amount of veteran posters on here calling for someone to be locked in a cage based on emotion, not rule of law, is sad. Very reminiscent of militant BLM people calling for "justice" or gun grabbers calling for confiscation. Word of the day: Polemic I love it when people who cannot acknowledge their own subjective bias use straw man arguments to discredit other people's thoughts on a subject, which is always stated in a manner that suggests emotion is being used in place of logic. And that, the polemicist believes to be true, because his subjective perceptions disallow him from reasoning that any contrary position to his has any logical merit based on critical evaluation of circumstances, both relevant to the point of discussion as well as surrounding factors that have bearing on the topic. No, instead their thoughts must originate from illogical and emotional reactions, and the discourse must be won by the fragile polemicist, as defeating the enemy is the only objective, as opposed to coming to some higher understanding... that is, unless the higher understanding is the intellectual capitulation of the opponent. I had to google that word, thanks for teaching me something new
Most of the posts I've made in this thread don't have any personal opinion. That one does, and of course I'm biased. Everyone enters the debate with bias. doesn't make me wrong, tho It's fun to say aloud too. By George, you're right 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:22:02 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The LA District Attorney probably needed an 800-1000 page report to answer a similar question. It wouldn't be reasonable for me to give you an accurate answer based on your stated scenario.  Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:27:46 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sounds at the very least "reckless driving" and possibly "manslaughter", no? Do we need laws to spell out every. single. bad. thing.? Because then we just end up with too many fucking laws. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The texting law is fairly new. Could people not be held negligent if they killed someone texting before it was specifically made illegal? Sounds at the very least "reckless driving" and possibly "manslaughter", no? Do we need laws to spell out every. single. bad. thing.? Because then we just end up with too many fucking laws. Have you bothered to look at how many laws we already have. We have that many because, Yes, every single little thing needs to be spelled out in painstaking detail because that is how the law works. If it is not written it is not something that the law can touch. Poking a badger with a fork may be wrong but unless the law is written in such a way as to describe and prohibit forking a badger, it is not illegal. Nation of laws not men/honor/morality/etc Better to kill all the lawyers and institute trial by combat or citizen's revolutionary council courts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:31:31 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You seem to be basing your argument/disagreement on mistruths and misunderstandings Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amount of veteran posters on here calling for someone to be locked in a cage based on emotion, not rule of law, is sad. Very reminiscent of militant BLM people calling for "justice" or gun grabbers calling for confiscation. Yes, disagreeing with the LA prosecutor's office over the interpretation of the statute on negligence is emotion. Absolutely. You seem to be basing your argument/disagreement on mistruths and misunderstandings I may be mistaken about other officers making false reports, but that doesn't change the nature of the statute. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:31:49 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
By George, you're right
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:32:28 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You may be right. But the Deputy didn't break that law, and I'd like to think you're not in favor of ex post facto prosecution. Accountability will be had in civil court, I'd wager. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amount of veteran posters on here calling for someone to be locked in a cage based on emotion, not rule of law, is sad. Very reminiscent of militant BLM people calling for "justice" or gun grabbers calling for confiscation. The amount of people who think that being exempted from one law means its legal to run people over when hey are driving distracted is sad. If that's the actual end state of the law then the LE exception needs to be removed next legislative session. If you're referring to me I haven't given any personal opinion on that law. Myself and most of the posts I've seen are just explaining what the law is. Don't confuse explaining with agreeing. I know. This exemption just shouldn't exist because one simply can't safely we a computer and drive at the same time. This case proves it and the family will not see the negligent party held accountable for his actions because of a bizarre transitive property of the statute. You may be right. But the Deputy didn't break that law, and I'd like to think you're not in favor of ex post facto prosecution. Accountability will be had in civil court, I'd wager. No one is calling for him to be prosecuted for using his device (which the law provides an exemption for) rather we are saying that his legal act was done in a negligent manner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:33:21 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The LA District Attorney probably needed an 800-1000 page report to answer a similar question. It wouldn't be reasonable for me to give you an accurate answer based on your stated scenario.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Sorry. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:33:51 PM EDT
[#18]
the front seat of a patrol car is a very dynamic situation which most civilians would find too complex to understand let alone comprehend.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:34:39 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I may be mistaken about other officers making false reports, but that doesn't change the nature of the statute. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amount of veteran posters on here calling for someone to be locked in a cage based on emotion, not rule of law, is sad. Very reminiscent of militant BLM people calling for "justice" or gun grabbers calling for confiscation. Yes, disagreeing with the LA prosecutor's office over the interpretation of the statute on negligence is emotion. Absolutely. You seem to be basing your argument/disagreement on mistruths and misunderstandings I may be mistaken about other officers making false reports, but that doesn't change the nature of the statute. Sounds like your crusade is against the politicians and lawyers, not the cops |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:35:10 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No one is calling for him to be prosecuted for using his device (which the law provides an exemption for) rather we are saying that his legal act was done in a negligent manner. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amount of people who think that being exempted from one law means its legal to run people over when hey are driving distracted is sad. If that's the actual end state of the law then the LE exception needs to be removed next legislative session. If you're referring to me I haven't given any personal opinion on that law. Myself and most of the posts I've seen are just explaining what the law is. Don't confuse explaining with agreeing. I know. This exemption just shouldn't exist because one simply can't safely we a computer and drive at the same time. This case proves it and the family will not see the negligent party held accountable for his actions because of a bizarre transitive property of the statute. You may be right. But the Deputy didn't break that law, and I'd like to think you're not in favor of ex post facto prosecution. Accountability will be had in civil court, I'd wager. No one is calling for him to be prosecuted for using his device (which the law provides an exemption for) rather we are saying that his legal act was done in a negligent manner. An a civil trial jury will punish the tax payers for his negligence if the county doesn't buy off the dead guy's family with tax payer money first. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:35:13 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, my opinion is that Balog is getting hung up on and having his thinking colored on it based on the wrong assumption that the involved parties committed widespread perjury The perjury is secondary to the negligence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:36:12 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the front seat of a patrol car is a very dynamic situation which most civilians would find too complex to understand let alone comprehend. Naw it's pretty simple. Most people can learn thier way around it in a day or two |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:37:20 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The perjury is secondary to the negligence. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Well, my opinion is that Balog is getting hung up on and having his thinking colored on it based on the wrong assumption that the involved parties committed widespread perjury The perjury is secondary to the negligence. Perhaps you should run for DA next election |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:37:36 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The LA District Attorney probably needed an 800-1000 page report to answer a similar question. It wouldn't be reasonable for me to give you an accurate answer based on your stated scenario.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Sorry. When all else fails an old fashioned appeal to authority is involked. Its funny, the just explaining crowd is really good explaining how the cop in question shouldn't be held accountable but are frequently silent on explaining how a cop in an article should be found accountable. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:39:34 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the front seat of a patrol car is a very dynamic situation which most civilians would find too complex to understand let alone comprehend. Please expand upon this statement and how it relates to this specific incident. Also, explain how it differs from "those" (TM) / "most civilians" that couldn't possibly comprehend the complexity of the inside of a police cruiser, while in their own vehicles, with their own doodads... I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean by your statement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:40:02 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have you bothered to look at how many laws we already have. We have that many because, Yes, every single little thing needs to be spelled out in painstaking detail because that is how the law works. If it is not written it is not something that the law can touch. Poking a badger with a fork may be wrong but unless the law is written in such a way as to describe and prohibit forking a badger, it is not illegal. Nation of laws not men/honor/morality/etc Better to kill all the lawyers and institute trial by combat or citizen's revolutionary council courts. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The texting law is fairly new. Could people not be held negligent if they killed someone texting before it was specifically made illegal? Sounds at the very least "reckless driving" and possibly "manslaughter", no? Do we need laws to spell out every. single. bad. thing.? Because then we just end up with too many fucking laws. Have you bothered to look at how many laws we already have. We have that many because, Yes, every single little thing needs to be spelled out in painstaking detail because that is how the law works. If it is not written it is not something that the law can touch. Poking a badger with a fork may be wrong but unless the law is written in such a way as to describe and prohibit forking a badger, it is not illegal. Nation of laws not men/honor/morality/etc Better to kill all the lawyers and institute trial by combat or citizen's revolutionary council courts. We have laws regarding negligent homicide. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:40:49 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Naw it's pretty simple. Most people can learn thier way around it in a day or two Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
the front seat of a patrol car is a very dynamic situation which most civilians would find too complex to understand let alone comprehend. Naw it's pretty simple. Most people can learn thier way around it in a day or two A day or two? 
Its a car, not a 777. Hell, I've had to drive and operate fire engines after spending all of fifteen minutes getting my bearings. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:41:38 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sounds like your crusade is against the politicians and lawyers, not the cops Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amount of veteran posters on here calling for someone to be locked in a cage based on emotion, not rule of law, is sad. Very reminiscent of militant BLM people calling for "justice" or gun grabbers calling for confiscation. Yes, disagreeing with the LA prosecutor's office over the interpretation of the statute on negligence is emotion. Absolutely. You seem to be basing your argument/disagreement on mistruths and misunderstandings I may be mistaken about other officers making false reports, but that doesn't change the nature of the statute. Sounds like your crusade is against the politicians and lawyers, not the cops Crusade? Lol. So if a cop commits murder and the DA decides not to prosecute him, I should only be upset at the DA not the cop? Interesting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:42:39 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Perhaps you should run for DA next election Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, my opinion is that Balog is getting hung up on and having his thinking colored on it based on the wrong assumption that the involved parties committed widespread perjury The perjury is secondary to the negligence. Perhaps you should run for DA next election No thanks, I'd rather avoid that shithole of a state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:42:49 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
if i am answering a work related email on my phone, and i hit and kill someone, i'm good to go? ar-jedi Apparently so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:43:14 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please expand upon this statement and how it relates to this specific incident. Also, explain how it differs from "those" (TM) that couldn't possibly comprehend the complexity of the inside of a police cruiser, while in their own vehicles, with their own doodads... I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean by your statement. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
the front seat of a patrol car is a very dynamic situation which most civilians would find too complex to understand let alone comprehend. Please expand upon this statement and how it relates to this specific incident. Also, explain how it differs from "those" (TM) that couldn't possibly comprehend the complexity of the inside of a police cruiser, while in their own vehicles, with their own doodads... I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean by your statement. I believe he is being sarcastic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:44:45 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When all else fails an old fashioned appeal to authority is involked. Its funny, the just explaining crowd is really good explaining how the cop in question shouldn't be held accountable but are frequently silent on explaining how a cop in an article should be found accountable. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The LA District Attorney probably needed an 800-1000 page report to answer a similar question. It wouldn't be reasonable for me to give you an accurate answer based on your stated scenario.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Sorry. When all else fails an old fashioned appeal to authority is involked. Its funny, the just explaining crowd is really good explaining how the cop in question shouldn't be held accountable but are frequently silent on explaining how a cop in an article should be found accountable. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Perhaps I think you're right and he should have been charged |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:46:45 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:  I'm not normally a cop basher, but if I did that exact same thing, I'd be typing this from jail. Hope the family gets a decent settlement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:47:23 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Crusade? Lol. So if a cop commits murder and the DA decides not to prosecute him, I should only be upset at the DA not the cop? Interesting. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sounds like your crusade is against the politicians and lawyers, not the cops Crusade? Lol. So if a cop commits murder and the DA decides not to prosecute him, I should only be upset at the DA not the cop? Interesting. You think this was murder? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:48:26 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No thanks, I'd rather avoid that shithole of a state. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, my opinion is that Balog is getting hung up on and having his thinking colored on it based on the wrong assumption that the involved parties committed widespread perjury The perjury is secondary to the negligence. Perhaps you should run for DA next election No thanks, I'd rather avoid that shithole of a state. It's pretty nice here today |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:50:31 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We have laws regarding negligent homicide. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The texting law is fairly new. Could people not be held negligent if they killed someone texting before it was specifically made illegal? Sounds at the very least "reckless driving" and possibly "manslaughter", no? Do we need laws to spell out every. single. bad. thing.? Because then we just end up with too many fucking laws. Have you bothered to look at how many laws we already have. We have that many because, Yes, every single little thing needs to be spelled out in painstaking detail because that is how the law works. If it is not written it is not something that the law can touch. Poking a badger with a fork may be wrong but unless the law is written in such a way as to describe and prohibit forking a badger, it is not illegal. Nation of laws not men/honor/morality/etc Better to kill all the lawyers and institute trial by combat or citizen's revolutionary council courts. We have laws regarding negligent homicide. And those laws have elements that must be met (read PC) in order to make an arrest. Then it has to be proven BRD in order to get a conviction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:51:29 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No thanks, I'd rather avoid that shithole of a state. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, my opinion is that Balog is getting hung up on and having his thinking colored on it based on the wrong assumption that the involved parties committed widespread perjury The perjury is secondary to the negligence. Perhaps you should run for DA next election No thanks, I'd rather avoid that shithole of a state. Because the entire state of Washington is Utopia? Right.................. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:53:18 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What are we allowed to say about this?? Nothing
Well, I guess we are allowed to say the bike was at fault for being there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:53:38 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you a CA cop? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So if I nail someone in my car because I was texting/emailing for work, it would be ok? Are you a CA cop? Mastershield, don't leave home without it. Txl |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:54:50 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Perhaps I think you're right and he should have been charged Stranger things have happened. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 5:55:46 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Good, fuck bicycles, fuckin riding in their proper lanes and shit. Good manslaughter. I think you need to calibrate your meter
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:00:48 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And those laws have elements that must be met (read PC) in order to make an arrest. Then it has to be proven BRD in order to get a conviction. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The texting law is fairly new. Could people not be held negligent if they killed someone texting before it was specifically made illegal? Sounds at the very least "reckless driving" and possibly "manslaughter", no? Do we need laws to spell out every. single. bad. thing.? Because then we just end up with too many fucking laws. Have you bothered to look at how many laws we already have. We have that many because, Yes, every single little thing needs to be spelled out in painstaking detail because that is how the law works. If it is not written it is not something that the law can touch. Poking a badger with a fork may be wrong but unless the law is written in such a way as to describe and prohibit forking a badger, it is not illegal. Nation of laws not men/honor/morality/etc Better to kill all the lawyers and institute trial by combat or citizen's revolutionary council courts. We have laws regarding negligent homicide. And those laws have elements that must be met (read PC) in order to make an arrest. Then it has to be proven BRD in order to get a conviction. Cop was driving. Bike was in bike lane. Cop hit bike. Bike rider dead. What more is needed? I don't care what cop was doing in the car, it doesn't even matter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:01:26 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A day or two?
Its a car, not a 777. Hell, I've had to drive and operate fire engines after spending all of fifteen minutes getting my bearings. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the front seat of a patrol car is a very dynamic situation which most civilians would find too complex to understand let alone comprehend. Naw it's pretty simple. Most people can learn thier way around it in a day or two A day or two?
Its a car, not a 777. Hell, I've had to drive and operate fire engines after spending all of fifteen minutes getting my bearings. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Neither of those posts were serious |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:03:44 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They 'punished' him by finally giving him the transfer he'd been asking for. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Cop wasn't fired, but did get some unspecified 'discipline.' He must have remembered to yell, "Stop resisting!" while driving over the cyclist. I think that means he gets to patrol in the ghetto now, that might be a good punishment.  Wood is still employed as a sheriff’s deputy, though he transferred from patrol to the courts division shortly after the incident, having made the request about a year earlier. They 'punished' him by finally giving him the transfer he'd been asking for. Well I''m running out of silver linings.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:04:07 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Cop was driving. Bike was in bike lane. Cop hit bike. Bike rider dead. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sounds at the very least "reckless driving" and possibly "manslaughter", no? Do we need laws to spell out every. single. bad. thing.? Because then we just end up with too many fucking laws. Have you bothered to look at how many laws we already have. We have that many because, Yes, every single little thing needs to be spelled out in painstaking detail because that is how the law works. If it is not written it is not something that the law can touch. Poking a badger with a fork may be wrong but unless the law is written in such a way as to describe and prohibit forking a badger, it is not illegal. Nation of laws not men/honor/morality/etc Better to kill all the lawyers and institute trial by combat or citizen's revolutionary council courts. We have laws regarding negligent homicide. And those laws have elements that must be met (read PC) in order to make an arrest. Then it has to be proven BRD in order to get a conviction. Cop was driving. Bike was in bike lane. Cop hit bike. Bike rider dead. Shark's in the water. Our shark |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:05:59 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Neither of those posts were serious Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the front seat of a patrol car is a very dynamic situation which most civilians would find too complex to understand let alone comprehend. Naw it's pretty simple. Most people can learn thier way around it in a day or two A day or two?
Its a car, not a 777. Hell, I've had to drive and operate fire engines after spending all of fifteen minutes getting my bearings. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Neither of those posts were serious Recalibrated. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:07:53 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Cop was driving. Bike was in bike lane. Cop hit bike. Bike rider dead. What more is needed? I don't care what cop was doing in the car, it doesn't even matter. Congratulations!!!!!!! You've proven the cop was at fault and responsible for the death of Olin. You have yet to prove a crime was committed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:08:56 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Please expand upon this statement and how it relates to this specific incident. Also, explain how it differs from "those" (TM) / "most civilians" that couldn't possibly comprehend the complexity of the inside of a police cruiser, while in their own vehicles, with their own doodads... I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean by your statement. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: the front seat of a patrol car is a very dynamic situation which most civilians would find too complex to understand let alone comprehend. Please expand upon this statement and how it relates to this specific incident. Also, explain how it differs from "those" (TM) / "most civilians" that couldn't possibly comprehend the complexity of the inside of a police cruiser, while in their own vehicles, with their own doodads... I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean by your statement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:09:22 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You may be right. But the Deputy didn't break that law, and I'd like to think you're not in favor of ex post facto prosecution. Accountability will be had in civil court, I'd wager. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amount of veteran posters on here calling for someone to be locked in a cage based on emotion, not rule of law, is sad. Very reminiscent of militant BLM people calling for "justice" or gun grabbers calling for confiscation. The amount of people who think that being exempted from one law means its legal to run people over when hey are driving distracted is sad. If that's the actual end state of the law then the LE exception needs to be removed next legislative session. If you're referring to me I haven't given any personal opinion on that law. Myself and most of the posts I've seen are just explaining what the law is. Don't confuse explaining with agreeing. I know. This exemption just shouldn't exist because one simply can't safely we a computer and drive at the same time. This case proves it and the family will not see the negligent party held accountable for his actions because of a bizarre transitive property of the statute. You may be right. But the Deputy didn't break that law, and I'd like to think you're not in favor of ex post facto prosecution. Accountability will be had in civil court, I'd wager. Running someone over in the bike lane isn't against the law? Really.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2015 6:11:08 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Congratulations!!!!!!! You've proven the cop was at fault and responsible for the death of Olin. You have yet to prove a crime was committed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Cop was driving. Bike was in bike lane. Cop hit bike. Bike rider dead. What more is needed? I don't care what cop was doing in the car, it doesn't even matter. Congratulations!!!!!!! You've proven the cop was at fault and responsible for the death of Olin. You have yet to prove a crime was committed. I don't give a damn about the He's more capable the everybody else, "On duty exemptions" from the law, whether he is ever charges or not, he is still just as guilty of distracted driving as Joe Nobody would be. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
