Snoogens Murphy wrote:
> On Nov 18, 12:07 pm, WindsorFox
SPAMcox.net> wrote:>> Snoogens Murphy wrote:
>>> On Nov 18, 1:45 am, WindsorFox
SPAMcox.net> wrote:>>>> Snoogens Murphy wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 17, 11:47 am, WindsorFox
SPAMcox.net> wrote:>>>>>> Snoogens Murphy wrote:
>>>>>>> On Nov 16, 7:27 pm, WindsorFox
SPAMcox.net> wrote:>>>>>>>> Snoogens Murphy wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 15, 6:26 pm, Johnny Rebel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> WindsorFox wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Mister2u wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, they should all be imprisoned for murder. The security told
>>>>>>>>>>> them numerous times he did not speak English and they had zero business
>>>>>>>>>>> even going in at all until they had an interpretor. They are all guilty
>>>>>>>>>>> of murder IMHO.
>>>>>>>>>> Well, not sure if they didn't have reason to 'go in' until an
>>>>>>>>>> interpretor arrived, but they really didn't need to use a taser on him
>>>>>>>>>> and could have gotten him down without that. As for them being guilty
>>>>>>>>>> of murder, I agree.
>>>>>>>>> Murder? Give me a break. To find them guilty of murder you have to
>>>>>>>>> show that they wanted to kill him. Do you honestly believe that was
>>>>>>>>> their intent? "Hey guys, let's kill this crazy foreigner!"
>>>>>>>> I didn't say guilty of, charged with. Besides it would be 2nd
>>>>>>>> degree or manslaughter
>>>>>>> "They are all guilty of murder IMHO." - Windsor Fox
>>>>>> Yes, and your point? They should be charged with 2nd degree murder
>>>>>> in my opinion. Do not sir, try to change my thoughts.
>>>>> If that is your opinion, you either (a) don't know what 2nd degree
>>>>> murder means, or (b) you think that the cops intended to kill the
>>>>> victim.
>>>> It sounds to me that you are not acquainted with the said
>>>> definition. As a one time peace officer, I am quite familiar with it
>>>> as used in the US. "A killing caused by dangerous conduct and the
>>>> offender's obvious lack of concern for human life."
>>> You may be shocked to discover that US legal definitions do not apply
>>> to Canada.
>> You may be shocked to know that I am in the US and that's what I
>> know and operate on, however I imagine the definition does not change
>> much if at all between here and there.
>
> The assumption that other countries are the same as the U.S. is a
> very, um... American attitude. The Canadian wording is: "meaning to
> cause death to a human being or meaning to cause him bodily harm that
> he knows is likely to cause his death".
>
> A taser is not likely to cause death. It's very unlikely. People have
> even volunteered to be tasered so that they can know what it feels
> like.
It's a two part definition, yours is the first part, my quote is
the 2nd part. And those volunteers were all healthy and willing.
suppose he had a heart murmmer? Or as you said the knee in his back in
combination with the taser. It doesn't matter how you look at it, he
is dead, and they went way over board. They are at fault.
--
"I get the impression that Jamie is a papusa or two short of a
combination plate." - Kent Wills
"Don't tell me what to do, 'nozzler!" - Loafy
