G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
Naturally you have statistics to prove that?
Naturally you have statistics to prove that?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you require statistics so that you can claim its barely enough to count. why bother? it should be enough that it happens even once. your outlook is how corruption and criminal cops continue to get away with their crimes. does that make you happy?
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
Is that what I said?
You made a statement, and now you can't or won't back it up.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
and now you make assumptions because you won't requalify your request. you've done this before. you ask for examples, then declare that they are moot because of some bullshit. I don't have the energy to play games with you tonight.
Disillusioned
New member
It's a mitigating circumstance, when she shoots him attacking her, when he's asleep she has plenty of other options, and the courts have so found. Self defense if he's beating her, once the danger is over, so is the self defense claim.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
wrong again. Francine Hughes, subject of the made for tv movie 'the burning bed', was found not guilty by reason of insanity.
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
You made the statement, and then refused to provide any evidence to support your claims. That's not an assumption, it's a fact.
Your move.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
fine, play your game. here's your real world example.
NYPD involuntarily commits police officer to psych hospital for whistleblowing
Lowaicue
英語在香港
And what would YOU do, high and mighty yank, if the situation was reversed and an Afghan came to the states and killed sixteen innocent Americans? Would you be making excuses for him?
'Ahh, poor chap, he was under such pressure and his wife had rowed with him. Lets just send him home to Afghanistan to face their justice system.'
No, of course YOU wouldn't. You'd be screeching like a banshee, 'Kill the raghead. Nuke his country. They are all animals and deserve to be exterminated.'
Listen, twat, You are nothing but memories. Your day as a right winger in the land of the right wing is over. It was brief, glorious and history.
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
Thanks. It looks like you have a point.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
i'm not entirely sure how to react.
Disillusioned
New member
Insanity and EED are not the same thing.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
i disagree. take a woman, mix in years of violent abuse and degradation, swirl it all up in a beaker of emotional trauma, and voila. you have a murder committed under extreme emotional disturbances excused as insanity.
Disillusioned
New member
Insanity is a condition, thinking that the fairies tell you to kill people, believing you can fly, knowing that the aliens stuck three cows up your rectum. EED is snapping, having "had enough" and just losing it, the kind of thing that makes the 90 lb shrimp attack the 200 lb bully who has abused him for months, that makes soldiers and cops eat their gun or charge a guy with a cleaver, but it's a temporary thing, it's not a condition, it can happen to anyone, and that really is the difference.
Though I don't have a pyche major, just the perspective from the Law side.
i understand your point of coming from where the law is, but is the law really correct
take a person that is abused by their bigger and stronger (or well armed) spouse and waits until the spouse is gone to arm themselves and lay in wait not trusting the justice system to protect them (instances of abusers or stalkers ignoring restraining orders are legion) and then takes retribution for years of abuse, imo that person is doing a public service by taking a chance and eliminating an abuser
Disillusioned
New member
In a situation of domestic violence, assuming that's what this is. The abused generally won't press charges, the problem from the police' point of view is that they and the person's friends see the abuse and can't act. If the abuser is actually being attacked, and survives, there are a huge number of options for them to take, in almost every city there are multiple women's shelters if the husband/wife is released after 24 hours on bail, there are friends, family. And if the spouse has yet to raise a hand to them, why should they have the right to shoot them "in fear". I'm firmly on the side of the law here, there are lots of options, shooting a sleeping spouse should not be one of them.
imo, it depends on each individual case and in the cases where the spouse as been the other spouse's punching bag, i would hope for jury nullification
your understanding of domestic abuse is a little shy of reality
i guess that we will not agree in this so i think that we should agree to disagree
Disillusioned
New member
I would hope for justice for the victim, it's still murder. We're supposed to judge the crime not the person. As for my understanding, well, i haven't been beating on spouses or been beatin on either, while it is nothing good and certainly deserves a long prison sentence and possibly some time in that hell you christians approve of, it's not a just cause to get a .45 in the brain while you sleep.
As you say however, agree to disagree.
just one thing, i am not a christian and do not believe in the christian hell or any other hell for that matter
life is what you make of it and you make your own heaven or hell
W
WinterBorn
Guest
The problem is, as someone pointed out, there is no way to actually protect the victim. Restraining orders are meaningless to a violent abuser. Add in years of conditioning to the fact that the abuser will punish them for violating his "rules", and you have what amounts to justification. I am sure there are plenty of examples of abuse victims killing their abuser. But there are probably far more examples of abusers killing their victim. There is an old (and bad) joke among domestic abuse workers - "If you want to kill a woman andget away with it, marry her first".