APP - Let's discuss the known FACTS that led up to Timor Rice being shot.

Status
Not open for further replies.
USFREEDOM911 said:
The cop pulled up, he started to remove it (draw it) from his waistband, and he became a threat.

You still haven't provided that legal definition where you said that someone isn't a threat, until they POINT the weapon.
Could you focus on posting that info, so we can move past your decleration?
Thanks
Click to expand...

Any legal definition of threat is fine with me. Move on or don't I don't care.
 
Rune said:
Any legal definition of threat is fine with me. Move on or don't I don't care.
Click to expand...

No - no - no, don't throw in the towel.

You provided what you FEEL and I really would like to see what legal definition you have, that supports what you FEEL.

This is important; because the legal definitions I provided, seem to show that your FEELINGS are in error.
 
Prove he drew his gun in a threatening manner.
Your words are not proof of anything except mental retardation.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
No - no - no, don't throw in the towel.

You provided what you FEEL and I really would like to see what legal definition you have, that supports what you FEEL.

This is important; because the legal definitions I provided, seem to show that your FEELINGS are in error.
Click to expand...

1.LMFAO
2. I am not throwing in the towel.
3. None of your definitions aided your case. Lol.
4. LMFAO.
5. LOL
 
Rune said:
Prove he drew his gun in a threatening manner.
Your words are not proof of anything except mental retardation.
Click to expand...

Now it appears that you're trying to hide your unsubstantiated post, of what you FEEL something should be.
Are you conceding and admitting that you were in error.

We can continue to the next stage, once that particular stepping stone has been crossed. :D
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Now it appears that you're trying to hide your unsubstantiated post, of what you FEEL something should be.
Are you conceding and admitting that you were in error.

We can continue to the next stage, once that particular stepping stone has been crossed. :D
Click to expand...

OK ILA.
NO I am not conceding.
You have not proven the boy presented a deadly threat.
You have said so but your word means nothing to me.
 
Rune said:
OK ILA.
NO I am not conceding.
You have not proven the boy presented a deadly threat.
You have said so but your word means nothing to me.
Click to expand...

But you're the one who made the unsupported comment, regarding what's a legal threat and I was able to show you in error.

It's really difficult to move past your conjecture, without you providing proof of your assertion.

Please remember the APP guidelines; because I would hate for you to embarrass yourself and get banned from posting in APP.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
But you're the one who made the unsupported comment, regarding what's a legal threat and I was able to show you in error.

It's really difficult to move past your conjecture, without you providing proof of your assertion.

Please remember the APP guidelines; because I would hate for you to embarrass yourself and get banned from posting in APP.
Click to expand...

Your mistake is that you think you showed me in error.
I will now repeat this for the third and final time.
Perhaps you will notice it this time.
You have not proven anything since your words are meningless.
You have gained zero points so far.
 
Rune said:
Your mistake is that you think you showed me in error.
I will now repeat this for the third and final time.
Perhaps you will notice it this time.
You have not proven anything since your words are meningless.
You have gained zero points so far.
Click to expand...

But all you've provided is your opinion, regarding what is a threat, and tried to pass it off as a legal definition.
Whereas I posted an actual description of what the legal definition is, which is and was in conflict of what you felt it was supposed to be.

I've requested and asked for you to provide something or even anything that supported the conjecture that you were attempting to pass off as legitimate.

Unless you're able to present something that backs up your supposition, you will have failed to be honest.

Once you either post something to support your comment or concede that you were only going off of what you wanted it to be, we'll be able to move to the next point of disagreement; but it's your decision to either continue or surrender.
 
Rune said:
Are you retarded?
You havn't proven anything.
Click to expand...

Then you must not be reading my responses to your comments; because if post #13, you made the following comment and provided nothing to support it:
Rune said:
Sure.
Under the legal definition of threat a gun is not a threat unless pointed at the affeared subject.
There was no threat. No reason to shoot.
Click to expand...

That appeared to be nothing more then an unsubstantiated FEELING.

My response to what you WISHED was true was post #14 and in it; I provided the legal definition that you apparently was unaware of and included some comments from me, within parenthesis (...):

USFREEDOM911 said:
You would have to post that "legal definition" for your comment to have any creditability; because I know of no law that says anyone has to wait UNTIL a weapon is pointed at them, but you could show me where I'm wrong.

Using your example: a person that hands a bank teller a note saying he has a gun and wants all the money, can't be charged with using a weapon when he's captured; because he never exhibited the weapon and never pointed it at the teller.

Decided to add the following:

Criminal Threats

1 - A criminal threat, sometimes known as the terrorist threat, malicious harassment, or by other terms, occurs when someone threatens to kill or physically harm someone else.

(drawing a gun can be considered a threat)

2 - The threat must be communicated in some way, though it doesn't necessarily have to be verbal. A person can make a threat through email, text message, or even through non-verbal body language such as gestures or movements.

(drawing a gun is non verbal and is a movement)

3 - The threat must be capable of making the people who hear it feel as if they might be hurt, and conclude that the threat is credible, real, and imminent

(drawing a gun on a Police Officer, is usually considered a threat)
Click to expand...

Therefore; I did prove that your initial presentation was in error and have given you numerous requests to provide something that would support your hope that your definition was in fact correct.

Once we're able to get past your attempt to falsely claim that your definition was correct, we can then move onto to your next point.

That is, unless you've become worried that attempting to support your claim will make you appear foolish and uninformed and I wanted to bring to your attention that just because the thread is closed to anyone else responding, it doesn't mean that other JPP posters aren't able to see your inability to have an honest discussion.
 
Sorry but what you clearly don't understand is that your comments in parenthsis are just opinions. Your incorrect opinions.
Your opinions are not facts.
All legal definitions of the word threat are similar enough that there is no point in me posted a definition.

Ergo you have proven nothing, again merely stated your opinion.
Do you understand the difference between a fact and an opinion?
 
Rune said:
Sorry but what you clearly don't understand is that your comments in parenthsis are just opinions. Your incorrect opinions.
Your opinions are not facts.
All legal definitions of the word threat are similar enough that there is no point in me posted a definition.

Ergo you have proven nothing, again merely stated your opinion.
Do you understand the difference between a fact and an opinion?
Click to expand...

Furthermore you can save your emo prodding Lady.
 
Rune said:
Sorry but what you clearly don't understand is that your comments in parenthsis are just opinions. Your incorrect opinions.
Your opinions are not facts.
All legal definitions of the word threat are similar enough that there is no point in me posted a definition.

Ergo you have proven nothing, again merely stated your opinion.
Do you understand the difference between a fact and an opinion?
Click to expand...

But my "opinions" are not incorrect and in fact I've proven them to be factual.

I see that you are now in agreement with the FACTS that I posted, regarding what is a threat, are and were correct and that they also contradict the "opinions" that you tried to pass off as a "legal definition".

Since we now are able to move past the FACT that what you offered was incorrect and that Timor drawing the weapon was a threat; what would you like to move on to, in this discussion?

Unless you have something that will refute my posted legal definition of what constitutes a threat or my comments, that are in parenthesis.
 
Rune said:
Furthermore you can save your emo prodding Lady.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are intending to suggest, but please do remember the rules of APP; because I don't want you to lose your ability to post in APP, prior to you being able to support your FEELINGS.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Not sure what you are intending to suggest, but please do remember the rules of APP; because I don't want you to lose your ability to post in APP, prior to you being able to support your FEELINGS.
Click to expand...

*** edited *** Not for APP.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
USFREEDOM911 said:
But my "opinions" are not incorrect and in fact I've proven them to be factual.

I see that you are now in agreement with the FACTS that I posted, regarding what is a threat, are and were correct and that they also contradict the "opinions" that you tried to pass off as a "legal definition".

Since we now are able to move past the FACT that what you offered was incorrect and that Timor drawing the weapon was a threat; what would you like to move on to, in this discussion?

Unless you have something that will refute my posted legal definition of what constitutes a threat or my comments, that are in parenthesis.
Click to expand...

Sorry Charlie but again your opinions are proof of nothing.
 
Rune said:
Sorry but you didn't post any facts which support you opinions.
Click to expand...

Now see, we have finally arrived at the reason for your incorrect conclusion.

I posted the facts that proved what we were in disagreement on and then I gave my opinion on those facts.


The other part of your fallacy, is that you've never posted anything of substance to support YOUR opinions / conjecture / assertions.

Would you care to provide such, at this time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top