Not disagreeing but where does that law originate?
The electoral college thing stops me, I won't waste my time if it doesn't count. btw I have never been arrested, but I do have a heavy foot.
Yes. I know that. I think you meant to say "convicted" as opposed to "charged". I do not know what crimes, but I presume all felonies? Is that so? And then we are back to conviction for a felony, which for those who can afford it, have "charges" reduced. JMO
You'd have to ask the folks on thread who want to go back to the era of "wedlock", prayer in school, and ten commanents, not me. I'm not down with any of that nonsense.
(I can guess though - people of color)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
A shepherd-boy, who watched a flock of sheep near a village, brought out the villagers three or four times by crying out, "Wolf! Wolf!" and when his neighbors came to help him, laughed at them for their pains.
The Wolf, however, did truly come at last. The Shepherd-boy, now really alarmed, shouted in an agony of terror: "Pray, do come and help me; the Wolf is killing the sheep"; but no one paid any heed to his cries, nor rendered any assistance. The Wolf, having no cause of fear, at his leisure lacerated or destroyed the whole flock.
This is the consequence of using bad examples.
My reason for bringing it up is that IMO, this case, like the last, has too many confounding factors and people involved to be a real "wolf." The consequences should be considered. I don't want to see real wolves get ignored either.
That's all from me. :wave:
Sent from Tapatalk
Oh yes, I do know the parable - I just didn't know what specific news story you were referencing. Still don't. I trust it was about the Eric Garner case? What were people doing/saying in the news story? Also, every news story out there undoubtedly has "confounding factors." Nothing is ever truly cut and dried. But to me this case clearly represents police overreaction and excessive use of force. IMO.
While it is tragic a man died during arrest, I have posted the law, the references to it and case law and of course there is the GJ decision. There was no overreaction and excessive force, yet you have not provided a post to prove it was a criminal act. It was per the law and that law has been the standard for decades.
I and I'm sure others would have an open mind to review something, any legal documentation, law, or precedent to substantiate your claim.
Whose morals, ethics and values??? Are you suggesting that a theocracy replace a democratic republic? JMO