Is negligence not a crime?A person can be negligent, but not have committed a crime.
Is negligence not a crime?A person can be negligent, but not have committed a crime.
Only took one post for you to pull out strawman. What's next, logical fallacy? Cognitive dissonance?Straw men are fun to demolish, but aren't there already enough allergens in the air, without adding more?
It's also worth noting the police aren't actually paying this money. The tax payers are. So, here we have a city admitting something their agents did was inappropriate and then charging the citizens with making amends.very true and somewhat understandable.
I just think if they are paying out (basically admitting guilt), someone needs to be convicted.
Am I wrong?
Only took one post for you to pull out strawman. What's next, logical fallacy? Cognitive dissonance?
I'll stick to the topic at hand and you can stick with arguing just to argue. Have fun!
I was under the impression the city settled but admits no wrong. Indy settles all the time and the officers did nothing wrong, it can be strictly a math decision. Based on all the publicity, a jury could have easily order them to pay more. Juries are fickle beasts.Only took one post for you to pull out strawman. What's next, logical fallacy? Cognitive dissonance?
I'll stick to the topic at hand and you can stick with arguing just to argue. Have fun!
It's also worth noting the police aren't actually paying this money. The tax payers are. So, here we have a city admitting something their agents did was inappropriate and then charging the citizens with making amends.
It's a loss times two for the tax payers.
Maybe not to you. But in the hood, kids do stuff like this all the time.The topic at hand is Tamir Rice, who in no way resembled youthful bb gun play.
Whether they admit wrongdoing or not, if what they'd done was right they wouldn't be paying.I was under the impression the city settled but admits no wrong. Indy settles all the time and the officers did nothing wrong, it can be strictly a math decision. Based on all the publicity, a jury could have easily order them to pay more. Juries are fickle beasts.
Maybe not to you. But in the hood, kids do stuff like this all the time.
When I was 12 I let a buddy of mine borrow my bb gun. He was chasing a few neighborhood kids through the backyards and someone called the police. Before long, the several kids were being chased through the backyards by police and eventually taken in. Luckily, they were released to their parents with only disorderly conduct charges. I was lucky enough to be busy that day but I never did get my bb gun back.
The youthful bb gun play you didn't observe was not observed by the police either. That's why when they arrived on scene they shot this little kid immediately.
Is negligence not a crime?
$6,000,000 worth of negligence?Not usually.
"Little kid"? 5'7, 195 pounds? That "little kid" was bigger than my dad.
And what the police officer observed was someone who was reported to have a gun, and who was reported to be pointing that gun at passers-by in a public park, reach for a 1911-style pistol tucked into his waistband when ordered to put his hands up .
$6,000,000 worth of negligence?
Not at all. Right and wrong have little to do with settlements. Trust me, having been on the other side of this, the City telling me I did nothing wrong, that the complaint was full of lies that made it past summery judgement, but they are paying out anyway just to get rid of it. Now, it was not the amount they were seeking but he deserved NOTHING. I'm in the middle of a new one now, in custody death, we will see if the City holds firm for a change or looses it's spine and caves. Again, none of us did anything wrong. Greater publicity, greater settlement.Whether they admit wrongdoing or not, if what they'd done was right they wouldn't be paying.
$6,000,000 worth of negligence?
That's the point of contention right there, at least for me. I have difficulty believing that message was conveyed in the way with should've..... if conveyed at all, given the officer in question, how quickly the situation unfolded, and the tactics used. You won't find a single seasoned LEO that will look at this situation and not say "what the heck were those idiots doing?"
I believe the media's intent with the story GPIA7R posted is to show that anyone, even the nicest people on the planet can snap at any moment. Therefore, no one should be allowed to own firearms lest they become the next mass murderer because Charmin changed the scent of their toilet paper unannounced.
Cop kills Tamir Rice and media reports on the criminal past of the 12yo's noncustodial father.
64-yo white man kills 59 and we get this...
Friend of Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock describes him as caring person who sought to 'make people happy'
Just food for thought. We might not like to acknowledge the media bias when it comes to racial issues... but it definitely exists.
Cop kills Tamir Rice and media reports on the criminal past of the 12yo's noncustodial father...