- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
IDK What The Law Says In MN But Regarding A Car As A Dangerous Weapon
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:20 pm
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:20 pm
even if not intending to kill
This is 1L criminal law.
11
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:25 pm to LuckyTiger
That poor woman who decided to ignore ICE officers/law enforcement instructions suffered the same fate others who have recklessly stomped the gas pedal on their vehicle in an attempt to run while nearly hitting an officer. Needless death but there seems to be a lot of this shite.....and I don't blame the ICE officer, most of these law enforcement officers who shoot a person react in the moment and that woman created the moment.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:36 pm to LuckyTiger
With someone acting a nut like that, who’s to say she wouldn’t go fown the road and run someone else over? Isn’t that part of the justification used when cops are in high speed chases? They put the public in danger
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:39 pm to LuckyTiger
quote:
This is 1L criminal law.
Yet somehow The Bard of Barbe will claim the contrary.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:42 pm to Rebel
The question is did the law enforcement officer have a reasonable expectation of being in imminent bodily harm to justify the use of deadly force?
Posted on 1/7/26 at 4:45 pm to LuckyTiger
Well, he was a victim of being dragged by a legal observer back in June and she hit him with the bumper of the car.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:11 pm to LuckyTiger
She's f'ing guilty. Yall quit talking like its a maybe. She was in the wrong, asked to stop, at gunpoint...and decided to ram a legal federal enforcement officer. Period
She's dead. Swift justice. He could have easily been killed by her tires and veering his direction
She's dead. Swift justice. He could have easily been killed by her tires and veering his direction
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:12 pm to LuckyTiger
None of that fits the circumstances...
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:22 pm to LuckyTiger
If a cop had shot the NO terror attack driver as soon as he took aim at civilians, Teedy would have had that cops head, and leftists would have been crying racism.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:24 pm to VOR
quote:
None of that fits the circumstances...
How so?
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:26 pm to VOR
quote:
None of that fits the circumstances...
The cult leader has spoken. I can guarantee you that if I went to court, that would definitely fit the circumstances.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:26 pm to LuckyTiger
quote:
The question is did the law enforcement officer have a reasonable expectation of being in imminent bodily harm to justify the use of deadly force?
WTF? He was in front of car when he shot her.
You can’t shoot through windshield standing on the side. And its at a front angle that hit her so it wasn’t an angled shot from the side. He then reacted and moved simultaneously.
Case closed for regular folks.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:52 pm to LuckyTiger
So how does that apply to when protesters block a road and a driver uses his vehicle to get them to move, to include hitting/moving them?
Some state statutes allow that... which I agree with.
Some state statutes allow that... which I agree with.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:55 pm to LuckyTiger
She would have killed him, or injured him badly, if he hadn't got out the way.....SELF DEFENSE!!!1
Posted on 1/7/26 at 5:57 pm to LuckyTiger
Driving a vehicle is the same as walking around with a loaded gun.
Add texting to the mix and a gun is safer.
Add texting to the mix and a gun is safer.
This post was edited on 1/7/26 at 5:58 pm
Posted on 1/7/26 at 6:20 pm to LuckyTiger
quote:
The question is did the law enforcement officer have a reasonable expectation of being in imminent bodily harm to justify the use of deadly force?
Not really. That would apply to a civilian. A law enforcement officer has a slew of other considerations to make as well.
quote:
So how does that apply to when protesters block a road and a driver uses his vehicle to get them to move, to include hitting/moving them?
Because they are committing a crime, dumbass. It's against the law for someone to try to limit an innocent person's movements. Its a very serious offense in most places, tantamount to kidnapping in some.
It doesnt apply to the police, as they are not acting illegally and are not committing a crime by limiting your movements.
smdh...im surprised some of you can even put your own pants on in the morning.
This post was edited on 1/7/26 at 6:26 pm
Posted on 1/7/26 at 6:23 pm to VOR
VOR, I can only conclude you are either willfully ignorant or legit retarded. I could evaluate you and make appropriate recommendations for your care if you’d like.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 9:31 pm to John somers
OK smartass
Analogous to a firearm, which typically can only be used when you are in fear of your life - if the car is a dangerous weapon, does the presence of protesters in a road pose a threat to your life such that you can run over the threat till it is no longer a threat or you can leave?
If the protesters are wielding objects that could be used as weapons, yes but I think prosecutors - esp in blue states- would argue that the protesters were not an imminent threat to life and limb and therefore you committed a crime by hitting them with a car.
Again - based on what the OP posted.
Analogous to a firearm, which typically can only be used when you are in fear of your life - if the car is a dangerous weapon, does the presence of protesters in a road pose a threat to your life such that you can run over the threat till it is no longer a threat or you can leave?
If the protesters are wielding objects that could be used as weapons, yes but I think prosecutors - esp in blue states- would argue that the protesters were not an imminent threat to life and limb and therefore you committed a crime by hitting them with a car.
Again - based on what the OP posted.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 10:17 pm to LuckyTiger
It was a mostly peaceful weapon.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 10:21 pm to LuckyTiger
I literally know someone who went to jail bc after he got into a basic bar fight, he got in his car to drive away, and then, still pissed, drove as if he was trying to run the other dude over. Nobody died, but the car was considered a deadly weapon in the charges.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News