- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
1
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:14 pm to jchamil
quote:
legal analysis
This is nothing more than Hanks's law & order inspired fan fiction.
This post was edited on 1/12/26 at 2:15 pm
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:14 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
You are generally not an idiot, so I am a bit surprised that you do not agree with the premise that someone who definitively KNOWS he is not in serious danger is not allowed to kill the person who is about to NOT hurt him.
Are you now claiming you know that he knew that he wasn't in serious danger?
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:14 pm to jchamil
Her thoughts are irrelevant.
His are hypothetically very important to relentless alter
His are hypothetically very important to relentless alter
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:17 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
yeah but the real question is does the person who KNOWS that he THINKS he KNOWS without actually KNOWSing that somebody might THINK they KNOW that they are going to KNOWINGLY hurt someone who THINKS the KNOW what they don't KNOW but only THINKS they KNOW that and might skin their knee when the THINK the vehicle is just pulling a 3 point turn on the way to picking up the cute kids with stuffed animals in the glove box but doesn't really KNOW whether they skinned their knee or whether the LEO actually knows if he had coffee this morning is able to KNOWINGLY discharge the firearm they THINK might be loaded but don't KNOW whether their cell phone or their weapon has it's safety on or not......
And you THINK you KNOW the answer to all these THOUGHTS because if you keep this up long enough maybe somebody will forget what we are talking about and THINK you KNOW you're right when what we really KNOW is you are full of shite and have an agenda.
And you THINK you KNOW the answer to all these THOUGHTS because if you keep this up long enough maybe somebody will forget what we are talking about and THINK you KNOW you're right when what we really KNOW is you are full of shite and have an agenda.
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:17 pm to JimEverett
quote:Please explain this to 808.quote:If you are stipulating that in the abstract - as in some sort of hypothetical thought experiment - then no. The hypothetical guarantees that given that the LEO knows he will not suffer death or serious bodily injury.
But just for the fun of the discussion ... If an LEO knows with 100% certainty that he will receive "minor injuries" (and nothing more) unless he first uses DEADLY force, does that knowledge constitute legal cause for the use of deadly force?
quote:Yes, and it is the province of fact finder (jury) to determine whether that belief is "reasonable."
However, assuming he knows this in the real world he may still have a reasonable belief that a person fleeing arrest, and that has shown a propensity of being anti-LEO, is a danger to others then the LEO can use deadly force.
To be CLEAR, I am not arguing (and have never argued) that it is impossible for him to have a reasonable belief that his life was in danger.
I simply disagree with the prevailing view here that "reasonable belief" has somehow been conclusively established.
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:18 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Lol of course you don't.
It's like the fricking video is cosmic to you.
It's like the fricking video is cosmic to you.
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:19 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
doesn't matter she hit him
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:20 pm to TDTOM
quote:Because understanding THAT premise is the first step toward understanding that it MIGHT not have been reasonable for the agent to believe his life was in danger.
You are generally not an idiot, so I am a bit surprised that you do not agree with the premise that someone who definitively KNOWS he is not in serious danger is not allowed to kill the person who is about to NOT hurt him.quote:
Why do you think this is important?
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:20 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
I simply disagree with the prevailing view here that "reasonable belief" has somehow been conclusively established.
All you can really do here is just laugh at you at this point. 
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:22 pm to hogcard1964
quote:No.
Are you now claiming you know that he knew that he wasn't in serious danger?
I am saying a fact finder MIGHT find that he did not reasonably believe his life to be in danger.
You folks seem to believe that "reasonable belief" has somehow already been conclusively established. It has not.
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:22 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
Again, if the agent KNEW that he was facing only "rather minor injuries," is the use of deadly force justified? If the agent KNOWS that the suspect is swinging only a nerf bat at his head, is the agent justified in shooting the suspect?
One significant thing being left out.
The agent was witness to all that transpired before that instant.
She was illegally blocking road, was told to move and didn’t. He heard and saw other agent tell her to get out of car. Instead of complying she tried to escape by accelerating towards him. He was justifiable in his fear for his safety. She had escalated this and was extremely reckless and irrational in her actions.
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:23 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Lol he was in danger only fricking idiots can spin a hypothetical into this shite.
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:23 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
"is the first step toward understanding that it MIGHT not have been reasonable for the agent to believe his life was in danger"
.
and you will go through any gyration you have to in the face of the video, logic, and the people responding to you here because of how desperate you are to establish this. Which is what is making you look like a buffoon.
.
and you will go through any gyration you have to in the face of the video, logic, and the people responding to you here because of how desperate you are to establish this. Which is what is making you look like a buffoon.
This post was edited on 1/12/26 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:23 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Fact finders that use hypothetical bullshite are the best!
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:25 pm to Jbird
quote:
Lol he was in danger only fricking idiots can spin a hypothetical into this shite.
But hypothetically, in this imaginary scenario where I am right, wouldn’t I therefore be right? Think about it.
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:26 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
You folks seem to believe that "reasonable belief" has somehow already been conclusively established. It has not.
So you're going to examine his thoughts, now? How does this happen?
Are you expecting him to claim he shot her in cold blood for the fun of it?
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:27 pm to Robin Masters
Here's a hypothetical.
If I were in the officer's shoes.
My choice is go home to my family alive or question her motives for hitting the gas
10/10 times three shots to her worthless arse will occur.
If I were in the officer's shoes.
My choice is go home to my family alive or question her motives for hitting the gas
10/10 times three shots to her worthless arse will occur.
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:29 pm to Renderuntocaesar88
quote:
Renderuntocaesar88
Member since Jan 2026
1 post
Posted on 1/12/26 at 2:30 pm to TDTOM
That clown has been removed after a mere 4 posts.
Page 7 of 35
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News