Go Back  

Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times 

Current Rating:

Join NowJoin Now
 
  #111  
Old 06-04-2011, 01:56 PM
mrh2008's Avatar
mrh2008
Offline:
My Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Poster Rank:528
male
Join Date: Jan 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
1/20 14/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1158
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

Their story does not matter. Botom line is, he threatened to kill people and got his ass shot.

Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 06-04-2011, 03:35 PM
Stevee
Offline:
So Fucking Banned
Poster Rank:21
Join Date: Aug 2009
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 15/20
Today Posts
0/11 ssss33585
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrh2008 View Post
Nope, see, here In Arizona, we don't have a problem with people killing criminals, it is well within our right to shoot people that come into our house and pose a threat. We have an awesome castle doctrine, no retreat laws, no warnings etc. etc. I know my shit in my state. Before you flap your lips, try some research.
So you're police act like fucking animals then?, Judge, Jury and executioners, you shot YOURSELF in the foot with that statement, we are discussing the validity of a shooting then you go and admit that your police do not give a shit about anyones rights.....you also stated that you are armed incase somebody should try to kick your door in and enter your property, mmmmmmm interesting...I wonder how this poor dead guy must have felt when shot 60 times.

Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 06-04-2011, 05:11 PM
mrh2008's Avatar
mrh2008
Offline:
My Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Poster Rank:528
male
Join Date: Jan 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
1/20 14/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1158
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve. View Post
So you're police act like fucking animals then?, Judge, Jury and executioners, you shot YOURSELF in the foot with that statement, we are discussing the validity of a shooting then you go and admit that your police do not give a shit about anyones rights.....you also stated that you are armed incase somebody should try to kick your door in and enter your property, mmmmmmm interesting...I wonder how this poor dead guy must have felt when shot 60 times.
oh my, oh my... Police do give a shit about our rights, but we do NOT have the right to level a rifle at a police officer... Yes I am armed and ready to protect myself if a criminal tries to kick in my door, that comment was directed toward whoever said they'd come over and stick it in meh but or some shit like that. I don't need to protect myself from a SWAT team, lights and sirens on and identifying themselves as police several times before kicking down my door.

Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 06-05-2011, 02:47 AM
rottenflesh's Avatar
rottenflesh
Offline:
My Rank: GUNNERY SERGEANT
Poster Rank:439
Male
Join Date: Mar 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1497
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrh2008 View Post
Their story does not matter. Botom line is, he threatened to kill people and got his ass shot.
The story does matter. Lies were told. Murder by SWAT is still murder.

Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 06-05-2011, 03:32 AM
mrh2008's Avatar
mrh2008
Offline:
My Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Poster Rank:528
male
Join Date: Jan 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
1/20 14/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1158
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by rottenflesh View Post
The story does matter. Lies were told. Murder by SWAT is still murder.
It's not murder. in AZ it's 100% justified when deadly force is used against someone that threatens the use of deadly force. They could have said they just wanted to look at his baseball cards, or his Barbie dolls... Deadly force would still be acceptable.

Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 06-05-2011, 04:28 AM
commondenom's Avatar
commondenom
Offline:
puelling pueman
Poster Rank:128
m
Join Date: Apr 2010
 
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Quoted: 2544 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
7/20 13/20
Today Posts
2/11 sssss8012
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

power hungry pigs......i fucking hate them...goddam nazis

if i hear people fucking around at my door i'll be grabbing my gun too

Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 06-05-2011, 05:12 AM
mrh2008's Avatar
mrh2008
Offline:
My Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Poster Rank:528
male
Join Date: Jan 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
1/20 14/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1158
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by commondenom View Post
power hungry pigs......i fucking hate them...goddam nazis

if i hear people fucking around at my door i'll be grabbing my gun too
There is a BIGGG difference between "people fucking around at my door" and Lights, sirens, and "Tucson police, OPEN THE DOOR!"

Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 06-05-2011, 05:35 AM
mrh2008's Avatar
mrh2008
Offline:
My Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Poster Rank:528
male
Join Date: Jan 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
1/20 14/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1158
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

Just to clear up legalities. These statutes were taken directly from http://www.azleg.gov/

13-405. Justification; use of deadly physical force

A. A person is justified in threatening or using deadly physical force against another:

1. If such person would be justified in threatening or using physical force against the other under section 13-404, and

2. When and to the degree a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly physical force.

B. A person has no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical force pursuant to this section if the person is in a place where the person may legally be and is not engaged in an unlawful act.

13-406. Justification; defense of a third person

A person is justified in threatening or using physical force or deadly physical force against another to protect a third person if:

1. Under the circumstances as a reasonable person would believe them to be, such person would be justified under section 13-404 or 13-405 in threatening or using physical force or deadly physical force to protect himself against the unlawful physical force or deadly physical force a reasonable person would believe is threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and

2. A reasonable person would believe that such person's intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.

13-410. Justification; use of deadly physical force in law enforcement

A. The threatened use of deadly physical force by a person against another is justified pursuant to section 13-409 only if a reasonable person effecting the arrest or preventing the escape would believe the suspect or escapee is:

1. Actually resisting the discharge of a legal duty with deadly physical force or with the apparent capacity to use deadly physical force; or

2. A felon who has escaped from lawful confinement; or

3. A felon who is fleeing from justice or resisting arrest with physical force.

B. The use of deadly physical force by a person other than a peace officer against another is justified pursuant to section 13-409 only if a reasonable person effecting the arrest or preventing the escape would believe the suspect or escapee is actually resisting the discharge of a legal duty with physical force or with the apparent capacity to use deadly physical force.

C. The use of deadly force by a peace officer against another is justified pursuant to section 13-409 only when the peace officer reasonably believes that it is necessary:

1. To defend himself or a third person from what the peace officer reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force.

2. To effect an arrest or prevent the escape from custody of a person whom the peace officer reasonably believes:

(a) Has committed, attempted to commit, is committing or is attempting to commit a felony involving the use or a threatened use of a deadly weapon.

(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon.

(c) Through past or present conduct of the person which is known by the peace officer that the person is likely to endanger human life or inflict serious bodily injury to another unless apprehended without delay.

(d) Is necessary to lawfully suppress a riot if the person or another person participating in the riot is armed with a deadly weapon.

D. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, a peace officer is justified in threatening to use deadly physical force when and to the extent a reasonable officer believes it necessary to protect himself against another's potential use of physical force or deadly physical force.

13-413. No civil liability for justified conduct

No person in this state shall be subject to civil liability for engaging in conduct otherwise justified pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.

The last statute ensures that the SWAT team, nor the city of Tucson will be responsible for the death of this moron.

Try as hard as you want. Deadly force was warranted in this instance. The law allows it. Any judge in this state will find each and every one of these officers not guilty of murder, negligent homicide, man slaughter etc. etc.
Nothing they did was illegal, a judge signed off on the warrant, therefore, they were legally allowed to kick in this mans door which in turn cancels out the Marines "castle doctrine" law because the team was legally allowed to be on his property and inside his house.

Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 06-05-2011, 01:20 PM
rottenflesh's Avatar
rottenflesh
Offline:
My Rank: GUNNERY SERGEANT
Poster Rank:439
Male
Join Date: Mar 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1497
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

When the details of what really happened and the inconstancies, and perjuries are brought to light, you will see officers going to jail for murder. He was an innocent man that was shot first and made sure to be dead so that the SWAT would have no opposing testimony that could possibly undermine their collusion and conspiracy.

Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 06-05-2011, 05:09 PM
mrh2008's Avatar
mrh2008
Offline:
My Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Poster Rank:528
male
Join Date: Jan 2010
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
1/20 14/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1158
Re: Tucson SWAT Team Defends Shooting Iraq Vet 60 Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by rottenflesh View Post
When the details of what really happened and the inconstancies, and perjuries are brought to light, you will see officers going to jail for murder.
Guess what! In Arizona, the burden of proving that the use of physical deadly force was not justified is put on the prosecutors that the deadly force was used on. It's kinda hard for a dead guy to help prove that deadly force was not justified. No one will be charged.

Reply With Quote

Powered by vBulletin Copyright 2000-2010 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO