Homeless man shot to death by police while “illegally camping” in NM foothills

[Stickfight]

According to Kirk Freeman, this whole thing was about property rights? Hobos are not allowed to despoil the desert landscape view of suburbanites.

Also according to Kirk and Phylodog, the police dinduniffin. They were just defending themselves. Someone should print this thread and mail it to the defense attorneys.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Sorry, I don't get what you're trying to say. The murder victim wasn't trespassing on private property, so no-ones property rights were violated. He was in public.

He was in public but that section had closed, thus he was trespassing.

According to Kirk Freeman, this whole thing was about property rights?

Incorrect.

According to me it is about whether a reasonable person would feel they were under threat of serious bodily injury or death.

One cannot use deadly force because someone is trespassing.

 

[Stickfight]

This case is about property rights.

According to Kirk Freeman, this whole thing was about property rights?

Incorrect.

???

I'm shocked that "textbook" self defense could go this far off the tracks in the court.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I'm shocked that "textbook" self defense could go this far off the tracks in the court

Off the tracks? You are claiming that there is a verdict now? Where did you read this?

 

[phylodog]

Also according to Kirk and Phylodog, the police dinduniffin. They were just defending themselves. Someone should print this thread and mail it to the defense attorneys.

Yes, yes, exactly what I've stated repeatedly throughout the thread.

I'm not saying I agree with the way this went down, I see some very real issues personally.

There was plenty of wrong to go around.

Can you not read or do you just have an issue with me severe enough that you would lie?

 

[steveh_131]

This case is about property rights.

According to Kirk Freeman, this whole thing was about property rights?

Incorrect.

 

[Stickfight]

Off the tracks? You are claiming that there is a verdict now? Where did you read this?

You are right, textbook cases of self defense over property rights so often end in 2 murder charges being brought by The State against its own agents that this isn't an unusual development at all.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

You are right, textbook cases of self defense over property rights so often end in 2 murder charges being brought by The State against its own agents that this isn't an unusual development at all.

Yes, it happens all the time. That's why we have trials and due process. Just ask the Danziger Bridge defendants.

So, they have not been convicted? Are you admitting this now?

 

[Stickfight]

Can you not read or do you just have an issue with me severe enough that you would lie?

Oh I'm not lying, though I admit it is a little harsh to lump you on with the "The police needed to shoot Boyd so he was shot" crowd. I based that mainly on your press release stating the police were forced to shoot him, which I realize was intended as a vehicle to criticize what you though was bias against police in the original article.

 

[HoughMade]

You are right, textbook cases of self defense over property rights...

Self defense over property rights? No. Were police present because of property rights? Yes. Then, they perceived a threat and responded in self-defense. Were their acts reasonable? I guess a jury may decide that.

So, the case starts with property rights, but that's not why the guy was shot.

I don't understand what's so difficult to comprehend.

 

[Stickfight]

So, they have not been convicted? Are you admitting this now?

The new deal is: every time you try to put words in my mouth, however clumsily, I'm going to quote you from this thread.

This case is only about property rights, which are the essence of Liberty.

 

[phylodog]

Oh I'm not lying, though I admit it is a little harsh to lump you on with the "The police needed to shoot Boyd so he was shot" crowd. I based that mainly on your press release stating the police were forced to shoot him, which I realize was intended as a vehicle to criticize what you though was bias against police in the original article.

according to Phylodog, the police dinduniffin.

Apparently you can read and are capable of comprehending the intent of my version of a press release, doesn't explain you accusing me of defending the officers in this case as the two are far from the same.

I didn't think it was a bias, it was quite clearly a bias. I have no issue reporting on the actions of police officers when they are wrong. I have little use when sensationalism and creative wording must be used to illicit the desired response, its disingenuous and petty. Those who struggle with independent thought lap it up though so I guess its a reasonably successful tactic.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The new deal is: every time you try to put words in my mouth, however clumsily, I'm going to quote you from this thread.

Ok, as long as you admit your error I am fine with it.

Funny how that b.s. we get from INGOtarians about property rights is exposed as a stalking horse. Guess property rights aren't so sacred after all.

 

[Stickfight]

So, the case starts with property rights, but that's not why the guy was shot.

That this is about property rights is not my claim. Neither am I claiming that people should be free to attack the police or others without fear of their targets defending themselves.

I'm going only on what was posted here and the fact that The State finds enough evidence to bring murder charges against 2 of the officers involved. Is The State wrong? Maybe, but I doubt it is so wrong that this was just a routine, completely justified hobo killing.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

'm going only on what was posted here and the fact that The State finds enough evidence to bring murder charges against 2 of the officers involved.

Something about a ham sandwich goes here.

A prosecutor in political trouble attempts to distract the voters from her problems by hanging some innocents?

Gee, I wonder if that has ever happened before?

 

[Stickfight]

Apparently you can read

I stuggle through, thanks for noticing!

 

[phylodog]

I stuggle through, thanks for noticing!

Thanks for calling me out on made up BS.

 

[steveh_131]

Funny how that b.s. we get from INGOtarians about property rights is exposed as a stalking horse.

Please explain which B.S. was written, which 'INGOtarian' wrote it, and how it qualifies as a 'stalking horse'.

 

[rambone]

I want to examine Kirk's textbook, that apparently explains that when a defendant conspires to mutilate a suspect by "shooting him in the pecker," it is a case study in justifiable self-defense. That must be quite a read.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I want to examine Kirk's textbook, that apparently explains that when a defendant conspires to mutilate a suspect by "shooting him in the pecker," it is a case study in justifiable self-defense. That must be quite a read.

Always happy to educate. You can read about it here:

https://books.google.com/books?id=j...nepage&q=use of pelvis shot by police&f=false