America's Gun Violence

1262263264265267

Comments

  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    And don’t forget the house tax bill legislation that has a provision to prevent states from banning convicted felons from obtaining concealed carry permits. Considering most convicted felons are white and honed their white nationalist and neo-Nazi skills and ideology while incarcerated, it makes sense coming from this group of Trump supporters in Congress? Does Canada allow convicted felons to conceal carry?
    Aren't convicted felons banned from owning firearms to begin with? I always thought that is the case, and if so, the concealed carry permit is a non-issue if they can;t even possess one.
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
  • stuckinlinestuckinline Posts: 1,854
    WTF?

    Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources has issued 10 hunting licenses to children under the age of 1 in the weeks following the state’s new regulations concerning mentored hunts, the agency reports

    Earlier this month, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker signed a law eliminating the age restriction on mentored hunts, meaning that children of any age would be allowed to accompany a licensed hunter in the field, as well as carry their own weapon.

    Previously, a child in Wisconsin needed to be 12 to be issued a hunting license, and mentored hunts — wherein the protégée would carry his/her own rifle — were limited to those 10 and up.

    In addition to the 10 mentored-hunt licenses issued to those under 1 year of age, Wisconsin’s DNR has also issued 52 other licenses to children under the age of 5, the Associated Press reports. In total, 1,814 licenses have been issued to children under 10, although the majority — 1,011 — went to 9-year-olds.

    On Nov. 17, 6-year-old Lexie Harris became one of the first and youngest hunters in Wisconsin to bag a deer during a mentored hunt under the new law. Her father, Tyler, said he had been taking Lexie on his deer hunts since she was 3, but never before was she allowed to actually carry a weapon and kill one.


    http://www.foxnews.com/great-outdoors/2017/12/01/wisconsin-issues-10-hunting-licenses-to-children-under-age-1.html

  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,265
    Only 58 killed. That’s it. No big whoop. Cancer kills more. So do car wrecks. Alcohol. No need for changes.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/local/las-vegas-teens/

    It blows me away that this is 'normalcy'. That people will argue to defend this. It's completely asinine.
    Did they ever find a strawman scapegoat 'motive' for Vegas?

    Or did the NRA lobby just give up on that narrative?
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 10,082
    mace1229 said:
    And don’t forget the house tax bill legislation that has a provision to prevent states from banning convicted felons from obtaining concealed carry permits. Considering most convicted felons are white and honed their white nationalist and neo-Nazi skills and ideology while incarcerated, it makes sense coming from this group of Trump supporters in Congress? Does Canada allow convicted felons to conceal carry?
    Aren't convicted felons banned from owning firearms to begin with? I always thought that is the case, and if so, the concealed carry permit is a non-issue if they can;t even possess one.
    Then why is it buried in a tax bill. Why is it there at all?
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    mace1229 said:
    And don’t forget the house tax bill legislation that has a provision to prevent states from banning convicted felons from obtaining concealed carry permits. Considering most convicted felons are white and honed their white nationalist and neo-Nazi skills and ideology while incarcerated, it makes sense coming from this group of Trump supporters in Congress? Does Canada allow convicted felons to conceal carry?
    Aren't convicted felons banned from owning firearms to begin with? I always thought that is the case, and if so, the concealed carry permit is a non-issue if they can;t even possess one.
    Then why is it buried in a tax bill. Why is it there at all?
    I have no idea. I just Googled it, apparently felons of illegal trade practices can own a gun. So Martha Stewart may be armed.
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 10,082
    mace1229 said:
    mace1229 said:
    And don’t forget the house tax bill legislation that has a provision to prevent states from banning convicted felons from obtaining concealed carry permits. Considering most convicted felons are white and honed their white nationalist and neo-Nazi skills and ideology while incarcerated, it makes sense coming from this group of Trump supporters in Congress? Does Canada allow convicted felons to conceal carry?
    Aren't convicted felons banned from owning firearms to begin with? I always thought that is the case, and if so, the concealed carry permit is a non-issue if they can;t even possess one.
    Then why is it buried in a tax bill. Why is it there at all?
    I have no idea. I just Googled it, apparently felons of illegal trade practices can own a gun. So Martha Stewart may be armed.
    Makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside, doesn’t it?
     
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 10,082
    WTF?

    Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources has issued 10 hunting licenses to children under the age of 1 in the weeks following the state’s new regulations concerning mentored hunts, the agency reports

    Earlier this month, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker signed a law eliminating the age restriction on mentored hunts, meaning that children of any age would be allowed to accompany a licensed hunter in the field, as well as carry their own weapon.

    Previously, a child in Wisconsin needed to be 12 to be issued a hunting license, and mentored hunts — wherein the protégée would carry his/her own rifle — were limited to those 10 and up.

    In addition to the 10 mentored-hunt licenses issued to those under 1 year of age, Wisconsin’s DNR has also issued 52 other licenses to children under the age of 5, the Associated Press reports. In total, 1,814 licenses have been issued to children under 10, although the majority — 1,011 — went to 9-year-olds.

    On Nov. 17, 6-year-old Lexie Harris became one of the first and youngest hunters in Wisconsin to bag a deer during a mentored hunt under the new law. Her father, Tyler, said he had been taking Lexie on his deer hunts since she was 3, but never before was she allowed to actually carry a weapon and kill one.


    http://www.foxnews.com/great-outdoors/2017/12/01/wisconsin-issues-10-hunting-licenses-to-children-under-age-1.html

    Kids gotta eat.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    mace1229 said:
    mace1229 said:
    And don’t forget the house tax bill legislation that has a provision to prevent states from banning convicted felons from obtaining concealed carry permits. Considering most convicted felons are white and honed their white nationalist and neo-Nazi skills and ideology while incarcerated, it makes sense coming from this group of Trump supporters in Congress? Does Canada allow convicted felons to conceal carry?
    Aren't convicted felons banned from owning firearms to begin with? I always thought that is the case, and if so, the concealed carry permit is a non-issue if they can;t even possess one.
    Then why is it buried in a tax bill. Why is it there at all?
    I have no idea. I just Googled it, apparently felons of illegal trade practices can own a gun. So Martha Stewart may be armed.
    Makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside, doesn’t it?
     
    I have no idea where the majority of your comments come from.
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 10,082
    CM189191 said:
    Only 58 killed. That’s it. No big whoop. Cancer kills more. So do car wrecks. Alcohol. No need for changes.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/local/las-vegas-teens/

    It blows me away that this is 'normalcy'. That people will argue to defend this. It's completely asinine.
    Did they ever find a strawman scapegoat 'motive' for Vegas?

    Or did the NRA lobby just give up on that narrative?
    It never happened. Complete hoax.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    CM189191 said:
    Only 58 killed. That’s it. No big whoop. Cancer kills more. So do car wrecks. Alcohol. No need for changes.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/local/las-vegas-teens/

    It blows me away that this is 'normalcy'. That people will argue to defend this. It's completely asinine.
    Did they ever find a strawman scapegoat 'motive' for Vegas?

    Or did the NRA lobby just give up on that narrative?
    False flag operation by the liberals, of course. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • KC138045KC138045 Columbus, OHPosts: 1,834
    mace1229 said:
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
    And the illegal Mexican immigrant who is also a felon was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle in San Francisco.  Not saying the hunter should not of been charged but this guy in California should of been charged as well.  He was wanted by immigration officers and should not of even been allowed to be in the position to shoot and kill this poor girl.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-reaches-verdict-san-francisco-pier-shooting-233343965.html
    Columbus-2000
    Columbus-2003
    Cincinnati-2006
    Columbus-2010
    Wrigley-2013
    Cincinnati-2014
    Lexington-2016
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    KC138045 said:
    mace1229 said:
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
    And the illegal Mexican immigrant who is also a felon was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle in San Francisco.  Not saying the hunter should not of been charged but this guy in California should of been charged as well.  He was wanted by immigration officers and should not of even been allowed to be in the position to shoot and kill this poor girl.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-reaches-verdict-san-francisco-pier-shooting-233343965.html
    He was charged. A jury found him not guilty of murder but guilty on other serious charges. What grounds do you have to argue against this sequence? Are you second guessing the jury's decision? I'm guessing they have more information on the case than you do. 
     
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    KC138045 said:
    mace1229 said:
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
    And the illegal Mexican immigrant who is also a felon was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle in San Francisco.  Not saying the hunter should not of been charged but this guy in California should of been charged as well.  He was wanted by immigration officers and should not of even been allowed to be in the position to shoot and kill this poor girl.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-reaches-verdict-san-francisco-pier-shooting-233343965.html
    He was charged. A jury found him not guilty of murder but guilty on other serious charges. What grounds do you have to argue against this sequence? Are you second guessing the jury's decision? I'm guessing they have more information on the case than you do. 
     
    I agree with that. I agreed with that with all the high profile police cases in the last 2 years as well, but that wasn't a good enough answer for most back then.
  • KC138045KC138045 Columbus, OHPosts: 1,834
    KC138045 said:
    mace1229 said:
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
    And the illegal Mexican immigrant who is also a felon was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle in San Francisco.  Not saying the hunter should not of been charged but this guy in California should of been charged as well.  He was wanted by immigration officers and should not of even been allowed to be in the position to shoot and kill this poor girl.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-reaches-verdict-san-francisco-pier-shooting-233343965.html
    He was charged. A jury found him not guilty of murder but guilty on other serious charges. What grounds do you have to argue against this sequence? Are you second guessing the jury's decision? I'm guessing they have more information on the case than you do. 
     

    All they charged him with was being a felon in possession on a fire arm.  I don't need grounds to state my opinion.  Isn't that what we all do on these threads?  He was an illegal immigrant in possession of a stolen gun in a crowded public place.

    Just like the hunter the killing probably was not intentional but it should still be considered manslaughter just like it was with the hunter.
    Columbus-2000
    Columbus-2003
    Cincinnati-2006
    Columbus-2010
    Wrigley-2013
    Cincinnati-2014
    Lexington-2016
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    edited December 1
    I'm uncertain what options the jury had, but seems like manslaughter would have been appropriate over murder. Sounds like he just got gun violation charges though. I haven't read if the jury even had that option.
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    mace1229 said:
    KC138045 said:
    mace1229 said:
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
    And the illegal Mexican immigrant who is also a felon was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle in San Francisco.  Not saying the hunter should not of been charged but this guy in California should of been charged as well.  He was wanted by immigration officers and should not of even been allowed to be in the position to shoot and kill this poor girl.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-reaches-verdict-san-francisco-pier-shooting-233343965.html
    He was charged. A jury found him not guilty of murder but guilty on other serious charges. What grounds do you have to argue against this sequence? Are you second guessing the jury's decision? I'm guessing they have more information on the case than you do. 
     
    I agree with that. I agreed with that with all the high profile police cases in the last 2 years as well, but that wasn't a good enough answer for most back then.
    Ha ha. Well, I can see a number of differences there, one important one being that this guy was found guilty of things that there was eveidence around, but I can see your point. My main point here is that the poster I quoted said that Zarate should have been charged, when obviously he was charged. 

    In some of these police cases there were no charges. In many others there were only police department investigations, not a trial. 
     
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    edited December 1
    KC138045 said:
    KC138045 said:
    mace1229 said:
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
    And the illegal Mexican immigrant who is also a felon was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle in San Francisco.  Not saying the hunter should not of been charged but this guy in California should of been charged as well.  He was wanted by immigration officers and should not of even been allowed to be in the position to shoot and kill this poor girl.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-reaches-verdict-san-francisco-pier-shooting-233343965.html
    He was charged. A jury found him not guilty of murder but guilty on other serious charges. What grounds do you have to argue against this sequence? Are you second guessing the jury's decision? I'm guessing they have more information on the case than you do. 
     

    All they charged him with was being a felon in possession on a fire arm.  I don't need grounds to state my opinion.  Isn't that what we all do on these threads?  He was an illegal immigrant in possession of a stolen gun in a crowded public place.

    Just like the hunter the killing probably was not intentional but it should still be considered manslaughter just like it was with the hunter.
    I agree, if the hunter was guilty of manslaughter (and it seems like he should be) then why not this guy.
    But I don't know if the jury had that option. I know in some cases they can decide to which degree he is guilty, but not always, and I don;t know the circumstances that allow that.
    But if the choice was only murder or not murder, then it probably wasn't murder. May just be a case of the prosecution over-reaching, thinking they can make an example and it backfired.
    Post edited by mace1229 on
  • tbergstbergs Posts: 3,040
    He was charged with murder and manslaughter, but the jury acquitted him on all charges based on the evidence. If that is upsetting, blame the prosecution. Wouldn't be the first time the prosecution cost a murder conviction...OJ (cough, cough).

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/us/kate-steinle-murder-trial-verdict/index.html
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    tbergs said:
    He was charged with murder and manslaughter, but the jury acquitted him on all charges based on the evidence. If that is upsetting, blame the prosecution. Wouldn't be the first time the prosecution cost a murder conviction...OJ (cough, cough).

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/us/kate-steinle-murder-trial-verdict/index.html
    Convicted of being in possession of a firearm, which brings this back full circle to how this was raised in this thread. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    I believe the shooting was accidental, so just don't see how that isn't still involuntary manslaughter. The thing is I can believe his whole defense story with the exception he didn't know it was a gun when he picked it up and it went off, and that doesn't change anything. Still manslaughter. The jury saw it different I guess.
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    mace1229 said:
    I believe the shooting was accidental, so just don't see how that isn't still involuntary manslaughter. The thing is I can believe his whole defense story with the exception he didn't know it was a gun when he picked it up and it went off, and that doesn't change anything. Still manslaughter. The jury saw it different I guess.
    I guess it all hinges on whether they believed he behaved recklessly or not. If they believed he deliberately discharged the gun, then clearly it would be reckless, so somehow they decided he was not. The hunting "accidents" are different, as the hunters deliberately discharged their firearms in unsafe situations. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,882
    mace1229 said:
    I believe the shooting was accidental, so just don't see how that isn't still involuntary manslaughter. The thing is I can believe his whole defense story with the exception he didn't know it was a gun when he picked it up and it went off, and that doesn't change anything. Still manslaughter. The jury saw it different I guess.
    I guess it all hinges on whether they believed he behaved recklessly or not. If they believed he deliberately discharged the gun, then clearly it would be reckless, so somehow they decided he was not. The hunting "accidents" are different, as the hunters deliberately discharged their firearms in unsafe situations. 
    I am not sure that deliberateness is the issue here.  Neglectful discharge cases haven’t gone well for defendants in the past either.  I was not on the jury, so i’m not going to pretend to know the ins and outs of their decision here...but it does seem interesting.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,729
    PJPOWER said:
    mace1229 said:
    I believe the shooting was accidental, so just don't see how that isn't still involuntary manslaughter. The thing is I can believe his whole defense story with the exception he didn't know it was a gun when he picked it up and it went off, and that doesn't change anything. Still manslaughter. The jury saw it different I guess.
    I guess it all hinges on whether they believed he behaved recklessly or not. If they believed he deliberately discharged the gun, then clearly it would be reckless, so somehow they decided he was not. The hunting "accidents" are different, as the hunters deliberately discharged their firearms in unsafe situations. 
    I am not sure that deliberateness is the issue here.  Neglectful discharge cases haven’t gone well for defendants in the past either.  I was not on the jury, so i’m not going to pretend to know the ins and outs of their decision here...but it does seem interesting.
    Especially since he was illegally in possession of a firearm, I just don't see how deliberateness is a factor.
    I can't imagine why he would intentionally discharge a gun, so giving him all the benefit of the doubt, it is still illegal for him to possess one.
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    PJPOWER said:
    mace1229 said:
    I believe the shooting was accidental, so just don't see how that isn't still involuntary manslaughter. The thing is I can believe his whole defense story with the exception he didn't know it was a gun when he picked it up and it went off, and that doesn't change anything. Still manslaughter. The jury saw it different I guess.
    I guess it all hinges on whether they believed he behaved recklessly or not. If they believed he deliberately discharged the gun, then clearly it would be reckless, so somehow they decided he was not. The hunting "accidents" are different, as the hunters deliberately discharged their firearms in unsafe situations. 
    I am not sure that deliberateness is the issue here.  Neglectful discharge cases haven’t gone well for defendants in the past either.  I was not on the jury, so i’m not going to pretend to know the ins and outs of their decision here...but it does seem interesting.
    Deliberateness is certainly an issue here, given the prosecution's assertion that he deliberately fired into the crowd. What I am saying is that the jury seems to have rejected that argument completely. 

    So we are left with accidental discharge, or deliberate discharge in another direction. If accidental, the only thing that seems to not fit the "reckless" definition is that he didn't know it was a gun when he picked it up, which was his defence. I guess that's what won out. 
     
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 37,932
    WTF?

    Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources has issued 10 hunting licenses to children under the age of 1 in the weeks following the state’s new regulations concerning mentored hunts, the agency reports

    Earlier this month, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker signed a law eliminating the age restriction on mentored hunts, meaning that children of any age would be allowed to accompany a licensed hunter in the field, as well as carry their own weapon.

    Previously, a child in Wisconsin needed to be 12 to be issued a hunting license, and mentored hunts — wherein the protégée would carry his/her own rifle — were limited to those 10 and up.

    In addition to the 10 mentored-hunt licenses issued to those under 1 year of age, Wisconsin’s DNR has also issued 52 other licenses to children under the age of 5, the Associated Press reports. In total, 1,814 licenses have been issued to children under 10, although the majority — 1,011 — went to 9-year-olds.

    On Nov. 17, 6-year-old Lexie Harris became one of the first and youngest hunters in Wisconsin to bag a deer during a mentored hunt under the new law. Her father, Tyler, said he had been taking Lexie on his deer hunts since she was 3, but never before was she allowed to actually carry a weapon and kill one.


    http://www.foxnews.com/great-outdoors/2017/12/01/wisconsin-issues-10-hunting-licenses-to-children-under-age-1.html

    Kids gotta eat.
    That makes it ironic that breastfeeding in public is probably less acceptable to these people than infants having hunting licenses and kindergartners blowing animals' brains out, lol.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,882
    edited December 1
    PJ_Soul said:
    WTF?

    Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources has issued 10 hunting licenses to children under the age of 1 in the weeks following the state’s new regulations concerning mentored hunts, the agency reports

    Earlier this month, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker signed a law eliminating the age restriction on mentored hunts, meaning that children of any age would be allowed to accompany a licensed hunter in the field, as well as carry their own weapon.

    Previously, a child in Wisconsin needed to be 12 to be issued a hunting license, and mentored hunts — wherein the protégée would carry his/her own rifle — were limited to those 10 and up.

    In addition to the 10 mentored-hunt licenses issued to those under 1 year of age, Wisconsin’s DNR has also issued 52 other licenses to children under the age of 5, the Associated Press reports. In total, 1,814 licenses have been issued to children under 10, although the majority — 1,011 — went to 9-year-olds.

    On Nov. 17, 6-year-old Lexie Harris became one of the first and youngest hunters in Wisconsin to bag a deer during a mentored hunt under the new law. Her father, Tyler, said he had been taking Lexie on his deer hunts since she was 3, but never before was she allowed to actually carry a weapon and kill one.


    http://www.foxnews.com/great-outdoors/2017/12/01/wisconsin-issues-10-hunting-licenses-to-children-under-age-1.html

    Kids gotta eat.
    That makes it ironic that breastfeeding in public is probably less acceptable to these people than infants having hunting licenses and kindergartners blowing animals' brains out, lol.
    Interestingly, I have also found it ironic that it is okay to depict people blowing each other’s brains out in HD on daytime TV, but a boob...noooooo!  
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,265
    CM189191 said:
    If you shoot someone in accident you should at least:
    Spend time in jail
    Never be allowed to handle own or otherwise possess a gun ever again
    Pay compensation to your victim above and beyond medical expenses


    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • mace1229 said:
    KC138045 said:
    mace1229 said:
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
    And the illegal Mexican immigrant who is also a felon was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle in San Francisco.  Not saying the hunter should not of been charged but this guy in California should of been charged as well.  He was wanted by immigration officers and should not of even been allowed to be in the position to shoot and kill this poor girl.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-reaches-verdict-san-francisco-pier-shooting-233343965.html
    He was charged. A jury found him not guilty of murder but guilty on other serious charges. What grounds do you have to argue against this sequence? Are you second guessing the jury's decision? I'm guessing they have more information on the case than you do. 
     
    I agree with that. I agreed with that with all the high profile police cases in the last 2 years as well, but that wasn't a good enough answer for most back then.
    Good post.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • mcgruff10mcgruff10 New JerseyPosts: 12,578
    mace1229 said:
    KC138045 said:
    mace1229 said:
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/deer-hunter-who-killed-woman-is-charged-with-manslaughter/ar-BBFZkjF?li=AAggNb9&ocid=edgsp

    Nighttime, neighbourhood, handgun deer hunter charged with shooting his neighbour after he thought she was a deer.
    100% agree with that verdict. He was not legally hunting, so there's no question he is criminally responsible for it. Manslaughter seems like an appropriate charge.
    And the illegal Mexican immigrant who is also a felon was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle in San Francisco.  Not saying the hunter should not of been charged but this guy in California should of been charged as well.  He was wanted by immigration officers and should not of even been allowed to be in the position to shoot and kill this poor girl.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-reaches-verdict-san-francisco-pier-shooting-233343965.html
    He was charged. A jury found him not guilty of murder but guilty on other serious charges. What grounds do you have to argue against this sequence? Are you second guessing the jury's decision? I'm guessing they have more information on the case than you do. 
     
    I agree with that. I agreed with that with all the high profile police cases in the last 2 years as well, but that wasn't a good enough answer for most back then.
    Great post. 
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
Sign In or Register to comment.