Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Above the Law?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by bruss01, Oct 16, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bruss01

    bruss01 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    626
  2. buzz_knox

    buzz_knox Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,849
    The title will only be appropriate if there's no serious investigation, or if the charges are substantiated but nothing happens, or if there is a longer delay in charging him than would otherwise happen. If there is sufficient cause for a charge to be made and it is, in fact, made in a timely manner, then he won't have been above the law, just another psycho with a firearm.


    So, the article is appropriate for the discussion, but the title will end up causing it to be construed simply as cop bashing.
     
  3. bruss01

    bruss01 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    626
    Buzz,

    Ok, perhaps it is unclear and warrants this little bit of clarification.

    Which, if true as aleged, indicates the officer believed that his status as a law enforcement officer placed him "above the law" since anyone like you or I who pulled this kind of stunt would most definitely have the cops called on him and would end up sitting in a cell somewhere because of it. My title pertains more to his mindset than to him actually being "above the law".

    Sorry for any confusion.
     
  4. Lou629

    Lou629 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Messages:
    493
    There are more than a few members of the public at large that are too unstable or emotionally disturbed to have any business carrying a gun, or being anywhere near them for that matter. You know the type, we all do.

    To apply that same thought here, if one can say that there is a certain percentage of the general population that shouldn't posess guns, it isn't a stretch to imagine that there could well be a certain percentage of the LEO population that could fall within that particular group, since they all start out as members of the public at large and, except for their career choice, would still be.

    I have known many civilian gun owners and LEO's over the years. In both cases the vast majority were completely responsible types that you would not give a second thought to their having a gun. Unfortunately i have also met more than a few civilians, and at least one LEO, that had no business at all around firearms. I am reminded of that old saying about the bad apple and the barrel. It's a pity that there's always going to be one or two in any given group.
     
  5. buzz_knox

    buzz_knox Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,849
    I understand now. My apologies if my post came across harsh.
     
  6. Spreadfire Arms

    Spreadfire Arms Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,312
    this sounds like a rather outlandish accusation. if its true, then yes, this officer has some serious explaining to do in court in front of a jury. if its false, then the complainant should be facing a court for filing a false police report.

    i think some of us (not just THR members, but the public in general) may be too quick to take this news story as 100% fact. they are only reporting what the complainant has alleged. the officer, under internal affairs investigation, has most likely been given a written order from the agency not to discuss this incident with anyone other than his attorney.

    i think there is probably more to the story. personally i am going to wait for more facts to come about. keep in mind the officer has not been charged yet either.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page