Originally posted by finti
of course it matters if you get caught while robbing a bank the trial wont be whether you robed the bank or not but how long you gonna serve for robbing it
Well but you are proven guilty then are you not? If you get caught molesting the child it is proven that you molested it....but if there is only evidence that you might have robbed the bank or molested the child you have to be treated innocent until you are proven guilty.
Originally posted by hotsauce6548
Innocent.Everybody deserves a trial.
Originally posted by Snoopbert
Doesn't matter. Innocent until proven guilty, or else the system WILL be manipulated.
Originally posted by Bardock42And yet a man can be shot if he is deemed suspicious enough by a police officer.
Well but you are proven guilty then are you not? If you get caught molesting the child it is proven that you molested it....but if there is only evidence that you might have robbed the bank or molested the child you have to be treated innocent until you are proven guilty.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
😬 And you don't see the double standard...
Plus if you actually shoot someone even if it was because you were in danger it will be investigated.
Originally posted by Fishy
No...The police has to act on an immediate threat, they can hardly call a judge ask if they are allowed to shoot then get the guy they want to shoot a lawyer and have a court meeting. If they can not arrest somebody then they should be allowed to shoot.
True....but remember you have vigilante cops out there too....so, who's to supervise....OH.....video... 🙄
Originally posted by Bardock42
I do see what problem you might have with that......but it is a difference if some guy with a knife runs at you and probably tries to harm you or you arrested someone who now is no harm to anyone and you have the time to proof that he's guilty or not.Plus if you actually shoot someone even if it was because you were in danger it will be investigated.
Originally posted by FishySo in the scenario of a man caught in the act of trying to molest a child, the man should be allowed a trial. However a dark skinned man who decides to wear a thick jacket in summer should be shot in the head if the police officer is slightly suspicious of the man? And theirs no double standard in that at all?
No...The police has to act on an immediate threat, they can hardly call a judge ask if they are allowed to shoot then get the guy they want to shoot a lawyer and have a court meeting. If they can not arrest somebody then they should be allowed to shoot.
Originally posted by Fishy
Everytime a cop shoots somebody here an investigation is launched... Ussually a shit load of media attention too. I don't know how it is in the US but over here if a cop shoots somebody and it wasn't necessary the cop is screwed.
Cops get a bad rap here too.....2 were thrown in prison because the man they were attempting to hold was high on coke....and was freaking out...they used quite a bit of force on him and he was black....so the racial card was played......
Originally posted by Fishy
Everytime a cop shoots somebody here an investigation is launched... Ussually a shit load of media attention too. I don't know how it is in the US but over here if a cop shoots somebody and it wasn't necessary the cop is screwed.
Exactly my point...it'ws not just "shot-dead-and ok" it is a big thing........but often the only possible way...if not the Cop will be punished.......(but again innocent until proven guilty)
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
So in the scenario of a man caught in the act of trying to molest a child, the man should be allowed a trial. However a dark skinned man who decides to wear a thick jacket in summer should be shot in the head if the police officer is slightly suspicious of the man? And theirs no double standard in that at all?
Investigations don't bring people back to life.
There is a no double standard in the syste at last, because if the cop shoots a man who was slightly suspicious he will face trial lose his job and most likely stay in jail for a long ass time...if there is a double standard in your country...I don't know ...but the system works out just fine.
As for the "Investigations don'T...." no they don't but it is not justofied to kill the person so they will be treated like every other murderer the second they are proven guilty.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
No double standard....
I've seen the phrase "Innocent until proven guilty." used by you and every other person on this thread. Yet when this scenario arises the person is treated as guilty until proven innocent by subsequent inquest.
If a cop thinks he needs to shoot that person he can shoot that person he has a gun and he is allowed to use it. However if he shot the person without a damn good reason he's going to jail. If he shot that person without a damn good reason he becomes a murderer its that simple. There is no double standard, he gets punished if he was wrong he doesn't get punished if he was right. But he's only right when the guy can kill other people. If the criminal has a bomb then the cop is allowed to shoot if the criminal points a gun on the cops head then yeah sure the cop can shoot, but unless something like that happens the cop can't shoot and he will be trialed for doing so.
Whats the double standard?