Popular TikTokker charged with manslaughter after accidentally shooting friend

can you ban speech cause someone stole a car 20 years ago? can ban their right to own a gun?

any right that doesn't apply to the least among us is not really a right at all

 

I was not the one that demanded it, the poster was demanding our school children be trained, I said how about people in such a household

 

My response was to your idea that having a person having a right can cause the government to require compulsory education for persons around them, or for themselves.

You don't have political speech training because you have a tongue. You don't get election training because you have a right to vote. ETC.

 

Are you under the impression I support removing rights from persons no longer serving out a sentence for a crime they were convicted of by a jury of their peers after due process was had where they were represented by counsel? Bless your little heart.

Do you want to maybe review some of our prior discussions over the years and retract that statement so you don't seem so silly?

 

I would be shocked if this turns out to be an accident. There are too many steps between someone leaving behind a weapon and this death. It's statistically improbable all those lined up to this person dying.

 

if you're not, then we agree on that one

when you need the privilege to have a right, they are no longer rights

 

I also favor re-expanding the death penalty to cases of rape and strong arm robbery after the 3rd offense. I doubt we agree on much.

 

I do not, the DP can not be undone, I am good with LWOP

sometimes the inmates have no victims, sometimes they are the victims...

http://www.forejustice.org/wc/ray_krone_JD_vol2_i9.htm

glad we agree, ex-felons should still have their rights restored when their sentence is complete and be able to vote and own a gun, ect.... we can agree on some things at least

 

The cases of reversal are 1) few and far between, 2) almost always hinge on racial animus being the norm which it no longer is, 3) and generally involve cases so old modern evidence was not a thing.

I'd support an extra finding/stricter standard for death penalty cases. But I don't think putting savage animals who cannot be rehabilitated (which is what life without parole means) in with those who can be rehabilitated and whom we're trying to rehabilitate is a winning strategy. Bad apples spoil the bunch.

I'd also support giving the sentence of the apparently innocent party to the prosecutor and their staff in any case involving prosecutorial misconduct.

 

I would agree to the part highlighted

 

Compromise is a wonderful thing. Then you just have the things you couldn't agree on to fight about.

 

Like how access to marijuana 'can be restricted'? Would you say marijuana has ever been difficult to obtain?

 

On what do you base the claim "certain people just don't care about that"?

 

Going by my observations that they never support solutions to prevent such deaths and injuries from occurring in the future. We've endured how many school shootings and other mass shootings with no meaningful changes to gun laws and no change in attitude among 2A proponents now? I can only conclude that a great many Americans don't care about the loss of life and are content to let it continue.

 

Should we allow the government to ignore the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and SCOTUS to protect lives?

 

Ah, so because people don't support your proposed solutions that involve further infringement of our rights, then they 'don't care.'

That's pretty much what I figured.

Many people who don't support more restrictions on access to guns (in part, because those restrictions are unlikely to effect criminals and also because they view those restrictions as unconstitutional) do in fact support other measures to prevent violence. For examples: -keeping those prone to violence locked up in prison with longer and more severe prison sentences for violent offenders -and overhauling the mental health system. I personally am a big proponent of this one, but since you and I already discussed this in post #27 of another thread, I won't bother repeating myself.

Regarding accidental discharge of firearms, there are many proponents of increasing access to gun safety training. I personally think gun safety should be part of a general safety class taught in public school, covering common tools, fire extinguishers, household chemicals, common sources of infectious disease such as house pets and pests, and other dangers the average person is likely to encounter in everyday life. Its unfortunate that schools these days treat firearm safety in much the same manner they used to treat drug safety and safe sex- only abstinance. We learned long ago that 'abstinence only' is not a sufficient educational curriculum when it comes to sex and drugs... hopefully we'll learn the same lesson regarding guns sooner than later. It would probably help if certain people were able to abandon their dreams of disarming America. I understand that many people (especially in the education sector) would prefer that guns not exist. But the reality is that they do and they will continue to exist in America. By sticking to this 'abstinance only' curriculum of gun safety, we're setting people up for calamity should they accidentally encounter a firearm. Clearly 'don't touch it and call an adult' is not effective once children become adults.

 

No it can’t

 

In this case it is her fault since she shot her friend

 

Legalize all guns and abortions.

 

I love how the knee jerk response from her is "maybe it wasn't her fault" the relationship went tits up when this chick just casually pulled a gun and offed her friend on camera. Like who would not want THAT in their life? He must be crazy. lol

 

A fetus doesn't have a choice - an abject moron does.