Posted on 12/04/2023 12:58:34 PM PST by Red Badger
The tree of Liberty often needs to be nourished with the blood of patriots.
Thomas Jefferson
Yes. You’ve answered your own question. He was supposed to sacrifice his household and himself to the criminals. They will say he did not KNOW they would harm him. No standing?
It may be time to dispose the body yourself
Is there any actual confirmation that the homeowner was arrested?
I’ve seen police cuff people while they verify who they are, and then end up not charging them after confirming who they are.
Not entirely new. Recall “Bonfire of the Vanities”, a 1987 novel.
He is in handcuffs in he picture. The police believe him to be dangerous and that he will be charged with a crime.
False. People get handcuffed without being charged all the time.
Yep, big difference between being “detained” temporarily & questioned at the scene of a shooting or at the P.D., and being “arrested”. The homeowner was not arrested/booked.
https://twitter.com/LAPDPIO/status/1731145133675167911
https://nypost.com/2023/12/04/news/la-homeowner-fatally-shoots-suspect-during-attempted-burglary/
CA says you can have 10rds / 4 people leaves two extra
good luck wi that if you have to shoot the first one 3 or 4 times
A la Fargo?
On Monday, authorities identified the suspect whom was shot by the homeowner as 20-year-old Inglewood man Abednego Adre.
“People get handcuffed without being charged all the time.”
The shouldn’t be.
I agree but the police do it all the time! Even when you are pulled over for speeding, the police can say they suspect anything from smelling weed to you seem fidgety and make you get out of the car and put you in cuffs “for their safety”.
I know they do. But it is unconstitutional. They cannot place you in restraints or imprison you in a squad car until they perform the formal legal act of arresting you verbally and marandizing you.
Until you are legally arrested you are presumed innocent and cannot be restrained or imprisoned. They have been allowed to get away with it, but it is not legal.
But it is unconstitutional.
SCOTUS disagrees.
“Investigative Detainment” is a thing....(including cuffs):
https://jmarshlaw.com/detain-or-arrest-probable-cause/
and
https://le.alcoda.org/publications/files/CCIchap1.pdf
I know it is a thing. But it is unconstitutional.
It presumes guilt before innocence.
----------------
Perhaps the other perps that ran away were Abednego's brothers Shadrach and Meshach, along with their ringleader Nebuchadnezzar?!? ;-)
“SCOTUS disagrees.”
SCOTUS is wrong. It presumes guilt before innocence which is unconstitutional.
And please don’t try to say SCOTUS is never wrong and does not violate the constitution all the time. Especially concerning the 2nd amendment...
“PRESUMED innocent until proven guilty” is just as important as “Shall not be infringed”.
Yeah, but SCOTUS went for the “officer/public safety angle”...when police arrive to investigate a more serious incident like a shooting ...people presumed to be involved can be “held/cuffed for a short period of time” (”short” not defined too well).
https://casetext.com/case/terry-v-state-of-ohio
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.