Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Vn_survivor_67-68
You don't get it, do you?

Yes, the victim is responsible for the condition of his arteries. But that's always true, and has never prevented a conviction for murder when a criminal's actions are the proximate cause of a victim's heart attack. And cops, due to their position of power and responsibility, should be even more at risk than an ordinary citizen in that regard.

And then there's the failure to provide appropriate assistance to a citizen whose life was in danger. That's what cops are paid to do, and these cops didn't do their jobjs. For that alone, they should be fired. And if that's not enough, the innapropriate use of force should also be sufficient cause for termination.

55 posted on 10/08/2007 10:01:22 AM PDT by sourcery (Referring a "social conservative" to the Ninth Amendment is like showing the Cross to Dracula.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: sourcery
And then there's the failure to provide appropriate assistance to a citizen whose life was in danger. That's what cops are paid to do, and these cops didn't do their jobjs. For that alone, they should be fired. And if that's not enough, the innapropriate use of force should also be sufficient cause for termination.

First of all, we don't have a complete version of the events. You are making an assumption after the fact in order to criticize associated actions also after the fact. A child's view of reality.

The courts have officially decided that the police function is not to provide 'appropriate' (whatever that means) assistance to people in danger; they can't (are not allowed to) prevent crimes, just fix them after they happen.

Last I heard, cops aren't issued Ouija Boards.

The use of force is another issue altogether. We don't have any corroboration of what actually happened, yet. The described 'abuse' may have happenned or not. It may have been justified or not. From what was written, I have no way of knowing, nor does anyone else who was not there.

I just know that, if under those circumstances, I made the mistake of asserting my rights, claiming victimhood, getting arrogantly combative, verbally or otherwise before allowing the guys with the guns from knowing I am no danger to them, I have some serious survival deficiencies, or a total lack of brains.

130 posted on 10/08/2007 10:40:34 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

To: sourcery; Vn_survivor_67-68
You don't get it, do you?

Yes, the victim is responsible for the condition of his arteries...

Um, there are genetic predispositions for cardiac health issues. A person can eat reasonably, not smoke etc, and still have heart problems all because their ancestors had them. I know because it runs in the family and had an Aunt die on the table after suffering a heart attack, and the ER cardiac people were cathing her when her arteries basically disintegrated. She didn't smoke, drink and wasn't over weight. Her parents, my grandparents both died of cardiac issues within a year of each other back in 39.

I'm hoping that it is going to skip my generation. But if I run the possibility of drying from it anyway, regardless of lifestyle, then I might as well enjoy life as best I can while I still got it.

144 posted on 10/08/2007 10:51:21 AM PDT by AFreeBird (Will NOT vote for Rudy. <--- notice the period)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson