School shooting on Brazil Today.

[redpoint5]

Thinking about this more, the lawsuit by surviving family members is absurd.

Lets grant them the compensation for their loss, which should generously be placed at $1, since the guy actually has negative value to society.

Now they are open to counter-suit, which is having produced a member of society that is violent and uncontrolled. The value to society to not have such a member is probably several million dollars, if not tens of millions of dollars.

These despicable family members should slink away into darkness if they had any capability of feeling shame. A parent's primary job is to produce well-adjusted and responsible children that are liked by their peers. This is evidence that they failed miserably at the job that was most important for them to be successful at, and which they voluntarily chose when they made the decision to procreate.

If I were a judge, I'd tell the family members it's reprehensible that they created such a terrible person, and that I would graciously allow them to leave the court without further admonishment or punishment.

I don't even like the concept of monetary compensation of "survivors" for the loss of someone. It cheapens the human value and doesn't actually repair the damage because the damage was the loss of an individual, not money.

Likewise there's no end to who would be owed compensation. If I was a very good friend with someone that was murdered, should I be compensated for the pain and suffering, plus the lost moments we would have shared throughout the rest of our natural lives?

Originally Posted by All Darc

I don't think they were in some distance, but more like in a body to body fight, and he got the gun and shot hin fast. If he was already dominated, and stand, then 3 shot in the back would be a execution.

Anyway in the case of a true execution, seconds after you watch the guy shoot some family members... for me it's not a big crime, since you would have a fair reason to be in high rage.

...and that's why the benefit of the doubt is given to the Police in the US.

I don't like that anyone was shot, but it's a miracle it was stopped, even if it ended tragically.

[oil pan 4]

I bet if the guy though there would be much chance or being executed on the spot he wouldn't have tried it.

[RedDevil]

I don't think we have to feel pity for the guy. But three bullets in the back of the head is an execution and being emotionally overwhelmed is not a valid excuse.

[redpoint5]

Well we can't know if it was excessive force because we weren't there, and don't know the details of the struggle. If it was a wrestling match, then shooting someone anywhere is prudent.

Now if the guy laid down on the ground with his hands folded over his head, and then got shot, I'd say that was an execution. Anything short of that is just called threat removal.

...and I still have pity for the guy shot. His actions were guided by genetics and environment; neither of which he chose.

[freebeard]

...and I still have pity for the guy shot. His actions were guided by genetics and environment; neither of which he chose.

Maybe if he had just cleaned his room [Rule #1].

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Maybe if he had just cleaned his room [Rule #1].

Agreed.

While I can pity him for being a product of genetics and environment, he's still responsible for his actions. It's a paradox I don't think we'll ever solve.

[All Darc]

Radical left wing : All poor and non whites are victms of society, no matter the crimes. But if rich white people commit crimes it's because they are greed evil people.

Radical right wing : All violent criminals must die or putrefy on jail.

Radical feminists : People commit crimes because they are men, with a penis and testosterone and rape instinct. If they were gay or women there would be almost no crimes. If a woman commit a crimes it's becasue a man turned her crazy or the crimes was a regenge against a man who deserved it.

Rich People : If a family member committed a crime it's because of some psychologic problem, some disease... but not really his fault.
But they often think different if a poor people commit a crime.

Poor people : They think if they had money for a lawer, like rich people, they would not go to jail.

[slowmover]

The story isn’t the shooting, it’s the promotion of it.

Disarm citizens.

And there isn’t ONE Constitutionally-valid firearms law in this country.

Those who founded this country aren’t the malefactors. Control for that and gun crime falls to near-zero.

The dangers faced by ordinary citizens (death rate) from guns is DWARFED by actual causes via bad actors. The “medical system” alone kills more than a million annually. For profit.

In this country gun ownership & use stops or ends violent crime more than 2.5-million times per annum.

Cui bono?

.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

Three bullets in the back of the head of someone that has been disarmed (losing the very gun that shot him)... Yup, that's an execution.

No doubt the guy was guilty, but he should have been brought to justice. As you tell it it seems more force was used than needed. So, yeah.

There is no such thing as "over-reacting". A criminal was shot down with all the strenght needed to ensure he would be properly neutralized. Only lefties who pretend to have a monopoly of virtue would claim that to have been disproportionate.

[RedDevil]

That makes me a leftie? Or you a blatherer.

The guy lost the gun! Then someone took it, put it on the back of his head and shot three times.
The guy was probably either held restrained or was just unconscious at that time.

I'd rather be called a leftie than a goon. (I'm glad to say neither fits me in the least)