Kim Potter/Daunte Wright trial - Potter found guilty on manslaughter counts
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 89724
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:24 pm    Post subject:

I actually think a lot of this is trained IN to cops rather than weeded out. You'd be hard pressed to find a group of more aggressive, paranoid, self-entitled and yet trigger happy in the face of mild danger groups than cops. And it is institutionalized. A ton of cops get off on the action and get amped up for it.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 04, 2022 6:20 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
I actually think a lot of this is trained IN to cops rather than weeded out. You'd be hard pressed to find a group of more aggressive, paranoid, self-entitled and yet trigger happy in the face of mild danger groups than cops. And it is institutionalized. A ton of cops get off on the action and get amped up for it.


This is one of the several reasons I don't believe those who enter the medical field and those who go into law enforcement should be handled with the same standards of expectation. The motives for entering into the two fields are entirely different . Despite the fact that on the surface it's about helping people, the reality is that far, far too many entering law enforcement are about the dynamic you describe—the power of authority. That is why it is imperative that LEO have a different standard for where their actions meet the level of criminal negligence.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 60724
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is consider a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 04, 2022 8:00 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
I actually think a lot of this is trained IN to cops rather than weeded out. You'd be hard pressed to find a group of more aggressive, paranoid, self-entitled and yet trigger happy in the face of mild danger groups than cops. And it is institutionalized. A ton of cops get off on the action and get amped up for it.

I was talking to a young Sherrif. He said he loves it when they run. He's probably the kind of officer you're talking about. Honestly, he struck me as a nice guy.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Abe Lincoln


Last edited by jodeke on Wed Jan 05, 2022 10:58 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11180

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 7:59 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
This is one of the several reasons I don't believe those who enter the medical field and those who go into law enforcement should be handled with the same standards of expectation. The motives for entering into the two fields are entirely different . Despite the fact that on the surface it's about helping people, the reality is that far, far too many entering law enforcement are about the dynamic you describe—the power of authority. That is why it is imperative that LEO have a different standard for where their actions meet the level of criminal negligence.


I agree with you on a visceral level, and perhaps even on a practical level. I just can't get there on a logical level. I'm trying to think of another example that works this way, or even a hypothetical analogy. Just off the top of my head (so this may not work), suppose there is a segment of people with God complexes, who are attracted to medicine in the same way as the power-of-authority-hungry are attracted to law enforcement. If this hypothetical scenario were true, and the net effect was deleterious to the practice of medicine, would that change how an honest practitioner's mistake is dealt with?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
FernieBee
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 5839
Location: 921SD

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 11:03 am    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
I was talking to a young Sherrif. He said he loves it when they run. He's probably the kind of officer you're talking about. Honestly, he struck me as a nice guy.


Back when I was having drug & law problems, a cop told me that it scared him when I didn't run from him. I guess he was used to suspects breaking for it when he approached them.

I didn't run because I figured I'd get caught, anyway . . . not because I was looking forward to the confrontation. However, I never told him that.

I was always sane enough to not run from the police or fight with them.

Say nope to dope and ugh to drugs.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 5:30 pm    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
This is one of the several reasons I don't believe those who enter the medical field and those who go into law enforcement should be handled with the same standards of expectation. The motives for entering into the two fields are entirely different . Despite the fact that on the surface it's about helping people, the reality is that far, far too many entering law enforcement are about the dynamic you describe—the power of authority. That is why it is imperative that LEO have a different standard for where their actions meet the level of criminal negligence.


I agree with you on a visceral level, and perhaps even on a practical level. I just can't get there on a logical level. I'm trying to think of another example that works this way, or even a hypothetical analogy. Just off the top of my head (so this may not work), suppose there is a segment of people with God complexes, who are attracted to medicine in the same way as the power-of-authority-hungry are attracted to law enforcement. If this hypothetical scenario were true, and the net effect was deleterious to the practice of medicine, would that change how an honest practitioner's mistake is dealt with?


I can see the hypothetical, but the reality is there really doesn't seem to be even a remotely significant segment of such people entering medicine. That's not to say it may not have happened—I feel like I recall something about a doctor who was basically doing just that and killed patients, though it might have been an episode of TV (not being flippant). But I think we all know that a commonality amongst LE recruits is that desire to exert authority and that has gotten out of hand.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11180

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 5:42 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
I can see the hypothetical, but the reality is there really doesn't seem to be even a remotely significant segment of such people entering medicine. That's not to say it may not have happened—I feel like I recall something about a doctor who was basically doing just that and killed patients, though it might have been an episode of TV (not being flippant). But I think we all know that a commonality amongst LE recruits is that desire to exert authority and that has gotten out of hand.


I agree, but I intended it purely as a hypothetical. So suppose there was, and there were enough of them that they were causing a problem in the practice of medicine, in the same way a problem is occurring in the practice of law enforcement. Enough so that those who let it go to their head and let patients die (because THEY control who lives & dies, after all) are regularly charged with manslaughter. Again, this is a hypothetical that I'm trying to make analgous.

Now go back to that doctor who does NOT have a God complex, did not flippantly let a patient die, but got in over her head, made a grievous mistake, and that mistake directly led to the patient's death. In the real world, this case is a civil matter, and perhaps a licensure matter with the medical board.

But in our hypothetical world, does the presence of the God complex doctors change this honest mistake to a criminal matter?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:34 pm    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
I can see the hypothetical, but the reality is there really doesn't seem to be even a remotely significant segment of such people entering medicine. That's not to say it may not have happened—I feel like I recall something about a doctor who was basically doing just that and killed patients, though it might have been an episode of TV (not being flippant). But I think we all know that a commonality amongst LE recruits is that desire to exert authority and that has gotten out of hand.


I agree, but I intended it purely as a hypothetical. So suppose there was, and there were enough of them that they were causing a problem in the practice of medicine, in the same way a problem is occurring in the practice of law enforcement. Enough so that those who let it go to their head and let patients die (because THEY control who lives & dies, after all) are regularly charged with manslaughter. Again, this is a hypothetical that I'm trying to make analgous.

Now go back to that doctor who does NOT have a God complex, did not flippantly let a patient die, but got in over her head, made a grievous mistake, and that mistake directly led to the patient's death. In the real world, this case is a civil matter, and perhaps a licensure matter with the medical board.

But in our hypothetical world, does the presence of the God complex doctors change this honest mistake to a criminal matter?


Well, this is where we get back to my original contention that we clearly disagree on—the fact that LE has the greenlight to summarily execute the citizens they randomly encounter on their beat if they deem necessary, and without prior review, means that the two fields need to be treated differently. That dynamic doesn't exist in the medical field and never will. So no, even if the God complex existed amongst doctors in a significant manner, I don't see that as a justification to remove people like Potter from being criminally negligent. If we are going to insist that Doctors and LEO's be treated the exact same way in these matters (which I clearly disagree with), then we are going to need to err on the side of making sure that LEO's are held criminally negligent on avoidable cases of manslaughter rather than allow those type of events slide so that doctors can as well.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11180

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 7:26 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Well, this is where we get back to my original contention that we clearly disagree on—the fact that LE has the greenlight to summarily execute the citizens they randomly encounter on their beat if they deem necessary, and without prior review, means that the two fields need to be treated differently. That dynamic doesn't exist in the medical field and never will. So no, even if the God complex existed amongst doctors in a significant manner, I don't see that as a justification to remove people like Potter from being criminally negligent. If we are going to insist that Doctors and LEO's be treated the exact same way in these matters (which I clearly disagree with), then we are going to need to err on the side of making sure that LEO's are held criminally negligent on avoidable cases of manslaughter rather than allow those type of events slide so that doctors can as well.


So I asked you to assume a hypothetical for discussion purposes, and this whole post just says you're not going to accept the hypothetical.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 8:32 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Well, this is where we get back to my original contention that we clearly disagree on—the fact that LE has the greenlight to summarily execute the citizens they randomly encounter on their beat if they deem necessary, and without prior review, means that the two fields need to be treated differently. That dynamic doesn't exist in the medical field and never will. So no, even if the God complex existed amongst doctors in a significant manner, I don't see that as a justification to remove people like Potter from being criminally negligent. If we are going to insist that Doctors and LEO's be treated the exact same way in these matters (which I clearly disagree with), then we are going to need to err on the side of making sure that LEO's are held criminally negligent on avoidable cases of manslaughter rather than allow those type of events slide so that doctors can as well.


So I asked you to assume a hypothetical for discussion purposes, and this whole post just says you're not going to accept the hypothetical.


Sorry if you feel that I was being evasive or missmissive, that was not the intent and I thought that would be clear since I had already considered the hypothetical and "could see it" (which was snipped out in your quite tree). Maybe I did a poor job of expressing myself.

My point is that even if the hypothetical was true (that many enter the medical field to yield god like power) and the answer to the question, "in our hypothetical world, does the presence of the God complex doctors change this honest mistake to a criminal matter?", my response is that no. And that is because doctors are not, as a part of their duties, granted the authority end a life randomly (in the sense that Doctors treat people who come to them and LEO's have the ability to initiate contact with the citizenry), independently, immediately, and without discussion.

And again, please remember that I am not in agreement that doctors and LEO's need to be treated identically when it comes to unintended deaths. That is your premise and you are asking me to buy into that premise to answer your hypotheticals. I am simply pointing out how that divergency at the starting point of the discussion is shaping how I view the hypotheticals you raise.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 8:39 am    Post subject:

I would add to the above that I think we both acknowledge that in this country we already have a very real problem with LEOs and how they mete out their abilities to engage in lethal force. The reason I am against dialing back how we deal with their negligence to the same framework we deal with that of doctor's is that doing so will only compound that problem. Perhaps I haven't been clear about why I don't see the idea of treating LEO's and doctors the same as a wise one.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 11517

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 8:43 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
....my response is that no. And that is because doctors are not, as a part of their duties, granted the authority end a life randomly (in the sense that Doctors treat people who come to them and LEO's have the ability to initiate contact with the citizenry), independently, immediately, and without discussion.


DMR, the standard for criminal negligence for cops are the same as they are for regular citizens:

Quote:
Criminal negligence refers to conduct in which a person ignores a known or obvious risk, or disregards the life and safety of others. Federal and state courts describe this behavior as a form of recklessness, where the person acts significantly different than an ordinary person under similar circumstances.

An example is a parent leaving a loaded firearm within reach of a small child.


Note the example for a parent leaving a loaded firearm for a small child. All they have to prove is recklessness.

And we know ordinary citizens don't have the same power to take a life either.

If it's just about the power/authority to take a life, then maybe the question should be, why are the standards for doctors lower than ordinary citizens?

If we take this same example and apply it to the medical profession, say:

A dentist leaving a scalpel (or other dangerous tool) out for a small child to reach who injures/kills him/herself..

Then, we can see that the parent would be charged with criminal negligence, but the doctor/dentist might not.

We expect parents to not leave dangerous weapons/tools out carelessly when small children are around. We might not have the same expectations for medical professionals. Why is that?


Last edited by LongBeachPoly on Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:07 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11180

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 9:34 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Sorry if you feel that I was being evasive or missmissive, that was not the intent and I thought that would be clear since I had already considered the hypothetical and "could see it" (which was snipped out in your quite tree). Maybe I did a poor job of expressing myself.


No worries.

Quote:
My point is that even if the hypothetical was true (that many enter the medical field to yield god like power) and the answer to the question, "in our hypothetical world, does the presence of the God complex doctors change this honest mistake to a criminal matter?", my response is that no. And that is because doctors are not, as a part of their duties, granted the authority end a life randomly (in the sense that Doctors treat people who come to them and LEO's have the ability to initiate contact with the citizenry), independently, immediately, and without discussion.


Yeah, maybe it's just a failure of my analogy. I was trying to create a scenario where some doctors can and do capriciously decide to end another person's life, and it happens frequently enough that it's a recognized problem in society. In this scenario, these doctors also would end lives independently, immediately and without discussion. But you're right that the "randomly" wouldn't be the same, because of the difference you point out in how contact is initiated. I'm not sure whether that difference breaks the analogy, but I acknowledge that it's there.

Quote:
And again, please remember that I am not in agreement that doctors and LEO's need to be treated identically when it comes to unintended deaths. That is your premise and you are asking me to buy into that premise to answer your hypotheticals. I am simply pointing out how that divergency at the starting point of the discussion is shaping how I view the hypotheticals you raise.


Yeah, that was the point of my trying to create the analogy -- to eliminate the a priori divergence and see if the same logic then applies to the other group.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11180

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 9:41 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
I would add to the above that I think we both acknowledge that in this country we already have a very real problem with LEOs and how they mete out their abilities to engage in lethal force. The reason I am against dialing back how we deal with their negligence to the same framework we deal with that of doctor's is that doing so will only compound that problem. Perhaps I haven't been clear about why I don't see the idea of treating LEO's and doctors the same as a wise one.


I believe I understand where you're coming from, and like I said before, I fully agree with you on multiple levels.

Maybe some of the "mandatory minimums" legislation of previous decades illustrates what I'm thinking here. While the baseline concept is a good one (lock up habitual criminals so they don't get out so easily and commit more crime), these laws also resulted in some minor offenders receiving mandatory sentences much longer than they should have received.

My thinking in the case we're discussing is that even though rouge police are definitely a problem, and they do need to be dealt with harshly (precisely because of the reasons you specified), there's still a danger of this approach casting too wide a net.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:53 am    Post subject:

Snipped down to focus on the topic I have been discussing—doctors's culpability versus LEO's:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
If it's just about the power/authority to take a life, then maybe the question should be, why are the standards for doctors lower than ordinary citizens?


I'm not really into expanding the debate to get into what we expect of doctors versus cops versus citizens (particularly on the level of super-specific one off incidents where the specificity gets into the realm of the case by case—which isn't within the scope of the concepts I am discussing) . But since it does play into what I have been discussing . . . as I see it, the duties that a doctors have are based on the mission to preserve life and health and the presumption that those who enter the profession are focused on doing that ethically.

And I will point out that I have stated that I would not be adverse to expanding doctors negligence more in the direction of criminal if we feel the need to put them on the same level of legal treatment as LEOs (a need I have said I do not see), and that doing so makes far more sense than dialing back the potential of LEO criminal culpability.

Anyway, I think we have established that those of us discussing this have made our points and the needle isn't moving for any of us—which is perfectly acceptable and understandable—and really, reinventing new scenarios and hypotheticals is not going to change that.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 11517

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:58 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Snipped down to focus on the topic I have been discussing—doctors's culpability versus LEO's:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
If it's just about the power/authority to take a life, then maybe the question should be, why are the standards for doctors lower than ordinary citizens?


I'm not really into expanding the debate to get into what we expect of doctors versus cops versus citizens (particularly on the level of super-specific one off incidents where the specificity gets into the realm of the case by case—which isn't within the scope of the concepts I am discussing)


Yes, but if it's about the power/authority to take a life, we can eliminate that part of it by substituting ordinary citizens for cops. There may be other factors, but if the main or only factor when comparing cops and doctors is that cops have the authority to take a life, then we can eliminate that factor.

DaMuleRules wrote:
Anyway, I think we have established that those of us discussing this have made our points and the needle isn't moving for any of us—which is perfectly acceptable and understandable—and really, reinventing new scenarios and hypotheticals is not going to change that.


Which is not my intent to change anyone's stance. I really want to analyze the fairness of the legal system.

Should doctors be held to a lower standard than ordinary citizens? And I know your answer is no (but not adverse to it), and I accept that. But it's still a question I want to ask, not just to you, but to anyone. Your answer just allowed me to ask that question.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11180

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 12:09 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
I'm not really into expanding the debate to get into what we expect of doctors versus cops versus citizens (particularly on the level of super-specific one off incidents where the specificity gets into the realm of the case by case—which isn't within the scope of the concepts I am discussing) . But since it does play into what I have been discussing . . . as I see it, the duties that a doctors have are based on the mission to preserve life and health and the presumption that those who enter the profession are focused on doing that ethically.


But couldn't you also say that the mission of law enforcement is to preserve public safety, and that there is a presumption that those who enter the profession are focused on doing it ethically?

From my perspective (even evidenced by your last sentence above) you see the problem with LE as something that's baked-into the very system, where I see it as a true (from an evidenciary standpoint) but not necessary (from a theoretical standpoint) downstream result. And I don't know if we should be legislating on the basis of downstream results.

Which is one of the cruxes of the point I'm trying to work through -- we both know that in the case of LE, it certainly isn't always the case that everyone enters the field for ethical reasons, and in fact a big problem exists. That's why I was trying to posit a hypothetical where a similar problem exists with doctors, and see where that takes us.

(snipped paragraph that doesn't pertain to my response)

Quote:
Anyway, I think we have established that those of us discussing this have made our points and the needle isn't moving for any of us—which is perfectly acceptable and understandable—and really, reinventing new scenarios and hypotheticals is not going to change that.


I dunno, I can say that my thinking on the matter is continuing to evolve the more we discuss this. And I can honestly say that when presented with convincing logic my needle can not only move, it can completely reverse polarity.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 1:21 pm    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
I'm not really into expanding the debate to get into what we expect of doctors versus cops versus citizens (particularly on the level of super-specific one off incidents where the specificity gets into the realm of the case by case—which isn't within the scope of the concepts I am discussing) . But since it does play into what I have been discussing . . . as I see it, the duties that a doctors have are based on the mission to preserve life and health and the presumption that those who enter the profession are focused on doing that ethically.


But couldn't you also say that the mission of law enforcement is to preserve public safety, and that there is a presumption that those who enter the profession are focused on doing it ethically?


Except that current and historical evidence has proven that isn't the case. And again, there's that whole authority to kill those they encounter thing I've been harping about.

Quote:
From my perspective (even evidenced by your last sentence above) you see the problem with LE as something that's baked-into the very system, where I see it as a true (from an evidenciary standpoint) but not necessary (from a theoretical standpoint) downstream result. And I don't know if we should be legislating on the basis of downstream results.

Which is one of the cruxes of the point I'm trying to work through -- we both know that in the case of LE, it certainly isn't always the case that everyone enters the field for ethical reasons, and in fact a big problem exists. That's why I was trying to posit a hypothetical where a similar problem exists with doctors, and see where that takes us.


I can only base my positions based on the reality we actually deal with. Hypothetical ideal situations are great, but they rarely exist, and certainly don't here.

Quote:
Quote:
(snipped paragraph that doesn't pertain to my response)

Anyway, I think we have established that those of us discussing this have made our points and the needle isn't moving for any of us—which is perfectly acceptable and understandable—and really, reinventing new scenarios and hypotheticals is not going to change that.


I dunno, I can say that my thinking on the matter is continuing to evolve the more we discuss this. And I can honestly say that when presented with convincing logic my needle can not only move, it can completely reverse polarity.


I didn't mean to imply otherwise. My comment wasn't a swipe about stubbornness, it was simply an observation about how the general direction was going—lot's of hypotheticals to re-address the same basic concept in new ways.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ExPatLkrFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 3861
Location: Mukdahan, Thailand

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 6:04 pm    Post subject:

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/study_suggests_medical_errors_now_third_leading_cause_of_death_in_the_us

Maybe you should fear the doctor more than the cop. And the doctor doesn't have to worry if their patient is going to attack him for the most part.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11180

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2022 7:07 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
But couldn't you also say that the mission of law enforcement is to preserve public safety, and that there is a presumption that those who enter the profession are focused on doing it ethically?


Except that current and historical evidence has proven that isn't the case. And again, there's that whole authority to kill those they encounter thing I've been harping about.


Well, I think this is one of those cases where we don't just see it differently, but further than that, I disagree with the way you see it. I think I was right when I commented before that you see it as baked-in. I -DO- think the mission of law enforcement is to preserve public safety, even if that mission has been corrupted by many of those who enter the profession.

Quote:
I can only base my positions based on the reality we actually deal with. Hypothetical ideal situations are great, but they rarely exist, and certainly don't here.


Of course they don't, and the point of posing a hypothetical isn't to become a basis for our positions. It's to clarify out thinking about the real situation.

Quote:
I didn't mean to imply otherwise. My comment wasn't a swipe about stubbornness, it was simply an observation about how the general direction was going—lot's of hypotheticals to re-address the same basic concept in new ways.


I think it can move forward. The point is the same as with science -- to eliminate all the confounding variables so you're examining a single variable of interest. The purpose of the hypotheticals is to do the same.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2022 8:36 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Quote:
I didn't mean to imply otherwise. My comment wasn't a swipe about stubbornness, it was simply an observation about how the general direction was going—lot's of hypotheticals to re-address the same basic concept in new ways.


I think it can move forward. The point is the same as with science -- to eliminate all the confounding variables so you're examining a single variable of interest. The purpose of the hypotheticals is to do the same.


I'm game. So where do we go from here?
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11180

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2022 11:40 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
I'm game. So where do we go from here?


Can you discuss the hypothetical without shutting it down with a "that's never going to happen IRL?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 11517

PostPosted: Fri Feb 18, 2022 10:29 am    Post subject:

Quote:
Kim Potter, ex-officer convicted in fatal shooting of Daunte Wright, sentenced to 2 years in prison -- less than prosecutors requested

The sentence comes nearly two months after Potter was convicted of first- and second-degree manslaughter. Prosecutors had requested seven years and two months while Potter's attorneys argued for a lesser sentence, pointing to her lack of a prior criminal history and remorse for Wright's death.

Potter will be required to serve two-thirds of her sentence in prison, or 16 months, according to state law. With good behavior, she will be eligible for supervised release for the remaining third.


Wow, 16 months for 1st and 2nd degree manslaughter.

Quote:
Hennepin County Judge Regina Chu called the sentence "an extremely difficult decision."

In justifying it, she pointed to several mitigating factors, saying it was undisputed that Potter never intended to use her gun.

Chu told the court she took into account the four reasons for incarceration -- retribution, incapacitation, deterrence and rehabilitation -- saying retribution would be the only purpose served in Potter's case.

"There rightfully should be some accountability," she said.
But Potter is a "cop who made a tragic mistake," the judge added. "She drew her firearm thinking it was a Taser, and ended up killing a young man."


Quote:
Wright's family was "completely stunned" by the sentence, their attorney Ben Crump said in a statement.

"While there is a small sense of justice because she will serve nominal time, the family is also deeply disappointed there was not a greater level of accountability," the statement said. "The Judge's comments at sentencing showed a clear absence of compassion for the victim in this tragedy and were devastating to the family."

Shortly before she was sentenced, Potter tearfully apologized to Wright's family, saying, "I am so sorry that I brought the death of your son, father, brother, uncle, grandson, nephew, and the rest of your family," adding, "I'm sorry I broke your heart."

"I do pray that one day you can find forgiveness," the former officer said, "only because hatred is so destructive to all of us."


Quote:
Potter's tears 'trumped justice,' Wright's mother says

After Friday's hearing, Wright's mother told reporters her family was "very disappointed" with the sentence.

"This is the problem with our justice system today. White women tears trumps justice," Katie Wright said. She thought her own "White woman tears would be good enough," she said, "because they're true and genuine."
Wright's father similarly expressed his strong discontent with Potter's sentence. "I feel cheated, I feel hurt," he said.

"They were so tied up into her feelings and what's going on with her," Arbuey Wright said, referring to Potter, "that they forgot about my son being killed."


Quote:
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison asked Chu to impose the presumptive sentence of 86 months in a sentencing memo filed Tuesday.

That sentence, he wrote, would reflect the "seriousness of the loss of (Wright's) life" as well as Potter's "culpability" in causing Wright's death.
"It must always be remembered first and foremost that this case is about the death of Daunte Wright," the memo said, describing the young father as a "living, breathing human being, who loved, and was loved by his family and friends."

Under Minnesota law, an offender convicted of two or more charges from the same act is sentenced on their most serious conviction. The maximum penalty for first-degree manslaughter predicated on reckless use/handling of a firearm is 15 years in prison and/or a $30,000 fine.

However, under the state's sentencing guidelines, a judge has discretion to sentence convicted offenders with no prior criminal history, like Potter, to between roughly six- and eight-and-a-half years in prison.


https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/18/us/kim-potter-sentencing-daunte-wright/index.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 27043
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 18, 2022 2:16 pm    Post subject:

It seems like the judge sided entirely on the side of "she's remorseful and had no prior criminal history", instead of the opposite tack of "she's sorry but her recklessness caused the death of a human being", or, even, meeting somewhere in the middle and imposing a sentence of something like 4 years.

Feels awfully light to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 50633
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 18, 2022 3:07 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
It seems like the judge sided entirely on the side of "she's remorseful and had no prior criminal history", instead of the opposite tack of "she's sorry but her recklessness caused the death of a human being", or, even, meeting somewhere in the middle and imposing a sentence of something like 4 years.

Feels awfully light to me.


Agreed. I certainly wasn't expecting the maximum, but that's basically a slap on the wrist when you factor in the time subtracted for good behavior etc.

But, while it's sad to say, at least we are finally at a point where these officers are being held criminally accountable instead of getting paid time off.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB