I've come to believe that the Republican label means nothing. Most of the people running in Texas in red districts know that they cannot be elected if they run as a Democrat so they select to represent the party through which a victory is possible. If anyone has any doubts about the extent of the problem, you only have to look at the track records of the elected officials on the Republican platform that they were supposed to be supporting. I'm guessing that Oklahoma is not different. It is only when a difficult situation arises and the elected official decides in a way that isn't consistent with their pre-election promises that we recognize the depth of their betrayal. District Attorney candidates seem per-disposed to a Liberal mind set. Conversely, I cannot remember a single example of someone running as a Democrat and ending up acting like a Conservative.
One has to question exactly what the "crime" was here. Was it using the rifle in the first place? Given the current bias against all things AR-15, that wouldn't be surprising. Was it the number of rounds? If 30 rounds had been fired or maybe 10-15, would it still have been a criminal act? Was it even engaging an active shooter? I've listened to the lament of family members after their loved one was killed in an armed robbery attempt say that the perpetrator of the original crime meant no harm. The woman shooter probably wouldn't have actually hurt anyone if the police had just let her run out of ammo.
But perhaps even more heinous than any of that is my chief concern with District Attorneys. They seem to file cases based on whether those matters will advance their careers rather than to serve justice. I get it. You don't want to file cases that you don't that you can will but I feel sometimes that they do exactly that. The odds of a "win" on this one seem pretty long. Whatever happened to mens rea? It was a stretch for me on that subject with that Amber Geiger case. This one goes far beyond that. Is the implication that all police officers have a latent homicidal bent and take a law enforcement job to be injected into situations where they can carry it out? Shouldn't that have to be something that has to be proved in order to convict in a matter like this? The officer would not have been there except for the actions of shooter. Unless he was just waiting to use deadly force, there can be nothing criminal about the described events, at least for me. Perhaps there are additional circumstances but even my vivid imagination cannot come up with anything that would tip the description of this matter in a different direction.
Search found 1 match
Search found 1 match • Page 1 of 1
- Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:15 am
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: Oklahoma lieutenant indicted for stopping active shooter
- Replies: 33
- Views: 2917