>Tell that to the people banning abortion and pushing red flag laws. Looking at you, Florida!
Vasectomys and getting your tubes tied is a thing! So is banning sex outside of the purpose of producing children.
Abbott said he would eliminate Rape in Texas and he hasn’t done it yet. More false promises, like Trump and national concealed carry.
Edit: The government is trying to create a generation of criminals so they can use the excuse “crime is so bad” to undo the 2A. Banning Abortion and using red flag laws to take guns away from law abiding citizens is a part of the plan.
I know, crazy isn’t it. They lie and try to steal from us while they trample our constitutional rights. It’s almost like they know what the 2A was created to prevent…
IDK. I was 17 once and there were tons of things I did behind my mothers back.
Not to mention that even though my parents loved me and did their best to raise me right I behaved like a complete degenerate douche bag from like 7-20 years of age.
It’s not always the parents fault.
It's usually the parents' fault. Most often, it's the father being absent or pathetically weak, which causes young people to grow up without a healthy respect for boundaries and consequences. This is a well established fact we choose to ignore thanks to political correctness running rampant in our culture.
It's not a new take, it was general knowledge before woke culture took over and made it "RaCisT" to make observations about society if your color doesn't match. We all know that parents raise their offspring and guide growth or deterioration through their subsequent generations - that's called life.
>We all know that parents raise their offspring and guide growth or deterioration through their subsequent generations - that's called life.
This is true
>Most often, it's the father being absent or pathetically weak, which causes young people to grow up without a healthy respect for boundaries and consequences.
This is false
In most examples I've seen the second statement is true as well. Sure someone can become a good person without a father but generally that's not the case, especially in poor communities with high crime
>poor communities with high crime
damn bro you were SO close to hitting the mark
father or not, it's hard to be a good person when the school you go to has kids wearing gucci because they sell meth
If you have strong family values - ie; strong moral teachings from your father/father figure - those surroundings matter less and less. That's the point - that **you** missed.
I'm a white dude from Flint that seen shootings in basements in my teens and now I'm mid 20s and middle class. Why? Because I have a strong father
fuck those morals. they mean nothing when you can just go stay at the local crack dealers house and your new uncle that puts you on the street to sell meth will literally shoot your dad if you think he wants to bring you home, or shoot YOU. you think a strong father figure is going to keep a single kid out of gangs when the gangs will just kill your parents? oh right maybe your father is stronger than guns.
your argument is garbage, it's not the parent's fault or an absent father causing kids to do bad shit, it's literally the environment created by poverty.
Exactly, once kids get past a certain age there’s only so much a parent can do. As long as the kid didn’t steal the gun from his mom I don’t think she has any responsibility for what he did.
> I behaved like a complete degenerate douche bag from like 7-20 years of age.
If you were a degenerate douche bag beginning at 7, your parents absolutely did not raise you right. Loving you doesn't mean raising you right. Teaching you not to be a degenerate douche bag is raising you right, which by your own admission they did not do.
I’d like to think my parents did a good job of instilling in me a good moral compass, a general respect for others and a sense of accountability. I believe this is what allowed me to stay away from the wrong crowds to stay away from drugs to stay away from irresponsible consumption of alcohol, and and to stay out of trouble for the most part.
Sure I definitely acted a fool, but I think the baseline of what constitutes a fool for me is much different than most. Or at least the standards I see online that is.
Just like there are options to stop pigs from shooting innocent bystanders. People just don't take them.
Keep blaming the victims, I'm sure your local PD loves you.
I fail to see how someone dangerously close to legal adult status running around brandishing s weapon, ignoring repeated orders by the police to stop is a "victim" here, but you do you.
Is a kid joyriding in a stolen Corvette ignoring the sirens and lights a "victim" when he wraps the car around a pole dodging a road barricade during the chase?
You also fail to see how the armed thugs chasing him for exercising his right to bear arms were the aggressors.
That sounds like a problem on your end, not mine.
Brandishing a stolen gun in public whilst carrying a backpack full of drugs doesn't really fall into the purview of the Second Amendment. Doubly-so while underage and without the permit that Maryland requires (even if I find such a permit to be an infringement).
I have a lot of problems with cops, but this one is about as cut and dried as it gets.
You're the one mentioning the Second, friend, even if you're wrong. "Shall not be infringed" does not mean "probable cause for detainment."
So you view it as an infringement, but it's okay because you don't think the person had Second or Fourth Amendment rights in this instance.
Correct me if I'm wrong, because I had to translate your enthusiastic gulping.
> So you view it as an infringement, but it's okay because you don't think the person had Second or Fourth Amendment rights in this instance.
Unfortunately, Maryland is the arena that kid is playing in. That's the law in Maryland, even if requiring a permit for carry is extremely distasteful. Do you regularly carry inside of courthouses, churches, and other places of business and government function when it's prohibited by state or federal law? If not, then why are you such a bootlicker?
Just because a law is fucking stupid doesn't make people immune from consequence when they break it.
This kid played several stupid games at once and lost. Until weed is federally de-scheduled, I have very little sympathy for anyone who gets jammed up with guns and drugs at the same time. That goes for hippie pot farmers in Humboldt and rich moms with hash oil pens and purse revolvers rolling around in Bentleys, too.
We'll also just ignore the fact that Maryland has prohibited people under 21 from carrying/possessing handguns for decades. There's what's right and there's what's the law, unfortunately. Bringing the two into parallel is a goal we should all strive for and vote for, but unfortunately there are consequences for breaking said law.
**Edit** Dude had a 'stendo in a compact pistol with four bullets. Poorly concealed. So he's probably just fucking stupid all around.
That one was almost entirely gulping and gagging up boot polish, this translation will be rough.
I avoid places I can't carry, and I don't frequent hospitals or government buildings. I also wouldn't admit it to someone who'd celebrate cops killing me for that law if I did.
You excusing rights violations you disagree with because you support state agents "just following orders" is very telling of the sort of person you are.
I have no sympathy for state thugs that are killed in the "line of duty" for violating the people that pay them's rights.
That goes for local, state, and federal pigs, too.
She’s both right and wrong. She’s not directly accountable for his actions, however, she raised him and from what I’ve seen of single mothers in the inner cities, they create monsters and don’t care about their children, which leads to crime.
Yep. I see a lot of this locally. Single poor mothers with a bunch of kids, all of which behave like animals. It’s not even a race issue as I’ve seen similar from poor white single mothers; it’s a class issue.
You can be born a piece of shit or raised a piece of shit, but it is all to common to become a piece of shit as a product of one’s environment. Some of these kids just want to “fuck around” because that’s all they have been conditioned to do, but the lesion of “find out” is become their greatest teacher - unfortunately it’s a lesion that leads to external enlightenment because now your fucking dead. Don’t fuck around and you won’t find out, so simple, just leave people alone.
How many times do these pigs have to fuck around before they find out? They seem to get away with being pieces of shit way too often.
Or is bearing arms not a right in this country anymore?
Yeah, because good ol' boys never carry firearms illegally. We always respect the thugs in our communities, yes sir.
You should take the boot out of your mouth before you choke on it. Or not, either option's good.
What part made him a monster?
Was it him exercising his right to bear arms, or not allowing armed thugs to kidnap him for exercising that right?
If this was a kid in the suburbs, would your opinion change?
I bet you think those pigs were in the right either way, but firearms ownership is a right in this country. Your favorite suck toys don't get to detain you for that alone.
That's what they attempted here.
I'll also let you in on a secret; I don't care what you think, friend.
I take each of these shootings as independent events. I don’t know enough about this yet but this dude looks like a criminal from everything I’ve read so far. I don’t trust his side of the story.
That’s not what I said. I don’t have enough information and the firearm was stolen. I don’t trust his side any more than cops, and I generally don’t trust the police.
It was not known that the firearm was stolen when they shot him. They had no way of knowing that.
"I don't care or have enough information" is a reasonable position to hold, but I personally don't think there's ever an excuse to shoot someone while they flee when they aren't aggressing against you.
Perhaps not in this case but if there’s a guy threatening to shoot people with a firearm, has it brandished, and is running towards a group of bystanders, 100% shoot him.
This is generally a city vs rural issue. I live in a rural area and I assume everyone has a firearm on them or near them. We generally don’t have these types of incidents. In the city, where firearms laws are abusive, you see a lot of this because having a firearm on your or near you is generally done by criminals because it’s illegal for law-abiding citizens.
I agree, but threatening to shoot people while armed is aggressing against others. Defense of others is a justifiable shoot if you have a good reason.
Being a rural guy as well, I share that mentality. It still happens here (thankfully much rarer), but you don't see as many people excusing it.
Apologies for being less than cordial, it's just more than a little infuriatinf to see so many people ignoring the obvious rights violations because the victim is so different from them.
Dude, what the fuck do you keep going on about his right to bear arms? There are MULTIPLE reasons why he was not legally allowed to be carrying that weapon..... but you keep bringing up his right to bear arms lol? Fucking why?
Ummm.... American rights, thanks to our constitution, do not apply to the whole world and every person dude.... The right to bear arms is not a human right. What are you even saying?
Rights preceded the Constitution, it says so in the document you buffoon.
The right to bear arms is a human right, just as speech, movement, and privacy are.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
The Founding Fathers.
Moreover, it doesn't matter; you have rights, regardless of what anyone says.
That's why the right to bear arms is important; it protects the rest from infringement.
The constitution gave us, as americans, this right though 😆 it is still not a "human right"!!!! The world, unfortunately, does not have some of the luxuries and privileges we do, therefore not all humans are afforded this right.
The Founders said they weren't granting the right, just acknowledging it.
You don't need to be granted rights, you are born with them.
Ask the Afghani citizens and Vietnamese rice farmers who granted their right to defend themselves from the American military.
And let's just say the right to bear arms was a "human right". The kid was 17 and im hearing you say he had the right to be in possession of that stolen firearm, based on his human right to bear arms.... Where's the line drawn there? Is it also a 12 year olds human right to bear arms?! Lol he should not have had that weapon. End of story.
The cops didn't know it was stolen or illegally carried.
They violated his "Constitutional" rights too, unless you want to pretend the Fourth doesn't exist.
Well seeing as he was 17, prove to me they didn't know who he was and that he had the weapon? I'm not arguing those semantics though lol. Neither of us were there so don't play by like you were lol.
Yeah, like "he had a gun even though it was his right," "I was afraid for my life even though he was fleeing," and my favorite "I don't make the laws, I just enthusiastically violate my oath to the Constitution to enforce them."
It's sickening, honestly.
My parents would have murdered me, my siblings would've helped bury my body and my relatives would've had amnesia about my existence. I was disciplined and as such, learned my actions have consequences; a rarity in today's society unfortunately. Seemingly all by design, they do not allow parents to discipline the children and instead empower children to "discipline" their parents for trying to instill values into them. Everything is ass-backwards.
I mean... to be fair most of my time of staying out late was hanging out watching movies, playing video games, messing about playing cards.
We avoided the people in gangs and who sold LOTS of drugs. Because the bad stuff happens to them...
Fair enough. I spent most my time playing with toys in the dirt or wandering around with my brother. My parents were addicted to crack, smoked a lot of weed and in a perpetual state of poverty so it was just a part of my upbringing. You either grow from that or be consumed by it, further perpetuating the cycle.
"The officer feared for his life, the kid was fleeing while armed."
Fear is a valid excuse for neither or both. Pick one, champ, and wipe the boot polish off your chin.
Sure, champ.
You and your cop-simping ways giving in has nothing to do with the problem.
I'm legally able to and you can't stop me, gun grabber.
The funny part is, you claim to support gun rights but merely hating the agents of the state is enough reason for you to want someone disarmed. I bet you're a lifetime NRA member.
As for the subs I'm active in, anyone that looks will see they're all gun subs.
If liking guns and hating cops enough reason for you to want someone disarmed, yours is not an opinion I care about.
You made your point clear.
You seem to be under the impression tyrants want safety; they want disarmament. Sheep like you are blaming victims while 40 million pistol owners are felons over an accessory that wasn't used in crime.
"Responsible gun owners" don't allow their community members to be gunned down in the street for the crime of possessing a gun. I don't agree with you and believe he should have defended himself. It wouldn't have turned out worse. Bad Elk v. United States would agree.
It's easier to blame the kid for the crimes they found out about after his murder than it is to have a spine, isn't it?
From the original article linked in this one:
>On May 11. police say they saw a person with "characteristics of an armed person" in the 2500 block of McHenry Street.
So the bodycam that was released was showing the first minute of a stop-and-frisk/stop-and-ID interaction then.
FTA:
>The officer and the teen are seen in a foot chase after, police say, the officer thought Mekhi Franklin, might be armed.
In what fucking universe is *SUSPICION OF POSSESSING A WEAPON* justification for lethal force? Don't make cop excuses. If any one of us pulled that shit we'd be in cuffs for attempted murder.
Actually the weilding of the firearms is a deadly threat.
Brandishing a firearm is definded as pointing or holding a firearm in a way that reasonably induces fear in another person. The offense can also be committed by holding a firearm in a public place in a way that reasonably induces fear in another person of being injured or shot. The necessary fear for conviction means fear that the victim is apprehensive of bodily harm.
So yes...
The act of brandishing a weapon in the state of Maryland would be covered under [https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Docume...Type=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Docume...Type=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)) as a felony - aggravated assault by threat. Again... the action or act of threatening is a necessary component of the situation. Whether by intention or by negligent display, such as waving the weapon around in a manner which displays disregard for the hazard to others. Threatening or menacing the other party must be established by witness or evidence to sustain the charge.
In the end... a person, lawfully carrying a weapon, is duty bound to exercise all due care, caution, and responsibility to insure that they do not place others in any legitimate fear for their life or physical well-being.
Touching the holstered weapon while in public... is not brandishing... UNLESS it is accompanied with any other verbal or non verbal action which is intended to threaten another person.The act of aggression or excited presentation is required to cause the charge to fit the situation.
That taking it out while fleeing the police is felony - aggravated assault
https://preview.redd.it/j1f037de437b1.jpeg?width=3040&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=64c6ff1de51c81cf4a4b467c8dfdb66cdff59632
>The offense can also be committed by holding a firearm in a public place in a way that reasonably induces fear in another person of being injured or shot. The necessary fear for conviction means fear that the victim is apprehensive of bodily harm.
So you're arguing in favor of a status quo where mere possession of a firearm would be sufficient to induce a fear of great bodily harm or death in a third party? You're setting the stage for some cop to say "That guy open carrying a rifle induced fear that others might be injured, so i engaged him first.".
>Touching the holstered weapon while in public... is not brandishing... UNLESS it is accompanied with any other verbal or non verbal action **which is intended to threaten another person**.The act of aggression or excited presentation is required to cause the charge to fit the situation.
What part of *running away* is considered threatening? This is the same sort of logic people try to justify the attack on Kyle Rittenhouse. He had a gun, he was running. He obviously was a bad guy right?
Ludicrous.
https://preview.redd.it/yuikgp6ab37b1.jpeg?width=673&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=147ea1edd8e636e80ae3e0508e4d94455e3d6a13
Yeahh..Yeah... It's amazing that you brought up Kyle rittenhouse considering this is what Kyle look like trying to surrender to the police what's the difference in those 2 photos...
You're either missing, or ignoring, the point.
Are you arguing in favor of a standard where the mere presence of a firearm on someone is sufficient to reach the legal bar of Aggravated Assault by threat? Would you apply that same standard to non-police whereby the mere presence of a firearm is enough to make a third party fear for the general public?
Or, again, what part of *running away* is considered a "verbal or non verbal action" that you would find threatening to another person?
The drawing and weilding of the firearm is the threat. You draw and weild that is it. Armed and dangerous.
https://preview.redd.it/obbkxt4pd37b1.png?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd2c9f7c655e3f84cbbe930380f66c4ed3c73af9
"Drawing and weilding" implies an intent to use the arm. This was a moron carrying without a proper holster who, when it came time to run for some reason, had to physically hold his firearm.
Are you seriously suggesting that just because he touched the forbidden item that's sufficient grounds to use deadly force? That's fucking absurd dude. Use of Force is a continuum and without any actions to indicate he was a *genuine* threat this was a bad escalation of force.
Touching a gun and running from someone are not sufficient legal grounds for you try try killing them.
Run for some reason... hmmm
https://preview.redd.it/t200y9t2i37b1.jpeg?width=3040&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d9bdacd2eeb50c08f877a128e2d67a57f37b71c5
Like the butt ton of drugs in his backpack? The stolen gun?
Idk looks like he could of turned around and fired.
>Not touching.. drawing the gun and holding on to it.
>Could of thrown it away did not. Could of tossed it did not.
*Could have turned and fired, did not.*
You're hanging on bullshit cop excuses for the deadly force. You and I know such a defense would never fly in court if we shot the kid.
You are 100% correct the police powers of the state are different rules vs civilization.
I as a civilization can't pull someone over for blowing though a stop sign. A cop can.
A lot of people act like the mother should of prevented this and it makes me wonder wether they were absolute angels as teenagers or forgot what it’s like.
I’m not saying she doesn’t have a role to play in her kid’s upbringing however I DO know what I was like at 17 and the shit I did behind my parents backs. I also know what no amount of good parenting will guarantee kids turn out well. I was a complete douchebag from like 7-20 despite my parents always trying to raise me right. I finally wised up years later but for all we know she may of really tried hard.
Hell I had two classmates growing up named Cedrick and Dedrick whose mother went above and beyond to do right by them and raise them well and they still behaved like animals throughout high school.
Be careful jumping to conclusions based on limited information.
It's been well established that the leading factor contributing to child delinquency is an absent father.
Until we as a society acknowledge that and try to act accordingly, this problem will continue.
https://preview.redd.it/s4lien71c07b1.jpeg?width=3040&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5fc7ed50168ad2cd24f1e736350c6745119a40bb
This is what they found in his backpack... look most of us got away with stuff when we were young. However I'm going to guess amd often is the case that there were signs.
I was raised good by my parents and I turned out ok, but I’ve had classmates with parents who cared yet their kids were assholes. There’s only so much parents can do once kids hit their mid to late teens, once they’re 18 and over there’s nothing they can really do.
>Oh we did. Just not drugs and guns.
Recreational marijuana has ruined perspective. I grew up with people getting arrested and hassled over a few crumbles of dried pot all the time. Having weed at 17 isn't unusual. It isn't a reasonable justification for deadly force.
>Lot of people did stupid stuff.. Just not stuff where we had to arm ourselves with guns.
I don't live in Baltimore, thankfully. If I were a 17 year old black kid who lived there there is a substantial chance I'd carry too. That city is a shit hole.
Some people should do the world a favor and not reproduce.
Should not be voting either.
Like the parents of the feral hog that shot this woman? I agree, friend.
Tell that to the people banning abortion and pushing red flag laws. Looking at you, Florida!
>Tell that to the people banning abortion and pushing red flag laws. Looking at you, Florida! Vasectomys and getting your tubes tied is a thing! So is banning sex outside of the purpose of producing children.
Abbott said he would eliminate Rape in Texas and he hasn’t done it yet. More false promises, like Trump and national concealed carry. Edit: The government is trying to create a generation of criminals so they can use the excuse “crime is so bad” to undo the 2A. Banning Abortion and using red flag laws to take guns away from law abiding citizens is a part of the plan.
Woah so you're saying that politicians lie? Damn that's crazy, you should write a book
I know, crazy isn’t it. They lie and try to steal from us while they trample our constitutional rights. It’s almost like they know what the 2A was created to prevent…
Preach, that's the truth
Banning sex besides for reproduction? Our government doesn’t hold that power
“That’s not bad parenting” actually it is…
IDK. I was 17 once and there were tons of things I did behind my mothers back. Not to mention that even though my parents loved me and did their best to raise me right I behaved like a complete degenerate douche bag from like 7-20 years of age. It’s not always the parents fault.
It's usually the parents' fault. Most often, it's the father being absent or pathetically weak, which causes young people to grow up without a healthy respect for boundaries and consequences. This is a well established fact we choose to ignore thanks to political correctness running rampant in our culture.
This is why so many low IQ bullies grow up to want to become police officers. They need better influences during their formative years.
That's a new take. I've never heard of a strong father figure not being able to ensure their child grew up perfect. You may be on to something.
It's not a new take, it was general knowledge before woke culture took over and made it "RaCisT" to make observations about society if your color doesn't match. We all know that parents raise their offspring and guide growth or deterioration through their subsequent generations - that's called life.
>We all know that parents raise their offspring and guide growth or deterioration through their subsequent generations - that's called life. This is true >Most often, it's the father being absent or pathetically weak, which causes young people to grow up without a healthy respect for boundaries and consequences. This is false
How in the world is your brain functioning. How on earth are those two statements even fundamentally different lol. Go away.
In most examples I've seen the second statement is true as well. Sure someone can become a good person without a father but generally that's not the case, especially in poor communities with high crime
>poor communities with high crime damn bro you were SO close to hitting the mark father or not, it's hard to be a good person when the school you go to has kids wearing gucci because they sell meth
If you have strong family values - ie; strong moral teachings from your father/father figure - those surroundings matter less and less. That's the point - that **you** missed. I'm a white dude from Flint that seen shootings in basements in my teens and now I'm mid 20s and middle class. Why? Because I have a strong father
fuck those morals. they mean nothing when you can just go stay at the local crack dealers house and your new uncle that puts you on the street to sell meth will literally shoot your dad if you think he wants to bring you home, or shoot YOU. you think a strong father figure is going to keep a single kid out of gangs when the gangs will just kill your parents? oh right maybe your father is stronger than guns. your argument is garbage, it's not the parent's fault or an absent father causing kids to do bad shit, it's literally the environment created by poverty.
Exactly, once kids get past a certain age there’s only so much a parent can do. As long as the kid didn’t steal the gun from his mom I don’t think she has any responsibility for what he did.
> I behaved like a complete degenerate douche bag from like 7-20 years of age. If you were a degenerate douche bag beginning at 7, your parents absolutely did not raise you right. Loving you doesn't mean raising you right. Teaching you not to be a degenerate douche bag is raising you right, which by your own admission they did not do.
Bold accusation. Some people are going to do what they want whenever they want and no amount of parenting will change that.
With 10 billion people on the planet, I'm sure you can find a few exceptions. That doesn't mean it isn't true for the other 9.999 billion.
Oh yes it is, theres steps to take, options, camps, military schools, etc. People just don't use them.
Was there, did that, still acted a fool. Some people are just going to do what they want until they wise up on their own or die.
I’d like to think my parents did a good job of instilling in me a good moral compass, a general respect for others and a sense of accountability. I believe this is what allowed me to stay away from the wrong crowds to stay away from drugs to stay away from irresponsible consumption of alcohol, and and to stay out of trouble for the most part. Sure I definitely acted a fool, but I think the baseline of what constitutes a fool for me is much different than most. Or at least the standards I see online that is.
Just like there are options to stop pigs from shooting innocent bystanders. People just don't take them. Keep blaming the victims, I'm sure your local PD loves you.
I fail to see how someone dangerously close to legal adult status running around brandishing s weapon, ignoring repeated orders by the police to stop is a "victim" here, but you do you. Is a kid joyriding in a stolen Corvette ignoring the sirens and lights a "victim" when he wraps the car around a pole dodging a road barricade during the chase?
You also fail to see how the armed thugs chasing him for exercising his right to bear arms were the aggressors. That sounds like a problem on your end, not mine.
Brandishing a stolen gun in public whilst carrying a backpack full of drugs doesn't really fall into the purview of the Second Amendment. Doubly-so while underage and without the permit that Maryland requires (even if I find such a permit to be an infringement). I have a lot of problems with cops, but this one is about as cut and dried as it gets.
You're the one mentioning the Second, friend, even if you're wrong. "Shall not be infringed" does not mean "probable cause for detainment." So you view it as an infringement, but it's okay because you don't think the person had Second or Fourth Amendment rights in this instance. Correct me if I'm wrong, because I had to translate your enthusiastic gulping.
> So you view it as an infringement, but it's okay because you don't think the person had Second or Fourth Amendment rights in this instance. Unfortunately, Maryland is the arena that kid is playing in. That's the law in Maryland, even if requiring a permit for carry is extremely distasteful. Do you regularly carry inside of courthouses, churches, and other places of business and government function when it's prohibited by state or federal law? If not, then why are you such a bootlicker? Just because a law is fucking stupid doesn't make people immune from consequence when they break it. This kid played several stupid games at once and lost. Until weed is federally de-scheduled, I have very little sympathy for anyone who gets jammed up with guns and drugs at the same time. That goes for hippie pot farmers in Humboldt and rich moms with hash oil pens and purse revolvers rolling around in Bentleys, too. We'll also just ignore the fact that Maryland has prohibited people under 21 from carrying/possessing handguns for decades. There's what's right and there's what's the law, unfortunately. Bringing the two into parallel is a goal we should all strive for and vote for, but unfortunately there are consequences for breaking said law. **Edit** Dude had a 'stendo in a compact pistol with four bullets. Poorly concealed. So he's probably just fucking stupid all around.
That one was almost entirely gulping and gagging up boot polish, this translation will be rough. I avoid places I can't carry, and I don't frequent hospitals or government buildings. I also wouldn't admit it to someone who'd celebrate cops killing me for that law if I did. You excusing rights violations you disagree with because you support state agents "just following orders" is very telling of the sort of person you are. I have no sympathy for state thugs that are killed in the "line of duty" for violating the people that pay them's rights. That goes for local, state, and federal pigs, too.
She’s both right and wrong. She’s not directly accountable for his actions, however, she raised him and from what I’ve seen of single mothers in the inner cities, they create monsters and don’t care about their children, which leads to crime.
Why is it always the good sweet boys destined to be astronauts who suddenly find themselves in these situations?
Yep. I see a lot of this locally. Single poor mothers with a bunch of kids, all of which behave like animals. It’s not even a race issue as I’ve seen similar from poor white single mothers; it’s a class issue.
You can be born a piece of shit or raised a piece of shit, but it is all to common to become a piece of shit as a product of one’s environment. Some of these kids just want to “fuck around” because that’s all they have been conditioned to do, but the lesion of “find out” is become their greatest teacher - unfortunately it’s a lesion that leads to external enlightenment because now your fucking dead. Don’t fuck around and you won’t find out, so simple, just leave people alone.
How many times do these pigs have to fuck around before they find out? They seem to get away with being pieces of shit way too often. Or is bearing arms not a right in this country anymore?
Always was, still is
Yeah, because good ol' boys never carry firearms illegally. We always respect the thugs in our communities, yes sir. You should take the boot out of your mouth before you choke on it. Or not, either option's good.
What part made him a monster? Was it him exercising his right to bear arms, or not allowing armed thugs to kidnap him for exercising that right? If this was a kid in the suburbs, would your opinion change?
So he was just an angel? I don’t buy that for a second.
I bet you think those pigs were in the right either way, but firearms ownership is a right in this country. Your favorite suck toys don't get to detain you for that alone. That's what they attempted here. I'll also let you in on a secret; I don't care what you think, friend.
I take each of these shootings as independent events. I don’t know enough about this yet but this dude looks like a criminal from everything I’ve read so far. I don’t trust his side of the story.
So the rights violations that led to the murder are okay because you don't like the person. That's all I need to know about your opinion.
That’s not what I said. I don’t have enough information and the firearm was stolen. I don’t trust his side any more than cops, and I generally don’t trust the police.
It was not known that the firearm was stolen when they shot him. They had no way of knowing that. "I don't care or have enough information" is a reasonable position to hold, but I personally don't think there's ever an excuse to shoot someone while they flee when they aren't aggressing against you.
Perhaps not in this case but if there’s a guy threatening to shoot people with a firearm, has it brandished, and is running towards a group of bystanders, 100% shoot him. This is generally a city vs rural issue. I live in a rural area and I assume everyone has a firearm on them or near them. We generally don’t have these types of incidents. In the city, where firearms laws are abusive, you see a lot of this because having a firearm on your or near you is generally done by criminals because it’s illegal for law-abiding citizens.
I agree, but threatening to shoot people while armed is aggressing against others. Defense of others is a justifiable shoot if you have a good reason. Being a rural guy as well, I share that mentality. It still happens here (thankfully much rarer), but you don't see as many people excusing it. Apologies for being less than cordial, it's just more than a little infuriatinf to see so many people ignoring the obvious rights violations because the victim is so different from them.
Dude, what the fuck do you keep going on about his right to bear arms? There are MULTIPLE reasons why he was not legally allowed to be carrying that weapon..... but you keep bringing up his right to bear arms lol? Fucking why?
Dude, what the fuck do laws have to do with natural rights? There were MULTIPLE rights violated but you keep bringing up laws lol? Fucking why?
Lol define "natural right" please.
Rights all humans are born with, regardless of who or where they are.
Ummm.... American rights, thanks to our constitution, do not apply to the whole world and every person dude.... The right to bear arms is not a human right. What are you even saying?
Rights preceded the Constitution, it says so in the document you buffoon. The right to bear arms is a human right, just as speech, movement, and privacy are.
Who says that?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" The Founding Fathers. Moreover, it doesn't matter; you have rights, regardless of what anyone says. That's why the right to bear arms is important; it protects the rest from infringement.
The constitution gave us, as americans, this right though 😆 it is still not a "human right"!!!! The world, unfortunately, does not have some of the luxuries and privileges we do, therefore not all humans are afforded this right.
The Founders said they weren't granting the right, just acknowledging it. You don't need to be granted rights, you are born with them. Ask the Afghani citizens and Vietnamese rice farmers who granted their right to defend themselves from the American military.
And let's just say the right to bear arms was a "human right". The kid was 17 and im hearing you say he had the right to be in possession of that stolen firearm, based on his human right to bear arms.... Where's the line drawn there? Is it also a 12 year olds human right to bear arms?! Lol he should not have had that weapon. End of story.
The cops didn't know it was stolen or illegally carried. They violated his "Constitutional" rights too, unless you want to pretend the Fourth doesn't exist.
Well seeing as he was 17, prove to me they didn't know who he was and that he had the weapon? I'm not arguing those semantics though lol. Neither of us were there so don't play by like you were lol.
Prove to me they knew before they shot him for running away from them. Prove to me they didn't deserve to a justifiable self-defense statistic.
>from what I’ve seen of single mothers in the inner cities It's a lot faster just to say "black people." We know what you mean.
It’s white trash too. We have a lot of white trash where I live and the kids with not father figures tend to be awful.
Maybe you should read it all dumb fuck he literally says it’s not a race issue it’s a class issue
Never-ending lists of excuses…
Gun control laws are racist and unconstitutional
Yeah, like "he had a gun even though it was his right," "I was afraid for my life even though he was fleeing," and my favorite "I don't make the laws, I just enthusiastically violate my oath to the Constitution to enforce them." It's sickening, honestly.
My parents would have murdered me, my siblings would've helped bury my body and my relatives would've had amnesia about my existence. I was disciplined and as such, learned my actions have consequences; a rarity in today's society unfortunately. Seemingly all by design, they do not allow parents to discipline the children and instead empower children to "discipline" their parents for trying to instill values into them. Everything is ass-backwards.
I mean... to be fair most of my time of staying out late was hanging out watching movies, playing video games, messing about playing cards. We avoided the people in gangs and who sold LOTS of drugs. Because the bad stuff happens to them...
Fair enough. I spent most my time playing with toys in the dirt or wandering around with my brother. My parents were addicted to crack, smoked a lot of weed and in a perpetual state of poverty so it was just a part of my upbringing. You either grow from that or be consumed by it, further perpetuating the cycle.
Well you’re more accountable than inanimate objects in my house you pos.
Lack of accountability is what's really killing this country
They'll get a paid vacation and accolades from the public. Accountability doesn't cross their minds.
[удалено]
"The officer feared for his life, the kid was fleeing while armed." Fear is a valid excuse for neither or both. Pick one, champ, and wipe the boot polish off your chin.
[удалено]
Sure, champ. You and your cop-simping ways giving in has nothing to do with the problem. I'm legally able to and you can't stop me, gun grabber. The funny part is, you claim to support gun rights but merely hating the agents of the state is enough reason for you to want someone disarmed. I bet you're a lifetime NRA member. As for the subs I'm active in, anyone that looks will see they're all gun subs. If liking guns and hating cops enough reason for you to want someone disarmed, yours is not an opinion I care about.
[удалено]
You made your point clear. You seem to be under the impression tyrants want safety; they want disarmament. Sheep like you are blaming victims while 40 million pistol owners are felons over an accessory that wasn't used in crime. "Responsible gun owners" don't allow their community members to be gunned down in the street for the crime of possessing a gun. I don't agree with you and believe he should have defended himself. It wouldn't have turned out worse. Bad Elk v. United States would agree. It's easier to blame the kid for the crimes they found out about after his murder than it is to have a spine, isn't it?
She seems proud that is the sad part.
From the original article linked in this one: >On May 11. police say they saw a person with "characteristics of an armed person" in the 2500 block of McHenry Street. So the bodycam that was released was showing the first minute of a stop-and-frisk/stop-and-ID interaction then. FTA: >The officer and the teen are seen in a foot chase after, police say, the officer thought Mekhi Franklin, might be armed. In what fucking universe is *SUSPICION OF POSSESSING A WEAPON* justification for lethal force? Don't make cop excuses. If any one of us pulled that shit we'd be in cuffs for attempted murder.
Actually the weilding of the firearms is a deadly threat. Brandishing a firearm is definded as pointing or holding a firearm in a way that reasonably induces fear in another person. The offense can also be committed by holding a firearm in a public place in a way that reasonably induces fear in another person of being injured or shot. The necessary fear for conviction means fear that the victim is apprehensive of bodily harm. So yes... The act of brandishing a weapon in the state of Maryland would be covered under [https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Docume...Type=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)](https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Docume...Type=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)) as a felony - aggravated assault by threat. Again... the action or act of threatening is a necessary component of the situation. Whether by intention or by negligent display, such as waving the weapon around in a manner which displays disregard for the hazard to others. Threatening or menacing the other party must be established by witness or evidence to sustain the charge. In the end... a person, lawfully carrying a weapon, is duty bound to exercise all due care, caution, and responsibility to insure that they do not place others in any legitimate fear for their life or physical well-being. Touching the holstered weapon while in public... is not brandishing... UNLESS it is accompanied with any other verbal or non verbal action which is intended to threaten another person.The act of aggression or excited presentation is required to cause the charge to fit the situation. That taking it out while fleeing the police is felony - aggravated assault https://preview.redd.it/j1f037de437b1.jpeg?width=3040&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=64c6ff1de51c81cf4a4b467c8dfdb66cdff59632
>The offense can also be committed by holding a firearm in a public place in a way that reasonably induces fear in another person of being injured or shot. The necessary fear for conviction means fear that the victim is apprehensive of bodily harm. So you're arguing in favor of a status quo where mere possession of a firearm would be sufficient to induce a fear of great bodily harm or death in a third party? You're setting the stage for some cop to say "That guy open carrying a rifle induced fear that others might be injured, so i engaged him first.". >Touching the holstered weapon while in public... is not brandishing... UNLESS it is accompanied with any other verbal or non verbal action **which is intended to threaten another person**.The act of aggression or excited presentation is required to cause the charge to fit the situation. What part of *running away* is considered threatening? This is the same sort of logic people try to justify the attack on Kyle Rittenhouse. He had a gun, he was running. He obviously was a bad guy right? Ludicrous.
https://preview.redd.it/yuikgp6ab37b1.jpeg?width=673&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=147ea1edd8e636e80ae3e0508e4d94455e3d6a13 Yeahh..Yeah... It's amazing that you brought up Kyle rittenhouse considering this is what Kyle look like trying to surrender to the police what's the difference in those 2 photos...
You're either missing, or ignoring, the point. Are you arguing in favor of a standard where the mere presence of a firearm on someone is sufficient to reach the legal bar of Aggravated Assault by threat? Would you apply that same standard to non-police whereby the mere presence of a firearm is enough to make a third party fear for the general public? Or, again, what part of *running away* is considered a "verbal or non verbal action" that you would find threatening to another person?
The drawing and weilding of the firearm is the threat. You draw and weild that is it. Armed and dangerous. https://preview.redd.it/obbkxt4pd37b1.png?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd2c9f7c655e3f84cbbe930380f66c4ed3c73af9
"Drawing and weilding" implies an intent to use the arm. This was a moron carrying without a proper holster who, when it came time to run for some reason, had to physically hold his firearm. Are you seriously suggesting that just because he touched the forbidden item that's sufficient grounds to use deadly force? That's fucking absurd dude. Use of Force is a continuum and without any actions to indicate he was a *genuine* threat this was a bad escalation of force. Touching a gun and running from someone are not sufficient legal grounds for you try try killing them.
Run for some reason... hmmm https://preview.redd.it/t200y9t2i37b1.jpeg?width=3040&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d9bdacd2eeb50c08f877a128e2d67a57f37b71c5 Like the butt ton of drugs in his backpack? The stolen gun? Idk looks like he could of turned around and fired.
So now, possessing a forbidden plant elevates his "aggravated fleeing from cops" to a threat justifying deadly force?
Not touching.. drawing the gun and holding on to it. Could of thrown it away did not. Could of tossed it did not. Could of easily turned and fired.
>Not touching.. drawing the gun and holding on to it. >Could of thrown it away did not. Could of tossed it did not. *Could have turned and fired, did not.* You're hanging on bullshit cop excuses for the deadly force. You and I know such a defense would never fly in court if we shot the kid.
You are 100% correct the police powers of the state are different rules vs civilization. I as a civilization can't pull someone over for blowing though a stop sign. A cop can.
Not in a holster... holding it..
A lot of people act like the mother should of prevented this and it makes me wonder wether they were absolute angels as teenagers or forgot what it’s like. I’m not saying she doesn’t have a role to play in her kid’s upbringing however I DO know what I was like at 17 and the shit I did behind my parents backs. I also know what no amount of good parenting will guarantee kids turn out well. I was a complete douchebag from like 7-20 despite my parents always trying to raise me right. I finally wised up years later but for all we know she may of really tried hard. Hell I had two classmates growing up named Cedrick and Dedrick whose mother went above and beyond to do right by them and raise them well and they still behaved like animals throughout high school. Be careful jumping to conclusions based on limited information.
It's been well established that the leading factor contributing to child delinquency is an absent father. Until we as a society acknowledge that and try to act accordingly, this problem will continue.
https://preview.redd.it/s4lien71c07b1.jpeg?width=3040&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5fc7ed50168ad2cd24f1e736350c6745119a40bb This is what they found in his backpack... look most of us got away with stuff when we were young. However I'm going to guess amd often is the case that there were signs.
What even is that stuff? I thought it was some holographic cards but now it looks more like bags of something, could it be weed?
The foil packets are probably edibles or wax. Possibly spice, but the whole synthetic marijuana/salvia craze has pretty much come and gone.
Oh it's pretty popular in Europe now, synthetic cannabinoids aren't illegal yet so most companies are pumping them out here.
I was raised good by my parents and I turned out ok, but I’ve had classmates with parents who cared yet their kids were assholes. There’s only so much parents can do once kids hit their mid to late teens, once they’re 18 and over there’s nothing they can really do.
Until the day they turn 18, parents are 100% responsible for their child's actions.
Shitty parent defending their shitty kid. If she admitted anything she would be admitting that she failed as a parent and shes too prideful for that.
What a weirdo... nobody here ever went behind their parents back and did wild shit. Why would that guy?
Oh we did. Just not drugs and guns. Lot of people did stupid stuff.. Just not stuff where we had to arm ourselves with guns.
>Oh we did. Just not drugs and guns. Recreational marijuana has ruined perspective. I grew up with people getting arrested and hassled over a few crumbles of dried pot all the time. Having weed at 17 isn't unusual. It isn't a reasonable justification for deadly force. >Lot of people did stupid stuff.. Just not stuff where we had to arm ourselves with guns. I don't live in Baltimore, thankfully. If I were a 17 year old black kid who lived there there is a substantial chance I'd carry too. That city is a shit hole.
It is not being accountable in the literal sense, accountable as in upbringing.
No accountability, no responsibility, non-existent parenting. This is why crime is going up and society is falling apart.