Give me a break!

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by jim97701, Jul 24, 2014.

  1. jim97701

    jim97701
    Bend
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    817
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 24, 2014
  2. etrain16

    etrain16
    Oregon
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter 2017 Volunteer

    Messages:
    12,649
    Likes Received:
    37,726
    If a judge actually allows this case to move forward, he should be removed from the bench. Unbelievable that criminals are able to sue their victims. Why are politicians not passing laws preventing lawsuits by people who are committing felony offenses?
     
  3. The Heretic

    The Heretic
    Oregon
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,713
    Likes Received:
    13,875
    Because everybody has rights - even criminals.

    Not sure whether, as a fact of law, the lawsuit should go forward, but if it does and a trial court judge doesn't throw it out, then I would complain. Everybody gets their day in court - usually.

    That said - to the criminal "victim":

    2004-06-28-toobadsosad1.jpg
     
  4. etrain16

    etrain16
    Oregon
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter 2017 Volunteer

    Messages:
    12,649
    Likes Received:
    37,726
    That's not necessarily true. There are cases that get tossed out before they ever get to the courts as they are seen as being "frivolous" or something to that effect. I agree a judge should review the charge made by the little butt-hurt criminal, but I think in so doing, he'd be in a position to not punish the actual victims in this case (the Pizza place and the employees) by forcing them through a trial that will only waste their time and money. Getting tossed out up front does happen, and I hope it happens here.
     
  5. Doc In UPlace

    Doc In UPlace
    Tacoma-ish
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,690
    Likes Received:
    2,153
    Good time to point out that many people who have used their weapons to defend themselves during an attack or other violent felony... have wound up defending themselves in civil court against a suit brought by the attacker or the attacker's family. And it's coming out of your pocket, unless you have a hefty liability policy and even then it's gonna be miserable.

    Particularly onerous is the attacker who is rendered disabled by the (i.e., our) defensive response. All of a sudden this person will manufacture all kinds of 'lost wage" and unusable "talents" previously unused or realized but claimed anyway. (unrealized before the crime, that is.)

    This is why I highly recommend having a good use of force toolkit available, ranging from avoidance/retreat to open-hand to less-than-lethal to deadly force. Few things are properly suited to a deadly force response and before shooting we want to make sure we are as justified as the circumstances allow, and that no other available options could have been sufficient.
     
    Quacky88 likes this.
  6. etrain16

    etrain16
    Oregon
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter 2017 Volunteer

    Messages:
    12,649
    Likes Received:
    37,726
    Having the Castle Doctrine would be helpful too...
     
    Quacky88 likes this.
  7. The Heretic

    The Heretic
    Oregon
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,713
    Likes Received:
    13,875
    I would agree with a narrowly defined law - something to the effect that a criminal could not sue a victim of his violent crime for injuries the criminal incurred as a result of the act of the crime.

    But in general saying that a criminal can't sue someone is non-starter in my book.
     
    Quacky88 likes this.
  8. etrain16

    etrain16
    Oregon
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter 2017 Volunteer

    Messages:
    12,649
    Likes Received:
    37,726
    That's kind of the direction I was going, but may not have expressed that very well. I do agree that even criminals deserve due process under the law, but counter-suing someone who either defended themselves against the accused or captured them seems to stretch beyond the bounds of 'due process' in my book - that's not justice, it's taking advantage of a system that allows far too many frivolous lawsuits.
     
    jim97701 and Quacky88 like this.

Share This Page