Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
If i saw a grown man pinning a young girl on the ground, im going to kick him in the head as hard as i can first, and ask questions later. I can't think of a single reason that he would be justified in doing that.
A vicious kick in the balls would be a good alternative.
I understand the emotion but the better option is to stop the aggressor with the minimum amount of force required to ensure he is stopped. No need to go full Punisher and open yourelf up to lawsuits.
If you're going to get in a fight with a violent aggressor it's best to end it as quickly as possible to minimize risk to yourself and others. Going for the minimum and misjudging that is going to leave you open to harm and potential death. You don't owe the aggressor anything. Their actions created the situation not you.
Ender's Solution.
No, I agree. A good, hard kick to the face with my steel toed boots, then ask questions.
That's what all the child molesters say, when they get caught on video pinning down a child. Where would a child get enough money for eggs?
What a great way to make sure your house and car continue to get egged, more aggressively and more regularly to boot.
He thought the girl was throwing eggs at his apartment. What a loser, tell the landlord to do something about it, it’s not even his property.
Florida landlord caught pinning down...girl gets life in el Salvador.
The Deregulated Florida Oblast has many fine fucking residents.
Psychopath.
Egging? Who the fuck can afford egging?
Once you become a woman, you get one egg every month...but its tiny. And you'll bleed a ton and get cramps. God....yeah that looks good!
felon musk
He should've stood his ground and shot her. /s
The city confirmed that Mutu started his job as a parking enforcement specialist last week, with an annual salary of $42,078,40.
"He is currently suspended while the situation is under review," a city spokesperson said
"I'm a police officer, comply with my orders immediately!"
"Fuck off, meter maid!"
Yeah, that was what jumped out at me too. Paul Blart got his first whiff of authority, and immediately jumped straight to police brutality.
Shitbird thought he was a cop now and didnt have to follow any laws.
Nope.
ngl, I assumed he was a cop based on the headline
A Florida man ran down and pinned an 11-year-old girl he suspected of egging his home in a "reprehensible" confrontation that was caught on video, authorities said Monday.
In Texas, it's legal to shoot someone egging your house, as long as they're doing it at night and you have a reasonable belief that you can't otherwise safely stop them. Egging a house is criminal mischief.
https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-9-42/
Texas Penal Code - PENAL § 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
Current as of January 01, 2024 | Updated by FindLaw Staff
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
EDIT: Also, where are all these people in Florida getting affordable eggs to egg with?
Eggs at Aldi in Florida are under $4.50.
9.42(2)(B)'s last word "and" makes it clear to satisfy the statue one must:
-Satisfy 9.41(1);
-Satisfy either 9.41(2)(A) OR 9.41(2)(B); AND
-Satisfy either 9.41(3)(A) OR 9.41(3)(B).
That reading effectively reads the final requirement out of the text or presumes some extreme fact pattern that was not mentioned.
AND the land cannot be protected by any other means or is considered a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to the person shooting them.
Firmly believe every judge would rule an 11 year old with eggs does not fulfill those requirements and therefore would likely be charged with manslaughter of some sort.
Now... If they set foot inside their house, that might be a different story. Eggs I don't think would be considered breaking into a house/vehicle/property
With this behavior from that guy, maybe there's a reason his apartment is getting egged!
The safety of our children is non-negotiable
As long as the 2nd amendment stands, nobody has a right to safety in USA. The 2nd amendment simply doesn't allow such a right.
So yes the safety is non negotiable, because you can't negotiate safety when the default is that everybody is allowed to own and carry deadly weapons.
Oh, fuck off. The 2A is needed now more than it's been in decades.
The 2A is needed now more than it's been in decades.
The second amendment was never intended to be used by citizens against the government. That is a lie cooked up by pro-gun people purposely misinterpreting history.
The second amendment exists because Madison didn’t want a large standing federal army, fearing it would put too much power into the hands of the federal government. Instead he wanted the nation’s defense to be handled by state militias.
That’s why it specifically talks about militias.
He changed his tune after the war of 1812 showed him the value of a standing federal army.
The government had no intention of being overthrown by its citizens if they decided the government was tyrannical. They put down multiple armed rebellions in the early years of the nation.
Well according the the people alive when Madison created the 2nd amendment, you're incorrect and it was also in there to be a checksum against the federal government. But I'm sure you're interpretation is more correct than theirs, right?
I could very well be wrong. I’m not a constitutional scholar, only repeating what I’ve learned and read. Can you show me these contemporary sources?
Right, those were talking about the ability of the states to be a check on federal power. Because military power would be in the hands of state militias.
M9stly referring to this, for anyone else who stumbles across this thread: "the Second Amendment was envisioned by the framers of the Constitution, according to College of William and Mary law professor and future U.S. District Court judge St. George Tucker in 1803 in his great work Blackstone’s Commentaries: With Notes of Reference to the Constitution and Laws of the Federal Government of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia, as the “true palladium of liberty.” In addition to checking federal power, the Second Amendment also provided state governments with what Luther Martin (1744/48–1826) described as the “last coup de grace” that would enable the states “to thwart and oppose the general government.”"
Yes. A check against Federal power because state militias would be the military might. A “palladium of liberty” for those who believed centralized power was dangerous to liberty.
Ask Shay’s Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion about whether the government would cede power when confronted by armed citizens (as opposed to state militias).