One of the worst verdicts in a civil suit ever

[ruby sparks]

....that action by the officer was highly reckless and unnecessary and by itself warrants some millions to the boy.

See, that's why I think the compensation system, perhaps especially in the USA, is a bit bonkers.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

I mean besides scale, what's the difference between this story and the Cliven Bundy case ???

Leftists like laughing dog would never defend the Bundy Bunch. I guess the only anti-government sovereign citizens who deserve millions are those with the correct skin color.

Did my point at least make any sound as it whizzed by you?

aa

 

[Derec]

Did my point at least make any sound as it whizzed by you?

Maybe it did. What was it again? I never defended the Bundys either.

- - - Updated - - -

See, that's why I think the compensation system, perhaps especially in the USA, is a bit bonkers.

Exactly.

 

[laughing dog]

That is logically idiotic. Somebody can be harmed without any wrongdoing on the part of police.

It is morally debased and logically idiotic to claim that someone who harms an innocent child through a deliberate choice did not do something wrong.

So, police should never shoot at criminals as long as there is a finite probability that their child might be inadvertently harmed?

The police are responsible for their shots and the ricochets.

It's wrong, but the wrongdoing was not on the part of police here. Had Korryn survived, she should have been charged with felony child endangerment as well.

Perhaps, but she did not shoot her child nor a ricochet from her gun hit her child. It came from the police. They are responsible for their actions. If the police had not fired, the child would not have been hit. It is logically idiotic for you to claim otherwise.

 

[ronburgundy]

duplicate