Raise your son to steal cars, seek $5 million in ghetto lottery

[Alcoholic Actuary]

They are going to buy the policy regardless. The greater point is that whether they are sued zero times or 15 times, for no amount or the amount of the policy limits, does not impact the city of Atlanta's ability to pay. I grant that if the Atlanta PD subscribes to the common habit of frivolously killing its residents and civilians, they will have difficulty finding an affordable insurance policy.

That's my point. Insurance companies are businesses, and the premiums must cover any payouts plus operating costs plus profits. The more is paid out, the higher premiums must be, and thus costs to the taxpayer.

I'm aware. These are also costs the taxpayer is already paying.

What needs to happen is that laws need to be changed to limit the amount juries can award for unjustified killings to some reasonable level when the triggering event was a felony committed by the dead guy, and shield cities and counties from liability entirely when the shooting is justified. Because too many times cities pay even for justified shootings.

Or does what need to happen is fewer shootings? Because it seems as though a lot of americans don't feel like investigation, charges, sentencing and execution all happening immediately is what the US justice system is supposed to be.

Why do you assume they don't?

Because you can't declare larceny income. Duh.

To be clear, they attempted to steal a vehicle - so they are guilty until proven innocent in your system? I mean obviously guilty of stealing a car, but now also guilty of any crime you can think of?

aa

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It sounds like they are going for a "personal defense" angle, by mentioning he "ran over my foot" bit. Like the foot was not enough and there was reasonable belief the thief intended to come around and go for the head. They can try that. I think the claim that he was protecting others from the thief's "erratic driving" as he attempted to leave the scene is their best hope. The idea he was going to come back to run over the other foot, or worse, is much weaker.

I think the running over the foot is the only thing that makes sense for why he might have fired. If it was necessary to escape then shooting about it is questionable. If he could have gotten away without running over the cop then it looks like a deliberate attack and shooting becomes reasonable.

Unfortunately, bad guys are used to driving at people to get them to jump out of the way--but when you try that on the police they usually shoot as it is an attempt to kill them.

 

[barbos]

And what if the shooting had caused the car to veer out of control and crash into a van full of terrorists who were on their way to set off a dirty bomb? The cop deciding not to shoot would have allowed them to carry out their plan and directly led to the deaths of millions.

That would be as likely as shooting anybody and getting the same result. Whereas in my case it's obvious that guys in stolen cars are more likely to cause accidents.
In any case, I think it would be more practical to sue car manufacturer. It should impossible to steal car in that fashion. I mean there are these damn proximity keys and whatever.

The "damn proximity key" would probably have still been in the vehicle. Being able to stop/start a car without touching the key makes it more likely that you won't take it with you when you intend to stay close to the car.

What's next, sue the tire manufacturer for not having "foot sensors" in the treads?

stop/start is not the same as moving. Car should not alllow driving away without owner inside.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

The "damn proximity key" would probably have still been in the vehicle. Being able to stop/start a car without touching the key makes it more likely that you won't take it with you when you intend to stay close to the car.

What's next, sue the tire manufacturer for not having "foot sensors" in the treads?

stop/start is not the same as moving. Car should not alllow driving away without owner inside.

That may be the most idiotic post I’ve ever seen on this site. Congratulations.

 

[barbos]

The "damn proximity key" would probably have still been in the vehicle. Being able to stop/start a car without touching the key makes it more likely that you won't take it with you when you intend to stay close to the car.

What's next, sue the tire manufacturer for not having "foot sensors" in the treads?

stop/start is not the same as moving. Car should not alllow driving away without owner inside.

That may be the most idiotic post I’ve ever seen on this site. Congratulations.

You clearly don't have a clue.

 

[laughing dog]

Because you can't declare larceny income. Duh.

Of course you can declare from any illegal activity. In fact, the IRS expects you to declare income from any source or activity, because income is income. Duh.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Because you can't declare larceny income. Duh.

Of course you can declare from any illegal activity. In fact, the IRS expects you to declare income from any source or activity, because income is income. Duh.

I thought everyone knew how the Feds finally busted Al Capone (evading taxes on his larceny income). Derec is clueless in two millennia. Shocking!

 

[Derec]

Of course you can declare from any illegal activity. In fact, the IRS expects you to declare income from any source or activity, because income is income. Duh.

That's just a scheme to be able to charge you with tax evasion, like they did with Capone. They do not really expect you to declare illegal income. That's why criminals launder their money, to be able to declare it as legal income, even if it really originates from illegal sources.
Now, do you really expect these two ding-dongs to have the diligence to launder their money?

 

[Derec]

I thought everyone knew how the Feds finally busted Al Capone (evading taxes on his larceny income).

Yes, everybody knows that. But that is just a plot to be able to charge criminals, not a real expectations that anybody would incriminate themselves by actually declaring income from say a robbery.

Derec is clueless in two millennia. Shocking!

Hardly. That dubious honor is laughing dog's. He is clueless no matter where in the space-time continuum he finds himself.

 

[Derec]

I'm aware. These are also costs the taxpayer is already paying.

And if these payouts were less frequent and for lesser dollar amounts, the premiums could be substantially lower.

Or does what need to happen is fewer shootings?

In many cases, yes. Many (but still a small minority of the >1000 fatal police shootings per year) are unjustified. But even in those cases awards are excessive.
And awards tend to be paid even when the shooting turns out to be justified. Michael Brown's parents became millionaires, even though the "hands up don't shoot" narrative collapsed. If they had even a shred of decency they would have donated all that money to the owner of the store their son robbed and which was vandalized by the Ferguson rioters.

Because it seems as though a lot of americans don't feel like investigation, charges, sentencing and execution all happening immediately is what the US justice system is supposed to be.

That does not mean that in most cases where police officers decide to shoot it is because it was necessary to prevent themselves or a third party getting hurt by the shootee.

To be clear, they attempted to steal a vehicle - so they are guilty until proven innocent in your system? I mean obviously guilty of stealing a car, but now also guilty of any crime you can think of?

This was in the context of your assumption that they were taxpayers. I made no assumption that they were not, but I think it unlikely given what they did for money.

 

[laughing dog]

Of course you can declare from any illegal activity. In fact, the IRS expects you to declare income from any source or activity, because income is income. Duh.

That's just a scheme to be able to charge you with tax evasion, like they did with Capone. They do not really expect you to declare illegal income.

It is not a scheme - income is income. Income is taxed regardless of the legality of the activity that generates the income.

That's why criminals launder their money, to be able to declare it as legal income, even if it really originates from illegal sources.

No, criminals launder their money to hide their criminal activity from law enforcement. The IRS is prohibited from informing on criminal activity.

Now, do you really expect these two ding-dongs to have the diligence to launder their money?

They would not have to launder it. Just declare it as miscellaneous income. The IRS does not care about the source of income.

Educate yourself  Taxation_of_illegal_income_in_the_United_States so you can stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[Derec]

It is not a scheme - income is income. Income is taxed regardless of the legality of the activity that generates the income.

It certainly was in the case of Al Capone.

No, criminals launder their money to hide their criminal activity from law enforcement. The IRS is prohibited from informing on criminal activity.

The upshot is the same - criminals will not be paying taxes on illegal income lest they launder it first. And I do not see an 18 year old car thief or a 21 year old armed robber having the foresight to call Saul.

They would not have to launder it. Just declare it as miscellaneous income.

Brilliant. Why didn't Al Capone or Daniel Noriega think of that?

the IRS does not care about the source of income.

IRS might not, but it's self-incriminating, hence the need to launder money.

Educate yourself  Taxation_of_illegal_income_in_the_United_States so you can stop embarrassing yourself.

If you think car thieves and armed robbers put proceeds from robbery on their 1040s, you are embarrassing yourself.

In any case, we are getting a bit far afield.
The family wasn't damaged to the tune of 5 million, and D' himself carries most of the blame anyway, so even if the shooting wasn't justified the family should not get more than maybe $50k.

 

[laughing dog]

The upshot is the same - criminals will not be paying taxes on illegal income lest they launder it first.

It does not need to be laundered in order to satisfy the IRS.

Brilliant. Why didn't Al Capone or Daniel Noriega think of that?

I don't know and I don't care.

IRS might not, but it's self-incriminating, hence the need to launder money.

It is not self-incriminating to the IRS.

If you think car thieves and armed robbers put proceeds from robbery on their 1040s, you are embarrassing yourself.

Ask your whores if they pay income taxes.

The family wasn't damaged to the tune of 5 million, and D' himself carries most of the blame anyway, so even if the shooting wasn't justified the family should not get more than maybe $50k.

Repeating your opinion does not make it any more factually based or true.

 

[Derec]

It does not need to be laundered in order to satisfy the IRS.

IRS would be satisfied with the money, but there is no advantage to doing it for the crooks. Unless they make enough to be conspicuus, in which case they launder. Small time crooks do not pay tax on their ill-gotten gains. That's just silly.

I don't know and I don't care.

Could be your motto.

It is not self-incriminating to the IRS.

But it is to somebody. Which is why crooks with enough money to launder do it in the first place. Laundering costs money.

Ask your whores if they pay income taxes.

You know Godwin's Law? We need Courtesan's Law (or something) for TF for people like Frikki, Toni and you that drag my sex life into unrelated threads.

Repeating your opinion does not make it any more factually based or true.

If you think I am wrong, offer arguments. Start with amount of damages. Justify the 5 million damage amount they are seeking. Then try to argue that the cop is 100% at fault here and D' 0%, i.e. that he did nothing wrong when he stole the cop car and drove over the cop's leg.

 

[laughing dog]

IRS would be satisfied with the money, but there is no advantage to doing it for the crooks.

Of course there is an advantage - they will get the IRS off their backs or prevent a future prosecution by the IRS.

You know Godwin's Law? We need Courtesan's Law (or something) for TF for people like Frikki, Toni and you that drag my sex life into unrelated threads.

I am not dragging your pathetic sex life into the threads. I simply suggested you actually educate yourself by talking to people you know who earn income illegally. You really have no clue what you are talking about.

If you think I am wrong, offer arguments.

I did. I am not responsible for your inability to read with comprehension. Mr. Griffin posed no danger to the police officer when he was fleeing. We don't know at this point if the officer did not follow Atlanta PD protocols or not. If he did not, he is 100% in the wrong here.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I fully support the notion that car thieves should pay taxes. After all, public dollars paid for the roads which their victims bought the cars to use, so they're taking advantage of public spending and should therefore contribute their fair share to maintain it.

 

[Derec]

Update in the D'Ettrick Griffin case. Fulton County prosecuted the shooter, but he was acquitted.

Ex-Atlanta police officer found not guilty in fatal shooting of teen

For Oliver Simmonds, the weight of the “whole world has been lifted off his shoulders” after the former Atlanta police officer was acquitted Friday afternoon in the death of an 18-year-old who allegedly tried to steal his unmarked patrol car five years ago.
[...]
The Fulton County jury found Simmonds, who once served on ex-Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms’ security detail, not guilty of felony murder and aggravated assault in the fatal shooting of D’Ettrick Griffin at a gas station in 2019.
[...]
Attorney Eric Fredrickson, who represents Griffin’s family in a civil lawsuit against Simmonds and the city, said Friday they respected the jury’s verdict but were disappointed. He said the verdict does not impact the civil case.
“I can’t imagine what it’s like to have to sit through that, when the person who shot your son is sitting there on trial,” Fredrickson said.

The hearse-chasing lawyer and the greedy family still want all those undeserved millions from Atlanta taxpayers.

For the Hound: no update whether or not D' was declaring his car theft income on his 1040s, but I still doubt it.