Police shoot man with stun gun to stop him from saving step son in burning house

[Pauli007001]

You were outside while the house burned. Did you leave your kids alone or did you run from the burning house?

Remember, it's not real.
I drove home from work and saw the house on fire, kids are inside with their mother.
My home.
My family.
My legally protected FREEDOM OF CHOICE to go in and save my family.
If a stormtrooper tries to stop me he is breaking the law.

Oh, so you can change the scenario from the OP, but everything I say must be exactly like the OP? Nice double standard there, sparky.

The man in the OP was in pajamas. He was not coming home from work.

Irrelivant, the stormtrooper was out of order.
Who says the dad left the house ?
Why do you support totalitarianism?
Hate freedom?

 

[Pauli007001]

I didn't say it was a fact. I said "I think". Reading your posts is my evidence for me.

So you admit to being a lying shit eater .
Noted.

Not at all. I still think you are the raving lunatic that got banned from XXX

So prove it fuckwit!!

 

[Katzndogz]

The fire department and police cannot allow people to enter burning buildings if they believe that it is too dangerous to do so. They just can't. They are liable for that death or injury KNOWING that death or injury was certain to result. If you don't want the authorities to have to obligation to make the decision to secure the scene, then you will have to work to change the law and remove all civil and criminal liability.

THIS!!! Well said.

Again, if my home was on fire and my kids inside, it is my constitutionally assured FREEDOM OF CHOICE to go inside to rescue my children.
If a pig tases me to prevent me doing so his action is unconstitutional, oppressive, totalitarian and criminal.
He will regret murdering my kids.
You would laugh, that's your sickness.

Actually, no it isn't. You are confusing freedom with license. You wrongly believe that "choice" trumps everything else. As soon as authority shows up your freedom of choice is ended. You do not have the right to enter a burning building, you do not have the right to enter a building with guns blazing if someone is holding your entire family hostage.

The obligation of the authority is FIRST to secure the scene this means being in total control over who goes where. You have no freedom to act. You have only freedom to act as long as there is no law against your actions. When an officer or firefighter says you can't go in a burning building, you can't. The police took the least restrictive measure by tasering him instead of shooting him.

This is tragic, a child is dead. If the man had died, the police and the firefighters would have been as responsible for his death, as if they had set the fire themselves.

 

[Chuckt]

Is that their fucking choice to make? So you can have an abortion, but you can't save your child?

When the fire dept is called, yes it is their fucking choice to make. That prevents the family from suing and crying "Why did you let him go in there?".

Look, a trained fire fighter in full gear was unable to get in because of the heat. You think the stepdad, dressed in pajamas, would have made it in and back out?

Wars are unsafe but men do and are still told to go in there.

What is the real and perceived level of safety? What is the margin for error? Maybe there was a margin for saving the kid that the fireman wasn't willing to take.

Sometimes the only way to save someone is to let men be men.

Did you know that a stun gun can pop your heart? You could have had two deaths anyway.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Paulie got pwned by both Winterborn and Katzndogs!!

That's hilarious!!

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Is that their fucking choice to make? So you can have an abortion, but you can't save your child?

When the fire dept is called, yes it is their fucking choice to make. That prevents the family from suing and crying "Why did you let him go in there?".

Look, a trained fire fighter in full gear was unable to get in because of the heat. You think the stepdad, dressed in pajamas, would have made it in and back out?

Wars are unsafe but men do and are still told to go in there.

What is the real and perceived level of safety? What is the margin for error? Maybe there was a margin for saving the kid that the fireman wasn't willing to take.

Sometimes the only way to save someone is to let men be men.

Did you know that a stun gun can pop your heart? You could have had two deaths anyway.

And if a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his ass on the ground every time he hopped.

 

[Pauli007001]

THIS!!! Well said.

Again, if my home was on fire and my kids inside, it is my constitutionally assured FREEDOM OF CHOICE to go inside to rescue my children.
If a pig tases me to prevent me doing so his action is unconstitutional, oppressive, totalitarian and criminal.
He will regret murdering my kids.
You would laugh, that's your sickness.

Actually, no it isn't. You are confusing freedom with license. You wrongly believe that "choice" trumps everything else. As soon as authority shows up your freedom of choice is ended. You do not have the right to enter a burning building, you do not have the right to enter a building with guns blazing if someone is holding your entire family hostage.

The obligation of the authority is FIRST to secure the scene this means being in total control over who goes where. You have no freedom to act. You have only freedom to act as long as there is no law against your actions. When an officer or firefighter says you can't go in a burning building, you can't. The police took the least restrictive measure by tasering him instead of shooting him.

This is tragic, a child is dead. If the man had died, the police and the firefighters would have been as responsible for his death, as if they had set the fire themselves.

Where in the constitution does it say any of the above?

The stormtrooper has no lawfull mandate to deny a home owner the right to enter his home.
Unless he suspects the homeowner is committing a crime.
What crime did this father commit?
A lethal weapon was used to restrain him, to protect who?
This is overreach, tyranny , totalitarianism, oppression and excessive police power.
His home!!!!
His castle.
Pigs murdered the kid.
Winterborn is laughing.

 

[Pauli007001]

You were outside while the house burned. Did you leave your kids alone or did you run from the burning house?

Remember, it's not real.
I drove home from work and saw the house on fire, kids are inside with their mother.
My home.
My family.
My legally protected FREEDOM OF CHOICE to go in and save my family.
If a stormtrooper tries to stop me he is breaking the law.

Oh, so you can change the scenario from the OP, but everything I say must be exactly like the OP? Nice double standard there, sparky.

The man in the OP was in pajamas. He was not coming home from work.

Pyjama party?
Across st at his cousins house.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Castle doctrine.
My house. My life. My choice.
Freedom.
My money.
My employees.
Direct or indirect, my employees.

YOu keep telling yourself that. I'll laugh when they taser you too.

You would laugh at the death of a child? Sick fuck!! The cop would regret that decision.

We are laughing at you, and, no, no cops would regret what they would do to you if you put them in jeopardy.

 

[Montrovant]

I think the man should have been allowed to re-enter the house, but I understand why he was not. Liability may be a concern, and certainly it's possible there was no way for him to get to his stepson. It's a bit of a morality vs practicality situation.

On the other hand, as WinterBorn brought up, I wonder WTF the step-father and grandmother were doing leaving the burning house without the child? GET THE 3-YEAR-OLD OUT FIRST!

Maybe it was just being woken up in a confusing situation, but the article said the two adults left the back of the house after being unable to get to the child. Why did they leave? Was there a different path to the room from the front door they thought would work? If the man was willing to run through the fire to get to the boy from the front door, what prevented that from the back door?

It sounds a bit strange to me.

Handcuffing and tasing the man seems unnecessarily harsh, but I can imagine someone being next to impossible to restrain in such a situation, handcuffed or not, so it may well have been justified (if the restraint is justified in the first place).

 

[Chuckt]

The fire department and police cannot allow people to enter burning buildings if they believe that it is too dangerous to do so. They just can't. They are liable for that death or injury KNOWING that death or injury was certain to result. If you don't want the authorities to have to obligation to make the decision to secure the scene, then you will have to work to change the law and remove all civil and criminal liability.

THIS!!! Well said.

Again, if my home was on fire and my kids inside, it is my constitutionally assured FREEDOM OF CHOICE to go inside to rescue my children.
If a pig tases me to prevent me doing so his action is unconstitutional, oppressive, totalitarian and criminal.
He will regret murdering my kids.
You would laugh, that's your sickness.

I guess the moral of the story is not to leave the house without the kids.

 

[Pauli007001]

Paulie got pwned by both Winterborn and Katzndogs!!

That's hilarious!!

Really ?
So you too hate freedom, support tyranny and oppression?

Never had you down as a liberal statist.

 

[Pauli007001]

YOu keep telling yourself that. I'll laugh when they taser you too.

You would laugh at the death of a child? Sick fuck!! The cop would regret that decision.

We are laughing at you, and, no, no cops would regret what they would do to you if you put them in jeopardy.

How would a cop be put in jeopardy by a father going into his house to save his kid?
This pig should be fired.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Paulie got pwned by both Winterborn and Katzndogs!!

That's hilarious!!

Really ?
So you too hate freedom, support tyranny and oppression?

Never had you down as a liberal statist.

You sure like making shit up and putting words into other peoples mouths.

Be careful or I may start acting in kind.

And yes it is hilarious that you got pwned which is becoming quite common for you and by common I mean every single time.

 

[Chuckt]

You would laugh at the death of a child? Sick fuck!! The cop would regret that decision.

We are laughing at you, and, no, no cops would regret what they would do to you if you put them in jeopardy.

How would a cop be put in jeopardy by a father going into his house to save his kid?
This pig should be fired.

It is a judgment call and if the officer was right then the man couldn't have done anything other than harmed himself. Some people ignore the consequences and don't act rational. People who are in a state of denial may go in for a sense of duty, guilt or regret.

 

[Pauli007001]

I think the man should have been allowed to re-enter the house, but I understand why he was not. Liability may be a concern, and certainly it's possible there was no way for him to get to his stepson. It's a bit of a morality vs practicality situation.

On the other hand, as WinterBorn brought up, I wonder WTF the step-father and grandmother were doing leaving the burning house without the child? GET THE 3-YEAR-OLD OUT FIRST!

Maybe it was just being woken up in a confusing situation, but the article said the two adults left the back of the house after being unable to get to the child. Why did they leave? Was there a different path to the room from the front door they thought would work? If the man was willing to run through the fire to get to the boy from the front door, what prevented that from the back door?

It sounds a bit strange to me.

Handcuffing and tasing the man seems unnecessarily harsh, but I can imagine someone being next to impossible to restrain in such a situation, handcuffed or not, so it may well have been justified (if the restraint is justified in the first place).

Why they left is not the point.
Why the stormtrooper allowed the child to burn because he had a hard on for tasing the father is the issue.
Pig killed the kid by denying the dad his constitutional right to choose!

 

[Pauli007001]

We are laughing at you, and, no, no cops would regret what they would do to you if you put them in jeopardy.

How would a cop be put in jeopardy by a father going into his house to save his kid?
This pig should be fired.

It is a judgment call and if the officer was right then the man couldn't have done anything other than harmed himself. Some people ignore the consequences and don't act rational. People who are in a state of denial may go in for a sense of duty, guilt or regret.

It's the mans CHOICE!!
Not the tyrannical stormtroopers.

 

[Chuckt]

How would a cop be put in jeopardy by a father going into his house to save his kid?
This pig should be fired.

It is a judgment call and if the officer was right then the man couldn't have done anything other than harmed himself. Some people ignore the consequences and don't act rational. People who are in a state of denial may go in for a sense of duty, guilt or regret.

It's the mans CHOICE!!
Not the tyrannical stormtroopers.

Safety is also based on "I didn't see, I didn't think, I didn't know."

 

[Esmeralda]

Is that their fucking choice to make? So you can have an abortion, but you can't save your child?

When the fire dept is called, yes it is their fucking choice to make. That prevents the family from suing and crying "Why did you let him go in there?".

Look, a trained fire fighter in full gear was unable to get in because of the heat. You think the stepdad, dressed in pajamas, would have made it in and back out?

They saved the man's life. They saved his family from having two dead instead of one. They prevented him from an action that would cause certain death.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

How would a cop be put in jeopardy by a father going into his house to save his kid?
This pig should be fired.

It is a judgment call and if the officer was right then the man couldn't have done anything other than harmed himself. Some people ignore the consequences and don't act rational. People who are in a state of denial may go in for a sense of duty, guilt or regret.

It's the mans CHOICE!!
Not the tyrannical stormtroopers.

Choices are not a guaranteed right you stupid ass fuck!!