Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If the police say you can't go in your own home, you can't go in your own home. You can be REMOVED from your home if there is a danger. He wasn't equal to the cops. The cops were charged with the authority to make the decisions as to who goes where. The man had no such authority.
You are so wrong, that it's just pathetic. Really pathetic. He had no freedom of choice nor freedom of movement. He had no more freedom of movement than if he was trying to run a police roadblock. He had no right to "associate" with a blazing fire either.
Is this really the level of ignorance we have sunk to? Seriously? Is this it?
Show me, in the constitution where a cop can arbitrarily remove your constitutional rights?
It's not the same as running a police roadblock.
That would endanger others.
This fathers actions endangered who?
What justified the use of potentially deadly force?
Nothing.
Power happy pig in a police state.
I hope the father gets his revenge for the murder of his child.
Using a taser isn't considered deadly force you stupid fuck!
But why let facts get in your way. It's never stopped you before.
From what I read in the article, a trained fighter determined it was unsafe. He probably saved this man's life and spared the family losing two people.
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!
Please show me where the US Constitution guarantees you the right to commit suicide?
From what I read in the article, a trained fighter determined it was unsafe. He probably saved this man's life and spared the family losing two people.
True. But knowing your infant child burned to death is the stuff of nightmares.
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!
Please show me where the US Constitution guarantees you the right to commit suicide?
Most states have what is called Patient Self Determination Act. You have the right to kill yourself if you are terminally ill and do not suffer from an illness for which suicidal ideations is a symptom.
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!
Please show me where the US Constitution guarantees you the right to commit suicide?
show me, in the constitution where a cop can arbitrarily remove your constitutional rights?
It's not the same as running a police roadblock.
That would endanger others.
This fathers actions endangered who?
What justified the use of potentially deadly force?
Nothing.
Power happy pig in a police state.
I hope the father gets his revenge for the murder of his child.
using a taser isn't considered deadly force you stupid fuck!
But why let facts get in your way. It's never stopped you before.
pauli's debate technique is a lot like my children's temper tantrums when they were 4 or 5 years old. They would stamp their feet and claim they were right. Facts were not involved in either case. (although the name calling pauli seems to love would get him more punishment than i would ever have doled out for my kids)
using a taser isn't considered deadly force you stupid fuck!
But why let facts get in your way. It's never stopped you before.
pauli's debate technique is a lot like my children's temper tantrums when they were 4 or 5 years old. They would stamp their feet and claim they were right. Facts were not involved in either case. (although the name calling pauli seems to love would get him more punishment than i would ever have doled out for my kids)
View attachment 28307
From what I read in the article, a trained fighter determined it was unsafe. He probably saved this man's life and spared the family losing two people.
True. But knowing your infant child burned to death is the stuff of nightmares.
Indeed it is. I feel sorry for the entire family.
I would be willing to bet the fire fighters have some nightmares about it too.
From what I read in the article, a trained fighter determined it was unsafe. He probably saved this man's life and spared the family losing two people.
The question here is the social dysfunction of Pauli007001 who believes the world revolves around his wants.
Anarchism, libertarianism, communism: credos based on the factual misunderstanding of human nature.
From what I read in the article, a trained fighter determined it was unsafe. He probably saved this man's life and spared the family losing two people.
True. But knowing your infant child burned to death is the stuff of nightmares.
The officer here had no choice but to do his job which is to "serve and protect". The fire dept could not go in as it was not safe due to the heat, thus there was no way that this guy would be able to attempt the rescue, it would have been certain death. The officer had to stop him.
From what I read in the article, a trained fighter determined it was unsafe. He probably saved this man's life and spared the family losing two people.
True. But knowing your infant child burned to death is the stuff of nightmares.
The kindest thing they could have done was let him go and let him die.
