Joshjrn Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Hahahaha. I can see Josh's brain melting now.You haven't the faintest idea... Link to comment
Scott Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 The best part is I can just imagine the face you made. It's perfect. Link to comment
Doc Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Here's a funny picture or two to lighten the mood!I lol at that one ^ every time I see it Link to comment
Joshjrn Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 The OJ case didn't even set the precedent. It's a basic premise of tort law. Older than the French Civil Code. Older than English Common Law. Older than the Jus Civil. Seriously thousands of years old Doc, I'd be wary of assuming that, just because you haven't heard of a particular kind of case, that it doesn't exist. If the New York Times were a reliable source of legal information, attorneys wouldn't make as much money as they do.To be honest Joshjrn, I doubt I know the first thing about law. I know only what I've been taught - in school - but outside of the school system, it hasn't sparked a single bit of my interest, so I don't care to learn anymore. You have much more experience with this Joshjrn, could you just tell us if you can be sued or have to pay restitution for the murder of a person if they break into your home and attempt to steal something?I'm disinclined to give a firm answer to your question. First, for liability reasons. Second, I assume that the ratio of idiots to normal people on the internet is out of wack, and I don't want that on my conscience. That said...Whether the burglar's decedents would have a cause of action for wrongful death against you would turn on whether it was homicide or justifiable homicide. Whether it would be justifiable homicide would turn on whether you would have a legal defense for your actions. Most states write their laws to include a legal defense when deadly force is used against someone who is unlawfully in or trying to enter your home, place of business, or vehicle if you are inside of said location, assuming that you can show that you had a reasonable belief that deadly force was required to repel said invader.But, this is a complex, nuanced area of the law. Each case would turn on the specific facts of that case, and no blanket statement of law is proper. But if you kill someone simply because they are stealing your TV, you are going to jail after being convicted in a criminal trial and you would be sued in a civil trial if you are deemed a worthwhile target. Link to comment
Doc Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 The OJ case didn't even set the precedent. It's a basic premise of tort law. Older than the French Civil Code. Older than English Common Law. Older than the Jus Civil. Seriously thousands of years old Doc, I'd be wary of assuming that, just because you haven't heard of a particular kind of case, that it doesn't exist. If the New York Times were a reliable source of legal information, attorneys wouldn't make as much money as they do.To be honest Joshjrn, I doubt I know the first thing about law. I know only what I've been taught - in school - but outside of the school system, it hasn't sparked a single bit of my interest, so I don't care to learn anymore. You have much more experience with this Joshjrn, could you just tell us if you can be sued or have to pay restitution for the murder of a person if they break into your home and attempt to steal something?But if you kill someone simply because they are stealing your TV, you are going to jail after being convicted in a criminal trial and you would be sued in a civil trial if you are deemed a worthwhile target.Well! Can't say I didn't learn anything today.Thanks. SoHow are those riots goin'? Link to comment
Unbeaten Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Well to bring us back onto track, riots are now in Birmingham and Liverpool. A couple of older medics are at Uni right now, supposedly the student area is okay but lots of the city's center and shopping areas have been burnt. Link to comment
Mike Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Just wait till the Gov't wants to cut entitlement programs, imagine how much they will riot! Link to comment
Unbeaten Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Just wait till the Gov't wants to cut entitlement programs, imagine how much they will riot!We've already cut a few programmes. Our government, in that respect, has had the balls to take action. Link to comment
Dan G Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Well to bring us back onto track, riots are now in Birmingham and Liverpool. A couple of older medics are at Uni right now, supposedly the student area is okay but lots of the city's center and shopping areas have been burnt....This thread's annoyed me more than the riots. Doc is Death, I didn't comment on any of the other threads where you got hate because I didn't know you or hadn't read anything stupid you'd said. Until now. Going back to the first page of stupidity... Guns would help this situation? As far as I'm aware, no-one has died or had any serious, life-threatening injuries since the riot began (I may be wrong). I don't imagine that being the case if everyone and their mother owned a gun.Also; I really wouldn't argue with Josh about law.This may sound completely irrelevant to begin with but I genuinely think that the economic environment contributed to this happening a large amount. If a riot began and you could see people were out getting free TVs or free computers from shop windows while you're sitting at home struggling to find a job, you'd be tempted. The fact that it started in Liverpool and all these other places not directly linked to Tottenham is probably because youths saw it as a chance at getting a quick buck so pounced. If the country was in a more stable state to begin with, there would have at least been fewer people on the streets looting.Luckily I haven't been effected yet. The closest rioting area to me is Woolwich and that's still 30 or so miles away. All I do know is that Charlton won't be playing at the weekend Link to comment
Unbeaten Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Luckily I haven't been effected yet. The closest rioting area to me is Woolwich and that's still 30 or so miles away. All I do know is that Charlton won't be playing at the weekend http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAzhZ4VPd9k&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYuMPw6Yi3k&feature=player_embeddedThe last video is pretty brutal. The teenager is bleeding/disorientated, a gang pretends to help him then mugs him. Link to comment
Dan G Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Okay I admit, I don't know when to use effected or affected. You got me Link to comment
Unbeaten Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 And with that amazing victory under my belt, I'm going to watch TV. Link to comment
Cpatel23 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I hear the loot being gained during these riots is equal to the amount of the L.A. riots. Didn't think british people could steal like african american people. well done! Link to comment
Mike Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I hear the loot being gained during these riots is equal to the amount of the L.A. riots. Didn't think british people could steal like african american people. well done!Implying the ones looting aren't the black brits. Link to comment
John Kleppe Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 The OJ case didn't even set the precedent. It's a basic premise of tort law. Older than the French Civil Code. Older than English Common Law. Older than the Jus Civil. Seriously thousands of years old Doc, I'd be wary of assuming that, just because you haven't heard of a particular kind of case, that it doesn't exist. If the New York Times were a reliable source of legal information, attorneys wouldn't make as much money as they do.To be honest Joshjrn, I doubt I know the first thing about law. I know only what I've been taught - in school - but outside of the school system, it hasn't sparked a single bit of my interest, so I don't care to learn anymore. You have much more experience with this Joshjrn, could you just tell us if you can be sued or have to pay restitution for the murder of a person if they break into your home and attempt to steal something?But if you kill someone simply because they are stealing your TV, you are going to jail after being convicted in a criminal trial and you would be sued in a civil trial if you are deemed a worthwhile target.Well! Can't say I didn't learn anything today.Thanks. SoHow are those riots goin'?L2castledoctrine Link to comment
Mike Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Oh man, just got done watching this vid.http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=715_1312794818But instead of thinking of rioting. Think of zombies. There are surviors inside, and the zombies break down the door. Next the alarm goes off and they swarm to the area. Link to comment
Jake Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Okay I admit, I don't know when to use effected or affected. You got me "Most of the time affect with an a is a verb and effect with an e is a noun."http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/affect-versus-effect.aspx Link to comment
Muse Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) The OJ case didn't even set the precedent. It's a basic premise of tort law. Older than the French Civil Code. Older than English Common Law. Older than the Jus Civil. Seriously thousands of years old Doc, I'd be wary of assuming that, just because you haven't heard of a particular kind of case, that it doesn't exist. If the New York Times were a reliable source of legal information, attorneys wouldn't make as much money as they do.To be honest Joshjrn, I doubt I know the first thing about law. I know only what I've been taught - in school - but outside of the school system, it hasn't sparked a single bit of my interest, so I don't care to learn anymore. You have much more experience with this Joshjrn, could you just tell us if you can be sued or have to pay restitution for the murder of a person if they break into your home and attempt to steal something?But if you kill someone simply because they are stealing your TV, you are going to jail after being convicted in a criminal trial and you would be sued in a civil trial if you are deemed a worthwhile target.Well! Can't say I didn't learn anything today.Thanks. SoHow are those riots goin'?L2castledoctrineWhat I was gonna say. Josh you should know that, Louisiana has its own form of [it].POP POP POP WATCHIN' MUTHAFUCKAS DROP. Edited August 9, 2011 by Muse Link to comment
Dan G Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Okay I admit, I don't know when to use effected or affected. You got me "Most of the time affect with an a is a verb and effect with an e is a noun."http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/affect-versus-effect.aspxJust after I posted that, I went on google to find out the difference and my internet went down. Thank you, Sir Jake Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now