maximilianfragglebottom
161324
6058
201
Jun 23, 2020 2:43 PM
maximilianfragglebottom
161324
6058
201
Bukkhockey
Stop using "murder" when incompetence or even negligence will suffice.
Humanzee2
It’s true. the single most important thing to stop police violence &corruption is to have serious consequences for bad behaviour. It’
thesmelge
I'm sure she'd be happy they named a law after her. You know, if she wasn't dead and nobody had faced repercussions for it.
cjandstuff
I'm still surrounded by people crying "if she'd just obeyed the law". You dense mutherfuker, she was in her apartment, SLEEPING! WTF!
SithElephant
Retroactively making things illegal is perhaps the only worse thing.
UranusSpelunker
Legally it’s more than likely manslaughter. What happened was a failure at every level. The judge who violated Supreme Court ruling should/
UranusSpelunker
/2 needs to be impeached, how the officers went about getting the warrant was bad faith and they need to be tried for that too.
snarflex
Ok but that's not how laws work.
TevishSzat
You know what we're not allowed to do? Implement Ex Post Facto laws. Everyone in that horrible situation acted in accordance with their >
TevishSzat
rights at the time. And the result was horrific but even if you did bring it to trial wouldn't result in a conviction The no-knock was >
TevishSzat
issued and shots were fired, the whole thing's what we call a SNAFU and banning no-knocks is the best result to prevent a repetition.
IrinaPalm
Stop with that reality and truth shit.
justabremelo
Police had warrant to enter, occupant has right to stand ground, police has right to return fire. The issue is no knock and no body cams.
Jackofslayers
they should be arrested but the logic of this post is beyond ignorant. You cannot arrest someone for something that was legal at the time
Trondheim
The only problem is you can't arrest someone based on a law that didn't exist at the time of the crime.
Snyder4Prez
I agree they need to be in prison, but legally it may be hard to get them there.
RoundThreeFIGHT
The problem with sending cops to prison is how to keep then alive once in there. that's some of the reason for protecting bad cops
Criscartersfallguys
This is why we just need a capitalistic monarchy. Then you wouldn’t have to wait.
caine224
There is exactly 0 chance that cop who were shot at first go to jail for anything. This is terrible but they didnt murder her. Murder has1/2
caine224
Legal requirements and this doesnt meet them. You dont want the law to give in to the mob, or you wont like it when it turns on you
Ryanator50
then release their names and addresses to the public. let the problem solve itself.
RoundThreeFIGHT
You are absolute scum to encourage that.
Ryanator50
yes I am.
nameofnick
It's difficult to retroactively apply the law in these situations, and probably not a precedent you want to set.
CKnowles
That's okay. The system was designed for precisely situations like this. If they have immunity, appeal up until SCOTUS rules that the law >
Illmakemyownusernamewithblackjackandhookers
The bigger issue is US law is set around a principle that you have to try people under the laws that applied at that time. Most places are
Illmakemyownusernamewithblackjackandhookers
It's unfortunate but I'm sure you could imagine the repercussions of allowing people to be tried under laws retroactively
CKnowles
No one is suggesting retroactive. Ex: 1A covers free speech, someone shouts 'Fire', court rules 1A wasn't meant for that.
CKnowles
was never meant to be interpreted that way, and the protection is unconstitutional.
dylanamanhouilhan
SCOTUS is the ones that established QI in the first place. People are always judged under the most light version of the law that was current
Isthe4thtimethecharm
I don't know the story. But I assumed the law was put in place because it would have been the only way to charge them. But no option.
dylanamanhouilhan
These things are always "in honor" so it doesn't happen again. Any liberal country doesn't allow laws to be retroactive
dylanamanhouilhan
So this new law cannot apply to them
CKnowles
I don't think anyone is suggesting charging them under the new law.
badgerthewitness
Then go to SCOTUS and ask for a new ruling.
dylanamanhouilhan
SCOTUS doesmt do that very often. Maybe 100 years after
pyr666
you can't apply laws retroactively.
digdoug78
Who was the actual target of the missing warrant and what was their crime and where are they now?
L1ota
Cops too busy handing out speeding tickets.
fastlanefreddy
Is it just me who perceives this murder as crooked cops robbing who they thought was a drug dealer?
Sionas
We could just lock them up ourselves. In this case we know they are guilty. So it would be justice.
IrinaPalm
Wow. That sounds positively......republican.
Bwrecka
Oh lookie! Another law for cops to break with zero consequences! Yay!!!
HelluvaEngineer27
Thing is you can't retroactively apply a new law. Just like if weed was legal federally tomorrow, people will still go to jail today.
Highlights333
Yeah! More useless laws!
KnownSecretCarrot
You can't arrest/prosecute on a law that does not yet, or previously exist. Sucks balls, but that is way the system works.
CKnowles
Here are some things we can do: Disbar the judge who signed this warrant. Fire these cops (doesn't need a court case, chief can just fire).>
CKnowles
Charge them for whichever degree of homicide you like, appeal the failure until a high enough court can say that whatever protection they >
CKnowles
have has been wrongfully used. If one court says "It's not murder bc..." SCOTUS can say "fuck that, you're wrong".
mondeca
Breonna's law would have prevented the "no-knock" warrant the cops were using. Of course, it was already a crime to kill someone.
ILogInToUpvote
"Not murdering people" has been a law for a long time.
JackalopeElope
The only way to get to 3rd degree murder is if they didn't identify themselves as cops. Wrongful death suit is a better pursuit.
probshouldntsayitbut
And there are lots of murderers roaming free ... from witnesses not speaking up to buying a verdict, the system is pretty fucked up
Alfadorfox
Yeah the law has to apply equally to everyone. If we don't want them to make up laws to prosecute us after the fact, we can't do the same.
KnownSecretCarrot
Unfortunately the system sucks and it is fly by night and hope it works. Unfortunately it's full of loopholes.
CKnowles
The two things are totally different, though. You can prosecute for murder even though you can't prosecute for kicking the door.
puddin151
Devils advocate, If it wasn't a law before they cant be tried, say a law were passed making something you did in the past illegal, it 1/2
puddin151
Wouldn't be fair or just to be prosecuted on something that is now illegal that wasn't when you did that thing 2/2
RogueCorp
Does it work in reverse, though? Like, it was a crime when you were arrested but isn't a crime by time you go to trial?
kushiro
That would be an ex post facto law, and those are prohibited under Article I of the US Constitution. So, yeah, unfair, but also illegal.
ILogInToUpvote
Devil's advocate here, "Not murdering people" has been a law for a long time.
kuriosly
thats laws never applied to cops though. They get an exception from most laws.
EveryNameIsTakenDammit
You guys needed to make a NEW law against murder?
PuzzledCompletely
The law bans no-knock warrants. The murder part was already illegal.
EveryNameIsTakenDammit
I'm sorry that you have to live like this.
Billyjimjoejohngerryjosephgeorgejames
NoonaComputerTerror
Recognize what they are doing by shutting down polling places. You can't vote if you can't get to a voting box
getotterhere
MrBobSaget
When he's at is best, there's nobody better.
BlackHartMTB
The woman who got it wrong was a cop. Lmao
The8obman
"This is a rap lyric?" kills me every time
pizzapartyhard
“Hangin’ in a jury!”
blastedsteak
Chappell so real. Voting is wrong answer, damn. Doesn’t hold back at all. Love his stand ups on Netflix.
AnythingMuchShorter
Yeah, voting is important, but you can only vote for the options on the ballot if you're not doing anything else.
magicrhombus
Republicans wouldn't be working so hard to stop black people from voting if it didn't work.
fluffmeister
While humorous, voting is important, get your votwr registration checked at vote.org
MrBobSaget
Honestly, I think that's the best part of this joke. It's sarcasm. "What? Voting? Of course that can't help anything! /s"
Boksha
It's not sarcasm. There's a chasm between helping and actually solving a problem. Yes, you should vote. No, that's not enough to fix it.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Nathanyel
hope you mean this in a positive way. If the other white guy in his 70s is elected, then at least it's possible that the next pres is not 1/
Nathanyel
2/ an older white guy.
Billyjimjoejohngerryjosephgeorgejames
THE ? VOTING ? MACINES ? ARE ? RIGGED.
rustyrascal
Also voting is rigged...
Navrodel
Highly vulnerable to tampering, likely all compromised in some way, and not independently verified before use, but probably not built rigged
AxelBeingCivil
... Why the bananas?
Billyjimjoejohngerryjosephgeorgejames
Cuz monkey business.
rustyrascal
For scale?
fluffmeister
Potassium is important for maintaining anger? Or it's to draw more attention to the post
buticantread
Did you read the one about prisoners counting toward electoral votes but not being allowed to vote? Or the mail in mess going on now.
iAmLrrrRulerOfThePlanetOmicronPersei8
Sounds like they’ll soon count as 3/5ths of a person soon
pleasesendcows
I requested a mail in ballot in the beginning of May and never received it. Primary is today, mail ins are due this week. Fucking bullshit
Falkh12
It's amazing how they were unable to prepare for something this predictable
fluffmeister
Aye it is bullshit, but dont let it stop you, fight through the bullshit and remember to vote in your local elections.
fluffmeister
Oh aye, ive hated gerrymandering since I learned about it in middle school, disassembling the electoral college and FPTP style elections is
fluffmeister
Important, start from the ground up, vote for your mayor, DA, and any elected positions in your local area as well as country-wide votes
kookyabird
Ranked choice baby! You can show support for other parties and still count towards the behemoth party of your choice!
MutatedFlamingo
Prisoners should be allowed to vote and required to participate. Reform and make them part of the community, not isolate and disenfranchise.
brownribbon
Prisoners should not be allowed to vote while in prison, but once released have all rights fully and automatically restored.
brownribbon
Also, prison populations should not count towards the population of the district where the prison is located.
fluffmeister
A-fuckin-men, cutting someone off from participating in ones community means they don't have buy-in and the easier path for them is recidivi
fluffmeister
Recidivism, like spend a bit of extra money on their first time through the system to give someone a skill (college or trades) and then
thecomfycat
humptysorthopedic
If what I read is true, cops had reason to *contact* Breonna or *watch* , not by busting in at 4am guns blazing.
LuminoZero
Let's ask the real Cosgrove what he thinks about these cops.
Kyuubles
Should publish where they sleep at night as well.
HopOnTheMagicSchoolBus
Wait I'm confused. Why do we want to ignore school shooters and terrorists, but remember these cops? Different motives?
BortSamps0n
Very these cops dont want the "fame" like terrorist and school shooters
parkerh17
School shooters and terrorists do it for the attention, not the case here so the perps names can be used without giving them what they want.
HopOnTheMagicSchoolBus
Not ignore! I meant not focusing on their names and their back stories.
DisgruntledFerret
The difference is school shooters and terrorists get arrested or killed.
DisgruntledFerret
When you can't even reach that minimum threshold, as with police officers who commit crimes without prosecution, the situation is different.
nduck1
Can we stop downvoting people to oblivion for asking legitimate questions?
HopOnTheMagicSchoolBus
I kinda answered my question while I was asking, but just wanted to make sure. Wasn't trying to be snarky. Some people have a lot of anger.
nduck1
I’m concerned that the anger is clouding judgement, and this cause is important. It’s completely acceptable to ask questions and seek answer
HopOnTheMagicSchoolBus
Yolo
Nevsaidso
Why are people down voting? Could have just responded succinctly as these fine people did!
eCheeseRunner
Fine, I changed my downvote. I think people are so cynical they assume trolling. Re-read it and it’s a fair question.
HopOnTheMagicSchoolBus
Much appreciated. I wasn't trying to be snarky, I just wanted to confirm what the game plan here is and fully understand.
only90skidswillgetthis
Because presumably people who shoot up schools or whatever want to be known to spread a message, cops don't want to be known as bad.
doctorofOT2017
Yes. The cops don’t want attention drawn to what they did while terrorists/school shooters often want the fame
BearRidingATrex
Yes. Mass shooters often want recognition of themselves & their “cause”. Police who abuse their position want anonymity to avoid backlash.
bonesizerandy1500
Also most the time a mass shooter/terrorist actually faces prison time.
Onimgurinsteadofworking
Or dies for their actions.
SomeDetroitGuy
The only dude to even have been fired was a guy with multiple sexual assault allegations. No arrest for them, either.
blastedsteak
What the fuck
coalminersknuckle
preparationh67
I'd still bet good money the dude had a dick fueled grudge against her.
williamrichards
What do you plan on charging them with?
SomeDetroitGuy
Wanton Murder, KRS § 507.020(1)(b).
MySpiritAnimalisBillMurray
Manslaughter/second degree murder, obstruction of justice, perjury, filing a false police report, conspiracy, felony murder. I could go on.
williamrichards
(1) you can't prove malice, so murder is out. A self defense argument gets them out of manslaughter charges, what are you using as evidence
PoorBoyChevelle
Some states have "depraved heart" murder classifications, which this would fit in
williamrichards
(2) for the report, perjury, and conspiracy charges? If you can prove they lied on the warrant, you might have something on one of them, but
williamrichards
(3) Even that would be difficult to make stick. In the eyes of the law, this is a tragic accident, not a crime committed
MySpiritAnimalisBillMurray
Again, lying on the report and warrant would be perjury. Covering would be obstruction of justice, and conspiracy re: same.
yitvan
They, and any other citizen, are responsible for every bullet that comes out of their firearm.
williamrichards
(1) A great rule for citizens and one disproven as applying to officers for criminal charges by decades of case law. Though the reason
78Hamster
This. ^
MySpiritAnimalisBillMurray
Former prosecutor here. 2nd degree does not require malice aforethought, thats 1st degree. Who shot first is a question of fact for a jury.
MySpiritAnimalisBillMurray
Meaning, accounts on who shot first differ, and should be given to a jury to determine the truth after explored by experts.
MySpiritAnimalisBillMurray
Despite reputation, juries aren't stupid. Shooting an unarmed citizen eight times, falsifying reports, & claiming self defense: hard sell
RoseSheepy69
Murder?
Kyrorayne
Obstruction of Justice, 1st degree manslaughter, filing a false police report, perjury, and conspiracy.
williamrichards
(1) You can prove the officers acted with malice? Something required to get even a 3rd degree murder charge in Kentucky? Assuming the
Craftylefty47
Does that mean you can’t convict a vigilante of murder in Kentucky?
williamrichards
What did the vigilante do?
thereisnoscotty
She was shot eight times, bud. Gonna have a hard time saying that's not malicious intent.
williamrichards
(1) Easy to claim, hard to prove. It was also how many cops? 8 rounds may sounds like a lot, but it's not like the standard is to only shoot
JonnyTightlips
Shooting an unarmed woman in her own home with no warranty against her while not announcing you are police...
williamrichards
(1) The woman might have been unarmed, but the woman's boyfriend who was shooting at the cops (maybe justifiably) certainly was not. As far
JonnyTightlips
Sounds malicious to me. Could even charge for him/them with voluntary manslaughter if can't prove a murder charge.
williamrichards
(2) officer's defense attorney isn't a complete idiot, the absolute best you could do is a manslaughter charge, and even that is almost
williamrichards
(3) unchargeable, to say nothing of convictable, because her BF shot first. "The officer was under fire and shot in self defense" is almost
SomeDetroitGuy
Wanton Murder would absolutely apply to someone blindly firing a weapon into a dark home he knows people are in.
SomeDetroitGuy
KRS § 507.020(1)(b), commonly called Wanton Murder doesn't require malice. It only requires:
SomeDetroitGuy
By firing blindly into a dark home he knew to be occupied and striking and killing Breonna Taylor (facts that are not in dispute), it meets
SomeDetroitGuy
3) and thereby causes the death of another person.
SomeDetroitGuy
1) circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life
SomeDetroitGuy
2) he wantonly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person
DirtPoorFarmerSeedingUsersub
Her "death" happened during normal "operational procedures." We classify as a "workplace incident;" she was not "murdered" @op
DirtPoorFarmerSeedingUsersub
mrsuzukiami
You at correct she was not murdered, but negligent homicide is still a very punishable crime and if they weren’t cops they’re in jail for 25
DirtPoorFarmerSeedingUsersub
I was being satirical nonetheless. Her death was a needless tragedy and was wantonly negligent
DirtPoorFarmerSeedingUsersub
I guess ppl didn't pick up on my excessive use of quotations
labmonkey4life
The quotation marks around “death” threw me. The others I got as sarcasm/satire, but I think calling it her death is fine
DirtPoorFarmerSeedingUsersub
That one was to overtly emphasize that something wasn't to be taken seriously with my comment
grandallbiognome
I got you
SomeDetroitGuy
That is some serious bullshit right there. The police fired blindly into the wrong apartment at innocent people. That's murder, period.
williamrichards
(1) The Police had a warrant. While executing the warrant they entered the apartment and were fired upon. They returned fire. This was a
williamrichards
(2) textbook case of why no-knock warrants should only be used in extreme circumstances, but this wasn't murder nor is your summary accurate
bmack2
No knock warrants should never be used no matter how extreme the circumstances. They should illegal period.
williamrichards
(1) You are aware of a group of KKK members with plans to shoot up a BLM protest. Your plan is to make the officers knock politely on the
JasonForge
My sister, who is far more left leaning and thorough than I am, believes that the officers should not be arrested. Which I am stumped about.
zenabel
What’s her reasoning
JasonForge
As she understands it - Officers had a lead where a witness/druggie listed Taylor's address as a pickup. Officers were in the right to (1/3)
Steven054
That's exactly how it works, she's right. It's pretty easy to understand. If it was a white guy we wouldn't even be talking about it.
JasonForge
approach and enter the house under the no-knock warrant. Officers were fired upon - and hit - therefore in the right to return fire. (2/3)
TastyBrainMeats
See, that's where I disagree strongly with her. You can't have a legal situation where BOTH parties are in the right to use deadly force.
[deleted]
[deleted]
JasonForge
She doesn't fault the officers, but rather the purpose and execution of the warrant. She's glad no-knocks are now prohibited. (3/3)
Alfadorfox
Huh. I think her reasoning is faulty but I agree they shouldn't be arrested now. Ex post facto laws and double jeopardy are still bad.
DrKriegersClone
Neighbors dispute their claim that they clearly announced themselves as police though. It's not enough to whisper 'police' while the 1/
DrKriegersClone
2/ occupants are sleeping, then bust in. Plus, supposedly she was hit multiple times by a cop shooting from outside the window. That sounds
LuluKazoo
Serious question: doesn't that mean her murder was somehow legal if a law was passed to prevent similar things?
JackalopeElope
If cops followed procedure and their conduct was never exactly ruled illegal/unconstitutional: it's cool. Basically, think "Air Bud" rules.
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
Apparently if a cop "accidentally" kills someone, then it's fine
IrinaPalm
Cops have qualified immunity.
AlienNippleAntennae
Which is absolutely bullshit.
IrinaPalm
Not really but you hold on to that real tight.
AlienNippleAntennae
Love that mute button go maga idiot! Go!
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
7 downvoters think arresting murderers is a bad idea. Good job guys
prepeymad
Well... 56 for you.
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
67 and rising
prepeymad
Holy shit 72!!
MatrimBloodyCauthon
Some people GLORIFY cops like they're not regular people in a profession that's utterly broken and easy to get into and abuse.
pillageandplunder
It is now at 80
pillageandplunder
Sorry 114
HiIMRickHarrisonAndTHISisMyPawnShop
Some people just see anything from Twitter and Instantly downvote without reading. I can't really blame them considering what Drumpf spews
itsmesteve
You say downvoters. I say racists.
KarmannGeezer
Probably cops.
AHopelesslyRomanticBOOB
116 now. Idiots
Leaps
I think arresting murderers is a good idea. I also downvote any post where the OP can’t be bothered to write a title.
Jackofslayers
No some of us just know what the term Ex Post Facto means.
PigsWeGetWhatPigsDeserve
So far, 19 people don’t agree with you saying this either.
philthy
And, we're upto 28 at this time!
philthy
That sounded like I'm happy...I'm not, to be clear. 28 idiots.
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
49 now
PigsWeGetWhatPigsDeserve
57!
drame
Maaaan stop doing that. Not everyone downvoting have to be made the enemy. Some just get tired of american politics. (heads up i voted up)
GroovyCrowley
There are still people that think Hitler was a great guy. Morons gonna moron.
lasagnapizza
What do you mean? Hitler KILLED Hitler. That's quite the feat if you ask me.
EveryBodyLovesMe
I’ve pointed it out before. >15,000 views, if only 50-something accidentally hit a button before moving on, that’s about right.
twozerooz
Probably not the case, im guessing.
morelikeconsham
Or 7 downvoters that accidentally pushed the downvote button. Or 7 that think imgur should be used exclusively for funny pictures. Or 7 that
morelikeconsham
argue that you can't punish people for laws that didn't exist yet. Getting upset over such a tiny margin is completely unreasonable.
Crazywelderguy
I get what you are saying, but the legal system is a tricky, sticky, imperfect thing. It's what allowed those cops to do what they did in 1/
Crazywelderguy
in the first place. Should the be charged? absolutely. Legally? I'm not a lawyer, but depending on the laws, it does set a dangerous 2/
Crazywelderguy
precedent to charge someone based on a law that didn't exist when they committed the crime, even if the deserve it. Someone committing a 3/
OrangeFlavours
Or they just don't like politics. It's never a good idea to go "You don't like this? Fuck you, you're on the opposite side, you're a bad guy
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
I'm just stating my opinion is all. If they truly don't like politics they won't bother scrolling to my comment anyway
OrangeFlavours
Yeah but it just annoys me every time I see people concerned that the front page post with thousands of upvotes and a hundred thousand 1/
OrangeFlavours
2/ views, has god forbid, 10 downvotes.
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
I had no idea this was going to blow up, at the time the upvote/ downvote ratio was 50:50
Winowill
Wrongly guessing what is in the mind of others is what leads to hate and discord. Be kind to each other. That is where lasting change starts
Winowill
I for one am all for their arrests, and upvoted the post, but there are reasons not tied to personal beliefs to downvote
Callito
No. But if you don't have the laws in place to punish in certain crime you shouldn't be allowed to. In Germany we got a specific
KilljoyWasHere
I mean murder is fucking illegal here, but I’m sure the DA and the Policemen’s union struck a dirty deal.
MyNameIsJesusAndIStealHubcapsFromCars
i mean, it's illegal to murder people.
Callito
Paragraph in our constitution that forbids sentencing someone if the corresponding law wasn't in place before the crime was committed.
plaguegremlin
It was unlawful search and seizure, because their suspect was already in custody. So they should be arrested, because they did break the law
plaguegremlin
And that was a law before the crime was committed
Callito
According to Wikipedia the suspect was arrested 2 hours after the shooting. https://eu.courier-journal.com/story/news/2020/05/12/breonna-tay
Callito
I know it sucks in this case. But you don't want your goverment to be able to make up new laws and punish you for the past.
Ultemus
Still... The murders...
Callito
Yes. And still humans with certain rights that can't be taken away.
damogen
I am not an expert in American law, but I am reasonably confident that murder has been a crime for some time
HessianGhost
We have that in America too. This new law specifically outlaws no knock warrants. Blindly and recklessly firing a weapon was already a crime
caine224
This wasn't murder so they can be arrested for murder. See how that works? U cant make crimes appear because you r mad. Not a system u want
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
Not even a trial? Not even a satisfactory police report? No video evidence? How do you know it wasn't murder?
caine224
They likely didnt even know she was there, so how did they plan beforehand to kill her? What evidence would you present to convince a jury>
caine224
That these officers wante/planed to kill her? That they sprayed bullets all over as a cover and breonna was the real target?
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
It was a botched operation. There was obstruction of justice via the "police report". They were obviously shooting in her direction.
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
It was her house!
caine224
So? Also they returned fire, didnt go in guns blazing. The fact that they shot almost everything in the house indicates that they had no >
maximilianfragglebottom
There's a shocking number of 8chan rejects in usersub
StarscreamAndHutch
What is this 8 Chan?
sordatos
Is the depraved brother of 4chan.... Let that sink
RideTheStimutacs
What's the sink doing outside?
Anxietynlifting
But 4chan is already a depraved version...
sordatos
That's my point
GizmosBabySitter
Its twice as bad as 4chan.
daanibf79
A website that censors nothing in the name of "freedom" but is basically just an outlet for depraved people to say and post horrible things.
PrinceSamaSanChanKun
There's multiple chan websites???
angrytaco
I know of 2, 4, and 8. The are others
birkenstocksarerad
yup.
Wolvenlight
So, so, so many. Dozens upon dozens. Though last I checked was probably a decade ago.
snarflex
Arresting murderers is great! Creating a law and then going back and prosecuting based on it post-facto is 100% illegal.
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
They broke into her home without a warrant and murdered her in cold blood. If that isn't already illegal then what the fuck
Leeloothedog
they had a warrent. not that it makes it any better. if anything it makes it much worse.
Leeloothedog
warrant
BrumpoTungus
Murder was already illegal.
OrangeFlavours
Then why is there a new law based off her name?
BrumpoTungus
See your username. The new law regulates no-knock warrants, not murder.
OrangeFlavours
What are no-knock warrants?
Atomic2
You speak the truth and they hate you for it. Sadly, what the officers did wasn't illegal when they did it, hence the need for the law.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Atomic2
No I think he is just responding to the post that alleges we should be arresting the officers. I dont think anybody is arguing that Breonna>
Atomic2
deserved to die, or defending her death in any way. But hes right in saying that we can't prosecute officers for committing a crime that >
BrumpoTungus
Murder was illegal.
Atomic2
Yea but because they were entering the home legally and were fired upon, their returning fire was considered self defense.
SnowpersonHitInTheFaceWithALackOfCreativity
If they did nothing wrong, why are they getting fired?