LadyEternity
Posts: 31
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
|
stef: I have all ready admitted that I had a memory lapse. The incident occured 10 years ago and I do not have a photogenic memory. I am a writer and a Mistress, not a weapons expert. However, suggesting to someone you don't know that their inability to remember whether a bullet was hollow point or rainbow striped makes them a liar, is rude, and also avoidance behavior. You don't live in my state, county, or city. You are unfamiliar with the ordinances in the town I lived in 10 years ago. Why would you assume that the police were not obligated to retrieve unspent rounds. In fact, in most suburbs of Chicago, police are required to retrieve even shell casings as there could be a crime linking a bullet to a fired weapon used in a crime. It is not legal to flush drugs, legal or illegal, down a toliet and to have police suggest to me to do that with crack was irresponsible at best, illegal at worst. To suggest that I toss dirty needles in the garbage? But instead of debating these reasons I give for supporting my personal belief that police do not uphold laws unless a major crime has been committed, only my mistake in memory is used. Not to defraud or disprove my facts or my opinions, but to try to label me a liar and thus make every point I've made pointless by suggesting I am a liar with nothing poiniant to say? This is a political forum for sharing ideas, not running for office and slandering the opposition.
I am glad for anyone who's memory is so photogenic they can remember perfect details from a decade ago. After car accidents and seizures and PTSD, I do not have a photogenic memory and sometimes I'm lucky I remember what I had for dinner last night. So again, I ask. Whether the bullet was hallow point or rainbow striped, the law said the police were supposed to come and get unfired rounds and write a report. They refused to do so. Just in the (now hypothetical) case of Brianna being slapped around by a boy, the police refused to arrest the person who actually caused bodily harm to another.
THAT was why I came out of a 4 year retirement to comment to one post. Because it infuriates me the way teenage boys are (often) allowed to walk away from a situation that breeds abusers. That boy physically assaulted a girl. He not only walked away, but watched the police arrest a woman trying to defend her from said abuse. The police, the very people who are supposed to protect people from abuse, showed him that he could get away with hurting a female. That it was ok to hurt a woman and not be punished for it. He actually caused bodily harm to another. The mother did not. She was trying to prevent bodily harm to another.
We live in a land where we are guaranteed inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That girl's rights were violated when he placed his hands on her. The mother did not deprive the boy of life or liberty, she did not shoot him. He is not imprisoned. Yet she is the (hypothetical) villain because she picked up a weapon in defense of another persons life, liberty and happiness. (Where i come from those that do that are lauded as heroes. They wear uniforms and go by branches like Army, Navy, Marines. Why is it they are heroes for defending the weak but because I am not sanctioned as a killer by Uncle Sam, I cannot hold up a gun in defense of my child being beaten? And don't anyone dare go off on me as being non-supportive of the military. I have a dozen Marines who will refute that claim)
I was right. I'm not ready for a second coming. *waves at DarkSteven* maybe another time
|
RE: mother arrested for protecting daughter - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread