Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 96818	2009-01-24 18:06:00	I suppose the Police well be blamed again.	Trev (427)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
741797	2009-01-25 13:17:00	The driver of the sky line should definitely be held accountable for the death of this guy; he was the one that created the situation in which the accident happened. This can also be applied to the "deer hunting" analogy - if there was no deer to be hunted (i.e., deer never existed) the total number of deer hunters killed by their hunting "buddies" would be nil.	Fifthdawn (9467)
741798	2009-01-25 13:20:00	Hah. Like you don't. And don't think I'm an idiot. You said that not in a literal context. You said that as a leverage to attack my personal opinion from. And now that's been pointed out by me, you conveniently pull out the fact to cover up what you actually meant. No no, I know you don't care. I'm just letting you know. A bit of knowledge doesn't hurt anybody. Go shove that apology up your insincere ass. Oh, and please answer me this question - why did you deliberately leave out the 'bludger' part when I said 'welfare bludger'? I guess I'm just not invested enough in winning a little scrap like this on an internet forum to keep it going. You win.	Deane F (8204)
741799	2009-01-25 13:31:00	The driver of the sky line should definitely be held accountable for the death of this guy; he was the one that created the situation in which the accident happened. The police shot the guy accidentally - not the guy that caused the callout. The offender who caused the callout did not pull the trigger and he did not kill the bystander. There is no actus reus and no mens rea. He did not premeditate the death of the bystander or even kill him accidentally - how can he be held accountable?	Deane F (8204)
741800	2009-01-25 17:22:00	And this conclusion is substantiated by private PMs. Frankly, I find it laughable that you think your private message buddys' opinions of me "substantiates" anything. This went into PM for the both of you as well? OMG Whoever started that needs to get a life :horrified Anyway, yeah the police will look into it, but its going to be near impossible sorting which officer shot the victim. No charges will be laid as a result... but hopefully there will be something positive come from this (maybe a relook at police procedure)	Myth (110)
741801	2009-01-25 17:51:00	The police shot the guy accidentally - not the guy that caused the callout. The offender who caused the callout did not pull the trigger and he did not kill the bystander. There is no actus reus and no mens rea. He did not premeditate the death of the bystander or even kill him accidentally - how can he be held accountable? Although not fully accountable, in my eyes his actions created the situation. As for the cop, basic gun rules: Identify your target beyond all doubt. www.police.govt.nz Bad judgement on his behalf and should be dealt with whether it was accidental or not.	rob_on_guitar (4196)
741802	2009-01-25 18:42:00	You guys should settle this like men . Have a fight after school over by the swings . I think that should be ,like boys . "Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed”	Cicero (40)
741803	2009-01-25 18:48:00	I think I know what happened. The offender was on the back of a flat deck truck trying to get into it and aiming his rifle at the driver through the back cab window (or the side). So the police shot at him from the side of the motorway. The shots missed him (aside from some shrapnel) and carried on and went into the van in which the innocent guy was sitting and one of the shots killed him. I had originally thought that the police had shot at the van directly and got confused as to who was the offender and who was the innocent guy. Very sad, so you can hardly blame the police as they would not have had time to see what was behind their target. They could just see him aiming at a member of the public. So they had to shoot then. But they should have shot at him earlier as he was running towards the flat deck truck.	Digby (677)
741804	2009-01-25 19:59:00	The policeman broke the cardinal arms code rule of firing a gun. ID your target and take into account area behind the target. If you cant dont pull the trigger. The offender only has a .22 which the police would see from the size of the barrel and action. The policeman failed to do this. You cant just fire a gun and kill an innocent person and say tragic accident how sad. In NZ its almost impossible to claim self defense using a gun. The police always seem to prosecute and its history for your gun license. Next time you get attacked in your home you will be defenseless so use gun wisely you have one chance. If I fail to do something at work and someone gets killed at work OSH will prosecute no questions asked so this shouldn't be any different. Silence from Pressf1 OSH god is deafening. I agree with Dean you cant blame the crook for someone else killing a person. Be as bad as Saudi Arabia. If you are a foreigner and have a traffic accident with a local its always your fault, because if you weren't in Saudi Arabia there wouldn't have been an accident. And its enshrined in Saudi law.	prefect (6291)
741805	2009-01-25 20:26:00	I think I know what happened. The offender was on the back of a flat deck truck trying to get into it and aiming his rifle at the driver through the back cab window (or the side). So the police shot at him from the side of the motorway. The shots missed him (aside from some shrapnel) and carried on and went into the van in which the innocent guy was sitting and one of the shots killed him. I had originally thought that the police had shot at the van directly and got confused as to who was the offender and who was the innocent guy. Very sad, so you can hardly blame the police as they would not have had time to see what was behind their target. They could just see him aiming at a member of the public. So they had to shoot then. But they should have shot at him earlier as he was running towards the flat deck truck. You are basicly right Digby. www.nzherald.co.nz :(	Trev (427)
741806	2009-01-25 20:54:00	The offender only has a .22 which the police would see from the size of the barrel and action. .22 calibre weapons are not popguns. People seem to think that they are little more than air rifles but they are quite lethal. And the .22 magnum round can make quite a mess too.	Deane F (8204)
1 2 3 4 5 6