Interesting breakdown. I DONE LEARNT SOMETHIN TADAY!Agreed, and bonus points for citing caselaw!
Interesting breakdown. I DONE LEARNT SOMETHIN TADAY!Agreed, and bonus points for citing caselaw!
You are correct. Good that it all worked out as well as it did could have been a lot worse. Guarantee that IF the officer HAD used his gun when the guy was in reverse and then it rammed into the store and there was a fatality of an innocent bystander, the BNSF employee would be getting sued or court.I thought the poster was saying that the BNSF agent had the right to shoot the suspect once he rammed the truck into the store, as if that gave the agent carte blanche to shoot the guy anytime thereafter. If that's not what the poster was saying I goofed up. As a law enforcement officer, the agent was bound by Garner v Tennessee as to when he could use deadly force. He probably could have legally used deadly force as the suspect was driving the truck toward the store, but once it hit the store and the suspect exited the truck the right to use deadly force ended. However, the agent pretty clearly had the right to use deadly force when he did, as the suspect was approaching him with a taser. Courts have said that given the fact that if the taser is used on the cop, the suspect could take the cop's gun and use it on the cop or others, deadly force can be used.
They hire homeschool kids !Its in way south Lincoln. Cant rural kids work at really young ages?
Are we still talking about the attack or is this code for your exploits.And he was punching the lemonade dispenser.
And the troll from Minnesota was warning us about traveling to the Twin Cities?????Here is a link to an article. https://journalstar.com/news/local/...cle_51f1a2e0-6801-5f96-9161-b31622adc2b7.html
Seems perfectly straightforward to me. Shrug. Bad guy attacks people. Good guy lights his a** up after bad guy ignores instructions and tries to attack good guy. Good guy being a uniformed officer. Really not complicated.
He had some issues