I base it off the fact the perpetrator had been released 7 times prior to this incident for the same exact thing
-
-
Replying to @chrisptacos1 @PierreSimonLap7 and
And that there are countless examples of homeowners and apartment residents getting sued by perps because the perp “tripped and fell” on a piece of carpet while robbing their house. That’s what I’m basing this on. And yes, sadly, this IS true.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kencharlson @chrisptacos1 and
No there are not. Please provide any citations. There are maybe 1 in million cases where the facts are weird or something, but not happening a lot AT ALL. Dare you to prove me wrong.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PierreSimonLap7 @chrisptacos1 and
There’s one. And I can do this all day long. You want more? It’s easy.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kencharlson @chrisptacos1 and
Lemme dig into the facts and I'll get back to you. But remember, you said if a perp slipped on a rug the homeowner would be liable. Im looking for something silly like that
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PierreSimonLap7 @chrisptacos1 and
We’re pointing out here that a perp is in somebody’s house, gets shot, and then the homeowner is sued and loses. The laws are protecting the perp rather than the homeowner. That’s where this convo started, and that’s what I’m showing here. Happy reading! :)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kencharlson @chrisptacos1 and
First, the perp didn't win this case. That article is just saying that the trial can go forward. A jury will decide if the homeowner loses. I suspect the only reason it can go forward is because one side is claiming the perp was running away when shot thus unreasonable.
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PierreSimonLap7 @chrisptacos1 and
You asked
@chrisptacos what his response was based on and he gave you a clear response. You asked me for an example - I gave you two. It seems that you would rather not acknowledge the problem. To sum up, it seems you and I will be voting very differently in the next cycle.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kencharlson @chrisptacos1 and
idgaf how you vote. you gave me a case that wasnt even finished yet lol and now youre talking shit hahah unbelievable. You are arguing in bad faith and are making very little sense
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PierreSimonLap7 @chrisptacos1 and
The fact the the law only has my back to use deadly force if my life or someone near to me is in “imminent” danger means that, in real life, I have to sit down at the kitchen table with the intruder at 3:00am in my house and have a discussion about what they’re there to do.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I'm so sorry your fantasies about murdering people can't happen, that must be really hard for you
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.