Results 1 to 10 of 62
Threaded View
-
4th December 2014, 05:54 #26
- Join Date
- Mar 2001
- Location
- Sep 1666
- Posts
- 10,462
- Like
- 15
- Liked 201 Times in 155 Posts
Can you prove that? That's a bold claim.
The problem with US law is that there is no inherent right to life (unless it's covered by the tenth amendment or possibly the fifth) and so consequently, the only directives you have to play with are the rulings of the Supreme Court; thus:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed...71/1/case.html
Apprehension by the use of deadly force is a seizure subject to the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement. To determine whether such a seizure is reasonable, the extent of the intrusion on the suspect's rights under that Amendment must be balanced against the governmental interests in effective law enforcement. This balancing process demonstrates that, notwithstanding probable cause to seize a suspect, an officer may not always do so by killing him. The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable.
- Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)
Is something which might be "constitutionally unreasonable", legal?The Old Republic was a stupidly run organisation which deserved to be taken over. All Hail Palpatine!
Amazing Oliver. Just to manage now please
[WRC] Delfi Rally Estonia 2025