Cop shoot, kills teen after he skips out on check at IHOP

[Martin_Hyde]

@Little Plastic Ninja

IF the kid had skipped out on his bill AND

There’s not much if here, we have pretty good evidence it was intentional.

IF the kid had been driving AND
IF the kid was trying to hit the cop rather than be arrested THEN the cop was justified in using deadly force.
ELSE he wasn’t.

This is irrelevant. If the driver actually was trying to run down the cop then the cop had the right to use lethal force to defend himself as a last resort, simply because the cop’s bullets may hit one of the other criminals in the car instead of the driver doesn’t mean the cop was unjustified in firing.

I would agree however if the cop deliberately killed someone in the passenger seat he’d not be able to argue he was acting in self defense, there’s no evidence of that at the moment. There’s no evidence of a lot of things (we don’t know if the car was trying to run the cop down, we don’t know if he was in a situation where he had no other choice) in this situation.

But whether or not he was driving is irrelevant. If he was in a car that was being used as a deadly weapon against a police officer, and is accidentally shot, that doesn’t influence whether or not the cop was justified in shooting. It’s like the sad case a few months back of a police officer shooting a 3 year old girl in the process of shooting the man who was using her as a human shield. I don’t believe the police were punished in that case because they were being fired upon, and had the authority to respond to lethal force with lethal force.

If you are speeding, you are committing a crime. It’s a traffic offense but it’s still an offense. Hyde, I hear you saying you have never been pulled over for speeding. That was not a statement that you have never been speeding.

Again, speeding is not a crime in my state. It isn’t in the criminal code nor does speeding make you guilty of a crime. You guys don’t seem to understand the definition of crime so I’d refer you to the Code of Virginia.

But hey, let’s assume you’ve never committed a single crime. You’ve never driven a half-mile per hour over the speed limit, you’ve never jaywalked, you’ve never had a parking ticket from an expired parking meter, you’ve never driven barefoot, and you come to a complete and full stop at every stop sign.

Everywhere I park that is metered is ran by a private entity, so if I did exceed the allowed parking time it wouldn’t be a crime, it’d just mean the owner of the parking area had the legal right to assess a fee on me. It’s like saying if you have ever paid your electric bill late (and thus had to pay a penalty) you’ve committed a crime, that is not the case.

And I’ve already explained to you that speeding isn’t considered a crime here. It isn’t dealt with in criminal court, it isn’t covered under the criminal code, it doesn’t go on a “criminal record.” It isn’t a misdemeanor or a felony. Larceny is a crime in the criminal code, depending on the specifics it is a misdemeanor or a felony.

Assuming that, can you also agree that not all of us reach that level of saintly perfection? If you consider a criminal to be anyone who has committed an offense on the lawbooks as illegal, then you are painting with a very, very broad brush. Most of the people you admire have probably, at some point, committed a minor crime. Some may have committed a major one. Does that mean that the world is better off if they’re shot?

I don’t consider everyone who has ever broken any law to be an especially nefarious criminal, and I’ve never said that. You just want to prop up that strawman because it is so easily shot down. There are obviously different levels of criminality and there are people who may accidentally break the law with no malice involved. They are a far cry different from someone who steals from a restaurant and then tries to flee from the police. That shows a criminal nature and thus means society is better off for losing someone like that.

Anyways, the hypotheticals are stupid in your argument. There’s a big difference between breaking the law in such a minor way you’d never get caught and in fact the police wouldn’t even do anything if they saw you doing it an fleeing from the police after stealing.

[Martin_Hyde]

@wring

you seem to have particular difficulty reading

I actually did read that, and I misread it because when it stated that shipping charges did not count towards the $100 limit I didn’t read further and realize they differentiated between shipping and “shipping and handling.” Either way, I order a lot of stuff from the internet for business related purchases, but that isn’t something that is filed in my personal income taxes, that is something that is dealt with via the accountants who deal with my business. And they certainly do pay the use tax for my business.

Me, the person, I don’t believe I’ve ever ordered more than $100 in items in a calendar year. I order a lot of stuff but it isn’t typically expensive. And I also don’t pay a shipping charge at all which is why I made the statement (I get free shipping through Amazon.com.)

Either way it’s still irrelevant. So what, I was wrong about the tax code, I have accountants for a reason. And I’m pretty confident I won’t be getting charged with tax evasion because I’m positive they know more about the Virginia tax code than you and probably more about it than any IRS agent or Virginia tax man that would want to come after me.

It’s further irrelevant because I still haven’t gone over that $100 limit and thus still wouldn’t have to report it and thus still haven’t committed tax evasion.

PERIOD

I have not committed tax evasion, I have not spent more than $100 in a calender year on items for which I did not pay a sales or use tax.

Happy?

Your whole tax evasion argument is worthless because, eventhough I was wrong about the tax code, I’ve told you from the beginning I haven’t spent more than $100 in a calendar year.

I’m not a criminal, maybe you are, it’s almost criminal you’ve wasted so much effort demonstrating facts about a tax code that do nothing except reenforce the fact I haven’t violated it.

I called you a thief. and yes, tax evasion is indeed a crime. Always prosecuted? no. but still a crime. as for the “mistake”, Richard Hatch tried that defense. It didn’t work.

Yes, but tax evasion isn’t theft, it’s tax evasion. So, even if I hadn’t gone over the $100 limit (which I haven’t, thus this entire post is a waste of your time and mine) I wouldn’t be a thief, I’d be a tax evader.

Richard Hatch attempted to defend his evasion of taxes by saying it was all a mistake, he thought some other party was responsible, that he didn’t intend to evade. Didn’t work for him, either. remember, the amount of the theft is apparently irrelevant - the theft of $20 seems to be in the same category of offenses as a Mob boss or serial killer.

Just because someone claimed it was a mistake, and it was found out that it was not, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t matter whether or not it is a mistake. If you read the Federal code it specifically labels tax fraud as the delibetate misleading etc etc, if it is not deliberate then it is not a crime. What’s so hard to understand? Obviously, Richard Hatch had proof against him that it was deliberate. It wasn’t that it was an accident and it was still a crime, like you seem to be implying. It was that he was lying it wasn’t an accident, and thus a crime.

again, since your self serving self has repeatedly read the same fucking page of the tax code w/o comprehension, I simply in good conscience cannot accept additional self serving declarations of fact from you. Especially here, since you’re relying on your memory of your actions from the past year. When you’re not able to see the words in front of your face when you look at a linked page, I don’t have any reason to trust that you correctly assess information that isn’t right in front of your nose.

Whatever, I’ve never committed a crime. And I’ve never been arrested or charged with a crime either.

Ultimately this is all moot. Because I never fled from a police officer, I never was in a car that may have been trying to kill a police officer. I never would put myself in that situation. At worst, even if I’m guilty of the horrifying crime of not reporting $5 in use tax, I wouldn’t flee from the police over it and thus put myself in a situation where I would be shot.

The primary reason I’m glad when criminals like this die isn’t the exact fact that they’ve broken the law, but the fact that they are violating the order of society. Someone who doesn’t report something on their taxes isn’t causing disorder in society, they have committed a crime but it is a crime that doens’t cause disorder if it’s of a low magnitude and doesn’t involve attempted fleeing from police and etc.

And back the issue at hand: I’ve never committed tax evasion.

Thanks for playing, thanks for wasting everyone’s time. But, as much as you want to believe everyone in the world is degenerate scum like your dead friend Aaron Brown, they aren’t. And I’m not, I’ve never committed a crime.

[Merijeek]

@Martin Hyde

I actually did read that, and I misread it because when it stated that shipping charges did not count towards the $100 limit I didn’t read further and realize they differentiated between shipping and “shipping and handling.” Either way, I order a lot of stuff from the internet for business related purchases, but that isn’t something that is filed in my personal income taxes, that is something that is dealt with via the accountants who deal with my business. And they certainly do pay the use tax for my business.

Huh. Who would have ever imagined he’d start to weasel.

(bats eyelashes)

-Joe

[bup]

@Martin Hyde

Again, speeding is not a crime in my state. It isn’t in the criminal code nor does speeding make you guilty of a crime.

Bullshit. Try googling “Virginia traffic violation strict-liability crime.”

And, if Bricker, or somebody else who’s a member of the Virginia bar sees this, please settle this.

@Martin Hyde

I don’t consider everyone who has ever broken any law to be an especially nefarious criminal, and I’ve never said that. You just want to prop up that strawman because it is so easily shot down. There are obviously different levels of criminality and there are people who may accidentally break the law with no malice involved.

@Martin Hyde

Criminals are a plague on society, and in all likelihood this officer, whether his life was in danger or not, performed a valuable service by shooting that criminal.

If walking out on a $26 check, and be honest - you have no fucking idea if he even ordered anything - makes you a “criminal,” so that society is better off if you’re dead, that’s just fucked.

It’s easy to rattle off names of people who committed crimes as youths and turned out to be great people when they grew up - because they weren’t shot dead.

[Martin_Hyde]

@Merijeek

Huh. Who would have ever imagined he’d start to weasel.

(bats eyelashes)

-Joe

It’s not a matter of weaseling. I’m still standing by the fact that I’ve never committed tax evasion. And even if I did, it wouldn’t have been deliberate, and thus it wouldn’t be tax evasion the crime it would be an error in filing.

Has anyone here ever committed an error in filing their taxes? I never have. But I know people who have, you just get the IRS telling you about your error and what has to be done to correct it. Talk of crimes or prosecutions or even fines typically aren’t even involved.

You guys can wax philosophic all you want, but I know I’ve never committed a crime, maybe everyone else on this degenerate cesspool of a forum has, but I never have. And I’m absolutely sure of that fact.

Anyways, either way, I’m alive and well because I’m not a degenerate scumbag who runs from police, and Aaron Brown is dead because he is.

End of story.

[Martin_Hyde]

@bup

Bullshit. Try googling “Virginia traffic violation strict-liability crime.”

And, if Bricker, or somebody else who’s a member of the Virginia bar sees this,

The whole basis for my argument that traffic violations aren’t crimes is Bricker said so in another thread.

Furthermore I think you guys are trying to stretch the definition of criminal in any case. No one considers speeders criminals, everyone considers thieves criminal.

And I think the laws even support this since speeding isn’t in the criminal code.

[Martin_Hyde]

Anyways, if I’d ever been speeding and a cop wanted to pull me over, I’d do so. I wouldn’t try to flee, that’s the difference between people like Aaron Brown and respectable society.

Even if I have committed some vaguely defined crime, it’s still a moot point because I don’t consider everyone who has ever violated any statute to be a “criminal.” That isn’t how I use the word nor is it how ANYONE ELSE uses the word because no one I’ve ever met uses the word criminal as synonymous with “person” which is basically what people on this forum seem to assert from time to time–that everyone is a criminal.

Misdemeanors and felonies are the “real crimes” not traffic violations (if they are even criminal.) Because misdemeanors and felonies involve an arrest, a charge being levied against you, and a trial to determine guilt or innocence.

[Cheesesteak]

@Martin Hyde

Misdemeanors and felonies are the “real crimes” not traffic violations (if they are even criminal.) Because misdemeanors and felonies involve an arrest, a charge being levied against you, and a trial to determine guilt or innocence.

Of course, there was no trial here. No due process. Only a single accusation of a petty crime.

[Merijeek]

@Martin Hyde

It’s not a matter of weaseling. I’m still standing by the fact that I’ve never committed tax evasion. And even if I did, it wouldn’t have been deliberate, and thus it wouldn’t be tax evasion the crime it would be an error in filing.

Has anyone here ever committed an error in filing their taxes? I never have. But I know people who have, you just get the IRS telling you about your error and what has to be done to correct it. Talk of crimes or prosecutions or even fines typically aren’t even involved.

You guys can wax philosophic all you want, but I know I’ve never committed a crime, maybe everyone else on this degenerate cesspool of a forum has, but I never have. And I’m absolutely sure of that fact.

Anyways, either way, I’m alive and well because I’m not a degenerate scumbag who runs from police, and Aaron Brown is dead because he is.

End of story.

Degenerate cesspool of a fourm? Well, you’d better get out before you get dirty.

After all, you managed to contradict yourself in your first and second lines.

Dipshit.

-Joe

[Contrapuntal]

@Martin Hyde

I tend not to read the writings of morons or the** mentally ill**, which is why I probably won’t read any more of your posts and is why I don’t read anything written by degenerate scum like Hunter Thompson.

(Bolding mine.)
Bullshit, you pathetic, lying excuse for a human being.

@Hyde

Also, the majority of this board is nothing but the representation of the worst and most despicable section of America. Degenerates, the** mentally ill,** the unwashed masses of extreme leftism that are literally a cancer upon mainstream society. The more credible I’m held by a bunch of degenerates the worse off I am as a person.

(Bolding mine.)

When asked why you hang around you said this–

@Hyde

I enjoy more an environment in which everyone disagrees with me than an environment in which everyone agrees with me. One leads to complaceny, the other does not.

You j have posted over 2600 times to a message board composed mainly of the mentally ill, and joyously so, by your own fucking admission.

You are a shit-stirrer, plain and simple.

[wring]

@Martin Hyde

Misdemeanors and felonies are the “real crimes” not traffic violations (if they are even criminal.) Because misdemeanors and felonies involve an arrest, a charge being levied against you, and a trial to determine guilt or innocence.

what makes you think that traffic violations can’t involve an arrest, a charge and a trial?

Richard Hatch had accountants, too. Guess who’s going to prison - Richard or the accountants.

Tax evasion is a crime, is prosecutable. And I call it theft 'cause the state is lacking funds that were due the state, tax evasion is a fancier way of saying “you denied money due the state, usurping for your own use money that wasn’t legally yours”. It’s simply more efficient to call it a theft.

thief.

(again, I reject your self serving declaration that you don’t think you’ve ordered more than $100 over the course of a year - because A. you’ve changed your claim several times now, including the ‘no, shipping doesn’t count’ crap, as well as ‘well it was intangible goods’ not to mention 'it was for my business and I’m quite sure my accountant blah blah blah". B. You simply haven’t kept track at all, you’re relying on your memory, not records. And you’ve demonstrated amply over the course of these pages that you’re not particularly good at even understanding what you’re looking at, let alone what isn’t in front of your face. I mean you didn’t even fucking finish reading the god damn paragraph? Q.E.D.)

[ExTank]

@Guinastasia

Yes, because a kid whose greatest crime is the old dine ‘n’ dash is just as bad as a mafia don.

:rolleyes:

Well, even Gotti had to start somewhere. :rolleyes: :dubious:

[The_King_of_Soup]

I’m convinced. A just world is one in which tax fraud is treated gently and respectfully, and those who run out on restaurant checks are shot. Because although one is a felony costing billions annually, petty thieves are the real criminals.

@Martin Hyde

You’re assuming there would be the trial.

No, Marty, I’m assuming there would be a trial. Tax crime doesn’t always result in a trial, and neither does dine-and-dash. But if you get caught at either and attempt to evade arrest and prosecution, you can expect some serious people to take an interest.

@Martin Hyde

Furthermore, how would a police officer catch me in the act of tax fraud? That’s not the kind of thing a beat cop could catch in the act.

Doesn’t have to be a beat cop, doesn’t have to be in the act. Commit a crime, get caught, get shot. That’s all that’s necessary for your next-of-kin to ponder the marvelous system that has subtracted another undesirable from our ranks, which is your philosophy, not mine.

@Martin Hyde

Reading the larceny statutes in Virginia certainly would’t exclude dine-n’-dashers.

Wouldn’t, Marty. The point is that it’s as easy to claim you innocently forgot to pay a restaurant check as it is to claim you forgot to pay taxes or accidentally wandered off with someone else’s property. Sure it’s hypothetical: it’s just telling that your imagination has no trouble coming up with excuses for yourself, but is completely out of ideas when it comes to anybody else.

@Martin Hyde

I tend not to read the writings of morons or the mentally ill, which is why I …

Don’t proofread?

@Martin Hyde

…probably won’t read any more of your posts and is why I don’t read anything written by degenerate scum like Hunter Thompson.

That hurts, Marty. Really, it does. But I didn’t get the impression that you come here to read, anyhow. I’ll keep following your posts, though: it’s like archaeology without all the dirt.

@Martin Hyde

I’m not worried about IHOP’s pancakes, but I am worried about criminal being loose in society and am thus glad that the police officer tried to apprehend them.

Now this brings everything to a screeching halt. Without the poisonous “he-was-a-criminal-so-it’s-good-that-he’s-dead” nonsense, it’s a moderate and unobjectionable position.

People, even petty thieves and tax-evaders, are not just one thing. That’s why penalties should be commensurate with the offense (and by the way: I wonder just what harm, in dollars, is caused by dine-and-dashers vs. tax evaders). It is not a benefit to society for anyone who commits any crime to be dead, nor is it just.

Even you aren’t just one thing, Marty: that body part can’t type.

[SteveG1]

@Martin Hyde

I tend not to read the writings of morons or the mentally ill, which is why I …

@The King of Soup

Don’t proofread?

That was fucking perfect!

[kidchameleon]

@bup

Bullshit. Try googling “Virginia traffic violation strict-liability crime.”

And, if Bricker, or somebody else who’s a member of the Virginia bar sees this, please settle this.

Filling out my SF-86 for the FBI were were advised, both by the Bureau and the police and lawyers who were applying, that a moving violation is an arrest and had to be included in that part of the form. You need to sign the ticket to be released on your own recognesance.

[Green_Cymbeline]

@Martin Hyde

Anyways, either way, I’m alive and well because I’m not a degenerate scumbag who runs from police, and Aaron Brown is dead because he is.

End of story.

You might not be a degenerate scumbag who runs from police…

But you’re sure as hell a DEGENERATE SCUMBAG!

[Guinastasia]

@nyctea scandiaca

You might not be a degenerate scumbag who runs from police…

But you’re sure as hell a DEGENERATE SCUMBAG!

Now now, let’s not insult degenerate scumbags by comparing them with Martin Hyde.

[Tenar]

@Mr Bus Guy

The hell of it is that today, IHOP was GIVING away pancakes.

Timing is sverything.

Was it Police Appreciation Day?

[kidchameleon]

@nyctea scandiaca

You might not be a degenerate scumbag who runs from police…

But you’re sure as hell a DEGENERATE SCUMBAG!

I’m sure not awake, I read that as Dirigible Scumbag…

[joyfool]

@Martin Hyde

Anyways, if I’d ever been speeding and a cop wanted to pull me over, I’d do so. I wouldn’t try to flee, that’s the difference between people like Aaron Brown and respectable society…

Goddammit, how do you KNOW? Has anyone conclusively, without a shadow of a doubt, proven that Aaron actually 100% did skip out on a ticket at IHOP? Did he even eat there that night/then? Was a portion of that $26 his? Well???

Until someone can verify by a cite that he did, then this all (and your attitude) is even more heinous than I could have ever imagined. You’d think this piece of the puzzle would be relevant, huh? :mad: