Can we just Stop with the Innocent until Proven Guilty Nonsense!

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • JEBland

    INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Oct 24, 2020
    1,976
    113
    South of you
    So we can expect a trial for the Nashville shooter then so we can officially call her a murderer?
    No, because she was stopped mid-violent act.

    There's a monumental difference between
    1. Stopping violent A-hole in the middle of a violent act and
    2. Lynching someone after a crime has been claimed to have been committed just on the basis of an accusation.

    Due process and presumption of innocence are corner stones to a free society. If you want evidence of what happens when we remove it, just see how claims on college campuses are handled:


    Students of all stripes have had their names drug through the mud and deprived of the education and opportunities that they paid a mortgage for... All because of unsubstantiated claims and no ability to confront accusers, denial of representation, etc, etc

    You might say "well who cares about college" but the real question is that after seeing what a train-wreck shadow-processing has been on Title IX claims, do you really want to extend that to society at large?



    While we're on the topi of this particular incendiary accusation and due process... what's really confusing to me is people I have known (offline) who believe that we should actively sympathize with rapists, rehabilitate, and reroll the dice by releasing them into society but also think that because rape convictions are hard to secure that we shouldn't be concerned with all that due process nonsense. I don't know how a person comes to that as a "yeah, that makes sense" policy.
     

    Shadow01

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 8, 2011
    3,239
    119
    WCIn
    No, because she was stopped mid-violent act.

    There's a monumental difference between
    1. Stopping violent A-hole in the middle of a violent act and
    2. Lynching someone after a crime has been claimed to have been committed just on the basis of an accusation.

    Due process and presumption of innocence are corner stones to a free society. If you want evidence of what happens when we remove it, just see how claims on college campuses are handled:


    Students of all stripes have had their names drug through the mud and deprived of the education and opportunities that they paid a mortgage for... All because of unsubstantiated claims and no ability to confront accusers, denial of representation, etc, etc

    You might say "well who cares about college" but the real question is that after seeing what a train-wreck shadow-processing has been on Title IX claims, do you really want to extend that to society at large?



    While we're on the topi of this particular incendiary accusation and due process... what's really confusing to me is people I have known (offline) who believe that we should actively sympathize with rapists, rehabilitate, and reroll the dice by releasing them into society but also think that because rape convictions are hard to secure that we shouldn't be concerned with all that due process nonsense. I don't know how a person comes to that as a "yeah, that makes sense" policy.

    But we must adhere to the “innocent until proven guilty “

    without a trial she will always be innocent.
     

    wcd

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 2, 2011
    6,274
    113
    Off the Grid In Tennessee
    But we must adhere to the “innocent until proven guilty “

    without a trial she will always be innocent.
    Understanding the purple , but to many on the left she (it) whatever is being labeled as a victim, which is the biggest load of horse crap I have ever seen.

    once again I do not believe in dismissing the foundation of our legal system, although many in power already have and we are in a post constitutional society, I refuse to accept we can not call it the monster it was. And we must afford it the benefit of the doubt because of a lack of a conviction.
     

    Cameramonkey

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    31,682
    77
    Camby area
    Understanding the purple , but to many on the left she (it) whatever is being labeled as a victim, which is the biggest load of horse crap I have ever seen.

    once again I do not believe in dismissing the foundation of our legal system, although many in power already have and we are in a post constitutional society, I refuse to accept we can not call it the monster it was. And we must afford it the benefit of the doubt because of a lack of a conviction.
    Yep. Because a crisis counselor should have been sent in to talk to her.

    She just needed a hug, that's all.
     

    ShimmeringTrees

    Amish Jack Wagon
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 4, 2023
    128
    28
    Indiana
    Today lives remain forever changed, for some a void has been created that will never be filled . As I scroll through various sources, I remain in dismay with the fact Evil is allowed to rear its ugly head. Read most any article and you will note the author’s statement of suspect, or alleged shooter. Understanding law dictates that someone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I am absent any explanation as to why we need to protect a monster and not call them out for what they were?

    Rant off

    As I read through the topic, I think I understand what your frustration is. I believe the powers at be choose to downplay heinous crimes for the purpose of social reconstruction as conditioning. I firmly believe if every aspect of life didn't have targeted verbiage, they lay would see straighter. Such as, calling an AR an assualt rifle. Abortion vs murder. Egg vs Baby. Raping a child vs we only expanded the age gap 10 years. Not to digress, just implying that I believe I understand what you are writing and it is very much a subject that people must understand or otherwise be misled.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: wcd

    K_W

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Aug 14, 2008
    5,385
    63
    Indy / Carmel
    The fact that we do not put the dead on trial means that "alleged" is the correct legal term.

    Even though we have solid evidence, from a manifesto, from postings, from security video, from witnesses, from body cams, from the corpses... There will never be a trial for that evidence to be judged, by a jury, to be "proof". With no proof, there will never be a conviction. They will always remain "alleged".
     
    • Like
    Reactions: wcd

    wcd

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 2, 2011
    6,274
    113
    Off the Grid In Tennessee
    The fact that we do not put the dead on trial means that "alleged" is the correct legal term.

    Even though we have solid evidence, from a manifesto, from postings, from security video, from witnesses, from body cams, from the corpses... There will never be a trial for that evidence to be judged, by a jury, to be "proof". With no proof, there will never be a conviction. They will always remain "alleged".
    Well I am all for it. Let the trial begin I think there would be a lot to be gained in doing so. Things would come out motives would be made public etc.
     

    Cameramonkey

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    31,682
    77
    Camby area
    Well I am all for it. Let the trial begin I think there would be a lot to be gained in doing so. Things would come out motives would be made public etc.
    The bleeding hearts that are already calling her a victim would lose their fashizzle. They'd call it abuse.
     

    Donovan48

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 24, 2022
    29
    13
    Tippecanoe County
    "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal concept, and we should be grateful for it. It dates back to the Salem witch trials where women were accused of being witches and had to prove they weren't or be executed. Of course the process of proving they weren't witches usually killed them anyway. Years later people realized the folly of what they had done and asserted the presumption of innocence and put the burden of proof on the state. It doesn't change anything in the minds of non-lawyers anyway. No history book claims that John Wilkes Booth was the "alleged" assassin of Abraham Lincoln even though he never had his day in court.
     

    wcd

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 2, 2011
    6,274
    113
    Off the Grid In Tennessee
    "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal concept, and we should be grateful for it. It dates back to the Salem witch trials where women were accused of being witches and had to prove they weren't or be executed. Of course the process of proving they weren't witches usually killed them anyway. Years later people realized the folly of what they had done and asserted the presumption of innocence and put the burden of proof on the state. It doesn't change anything in the minds of non-lawyers anyway. No history book claims that John Wilkes Booth was the "alleged" assassin of Abraham Lincoln even though he never had his day in court.
    Guessing you have missed my point repeatedly.
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    Disagree if you will but I can not refer to It as alleged or suspect .
    Then don't.

    :dunno:

    What, you expect accurate accounts, proper terminology and unbiased, honest reporting out of today's media?

    :):

    Frothing at the mouth over every little tidbit of lunacy from the left doesn't bother them, but it will give you high blood pressure and maybe an ulcer or two. Who winds up losing here?

    I'm not saying to ignore what's going on, in general. But some here really need to unplug from the recreational outrage and go touch grass for a bit.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,914
    113
    Avon
    Well I was kind of referring absolutes such as the piece of fecal matter in Nashville. There was no question regarding its guilt no gray area not even a remote chance that there was any question of its actions.
    The concept of due process, and its corollary of innocence until proven guilty, are moot in circumstances such as the Nashville Shooter. One does not engage in a legal process requiring due process or the presumption of innocence when acting in justified self-defense in response to an ongoing, active, lethal threat. The attacker's actions resulted in and led directly to the use of deadly force in self-defense, to stop the lethal actions of the attacker.

    In that circumstance, the attacker has implicitly forfeited the right of due process and its resultant presumption of innocence.
     

    Donovan48

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 24, 2022
    29
    13
    Tippecanoe County
    Guessing you have missed my point repeatedly.
    You said, "I think my point has been lost on this one? I am not asking for to declare someone guilty of a crime with out it being adjudicated. I am asking why we need to call a deceased monster an alleged shooter, or suspect."

    I get your point. I don't think we need to use "alleged or suspect" so I don't. Some people may use it to appear sophisticated, but It is just a convention born of habit for most people. Maybe when they do we should ask them, "So you don't think they did it?"
     
    • Like
    Reactions: wcd
    Top Bottom