Archived Black Georgia Sheriff Says Rayshard Brooks Shooting Was 'Completely Justified' (thegatewaypundit.com)
submitted ago by Mustard_Monkey
Posted by: Mustard_Monkey
Posting time: 6 months ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 9/16/2020 10:00:00 AM
Views: 656
SCP: 283
284 upvotes, 1 downvotes (100% upvoted it)
Archived Black Georgia Sheriff Says Rayshard Brooks Shooting Was 'Completely Justified' (thegatewaypundit.com)
submitted ago by Mustard_Monkey
view the rest of the comments →
[–] 24344144? ago
dude, it's their job to argue their side, whatever it is -- that's how we set up our justice system
[–] Helena73 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
WRONG. I mean who spread that false doctrine? A bunch of shadey lawyers, because it suits them. Lawyers should argue their case within the bounds of logical rhetoric and moral reason. Not attempt to get a leg over on the justice system by hook or crook, slithering their way around technicalities while violating the spirit of the laws we established and the most fundamental social contract of america itself. You have accepted an interpretation of american jurisprudence from some shyster.
All just laws (everywhere) must be based on the cultural values of the society they serve. The only purpose of a law is to codify a moral precept broadly accepted in a society. All other laws are tyrranical. If the laws or the lawyers become far removed from the basis of a legal system, the cultural values it was created to enforce, then the whole system must be scrapped and the lawyers must be discarded onto a pyre, figuratively of course. No justification for their existence if they do not reflect the moral code of a nation.
You are argueing muh technicalities, if they can get away with stuff, they should. Wrong.
[–] 24344771? ago
this seems within the bounds of arguing your side while still being honest. wouldn't it be irresponsible to not highlight how dangerous a taser is if it helped your case? or irresponsible not to highlight how safe it is if it helped your case in a different circumstance? it doesn't seem like he's inventing stuff out of whole cloth, just arranging the facts to make the strongest case he can for his side... which is his job as a lawyer, right?