79
Shot and then prosecuted: How a victim in Baltimore became a defendant
(www.thebaltimorebanner.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
79 points (96.5% liked)
politics
31362 readers
2194 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm not sure what the right solution is in this situation. Clearly, the guy was violating the law by carrying guns (in two cases) yet was also the victim of gun violence. Is the article suggesting that we should let felons carry guns so they can defend themselves?
Seems to me that general gun control would be a more effective measure 🤷
Or at the very least make everyone register and insure all of their guns so they can be tracked down when gun crimes are committed. I'd even suggest that we should require all ammunition include special, unique chemical markers on the inside and make people register that whenever they purchase ammunition.
How about disallowing evidence gathered about the victim of the crime from being used to prosecute them? Like we disallow evidence gathered without a proper warrant, theoretically.
The issue with that is a criminal can commit a crime, then have an accomplice commit a crime against them. Now when the police investigate the latter and find out about the former they can't use the evidence, so convicting the criminal of the, presumably, more serious crime becomes impossible. Create a 'crime loop' and no one can be convicted.
The cops would prosecute the crime they gave the external evidence for. In this case the shooting of the victim, because that came to their attention as a crime. Since they wouldn't have interacted with the victim except that he got shot, the fact he had a gun on him can't be used as evidence against him. Just like if they search your car for guns, they can't seize your bank statements from the glovebox and use them as evidence for financial crimes.