Cops can speed and kill, while motorcyclists are at fault for hitting jaywalkers.
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Cops can speed and kill, while motorcyclists are at fault for hitting jaywalkers.

  1. #1
    Sedate hooligan Array T-rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Van City

    Cops can speed and kill, while motorcyclists are at fault for hitting jaywalkers.

    If you're a motorcyclist, and you hit a jaywalker who jumps out from behind a truck while you are driving relatively slowly, you're guilty.

    However, if you're a police officer, and you hit a jaywalker on an open road while you're speeding, you're innocent.


  2. #2
    Bad Motherfucker Array thebronze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    On Yer Wife/GF/Mom
    Rocky Mountain, 1986 Livingroom (Aspencade)
    Another case of a double standard.... do as We say not as We do.....
    Anything You Can Do...... I Can Do Drunker
    "Growin up leads to growin old and then to dying...... And dying to Me don't sound like all that much fun"

  3. #3
    Registered User Array
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    2001 F4i
    As pointed out on another forum these really aren't accurate is a criminal court decision and the other civil. Two totally different sets of rules regarding evidence, etc. Much easier in general to prove and win a civil case than criminal. If the girls family decides to persue a civil case against the officer, THEN you can compare the end results.
    Last edited by NV HondaGurl; 08-05-2011 at 01:15 PM.

  4. #4
    Registered User Array
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Yup, social justice instead of equal justice, the conflagration of Law and Justice, capricious and arbitrary applications "by authorities" decay moral contracts within society culminating in a deterioration of the civil society.

    The real purpose of the Law is promoting the absence of INJUSTICE. When the Law has become perverted to be the promoter of INJUSTICE by and for those privileged, the moral contract with the citizenry loses credibility to render the Law meaningless. This complete perversion of the Law is gaining and so too will the rejection of it. The moral contract between the Law "and its apparatchiks" to society is fragile. These incidences of Lawful INJUSTICE are becoming all too common.

    What are the consequences of such a perversion? It would require volumes to describe them all. Thus we must content ourselves with pointing out the most striking.

    In the first place, it erases from everyone's conscience the distinction between justice and injustice.

    No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law. These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them.

    The nature of law is to maintain justice. This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are one and the same thing. There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because law makes them so. Thus, in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for the law to decree and sanction it. Slavery, restrictions, and monopoly find defenders not only among those who profit from them but also among those who suffer from them.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts