"Make my Day" defense for drug dealer who killed his own daughter?

[Socrates]

Actually, it is quite possible for the OTHER persons involved to be charged with the girl's murder.

During the commission of a felony, it is the perps, NOT the shooter, who are liable in the case of an unintentional death. For instance. Person "A' commits armed robbery against a gas station. The attendant, referred to as person "B" draws a legally owned firearm and inadvertently shoots another patron, person "C", of the gas station while trying to defend against person "A" There have been cases where person A was charged with the murder of person C even though person B actually fired the deadly shot.

This is because whoever initiates a felony crime is held responsible for all actions that occur as a result of their actions.

Yes, but, this varies by state law. Are you sure that's the case in Colorado?

Erik:
Once you are in that arena, an-ex-felon, you are in the wrong circles, like it or not. To survive in prison, you pretty much have to have someone watching your back, or, in other words, a gang affiliation, since the gangs are alive and well in our prisons. So everyone that is crucifying him for being a gang member, it's a matter of survival in prison. Once in, it's super hard to get out.
When you get out, you can't get a job, now you've got the gang tats from prison, you have serious problems and no money. So, you end up dealing drugs, etc.

If you try and go straight, I can't think of anyone that would need a gun more then a gang banger trying to break away from the gang. Move, and, your instantly identified by your appearance by that gang in another areas. The 13's and 14's, among other mexican gangs, have members in the entire western U.S. It's near impossible to get away.

So, the guy is poor, running in bad circles, force to live with his family, and, a target for both his gang, and rival gangs, thanks to his prison experience.

Now, we are going to send him back, and, he's going to live the rest of his life with his gang buddies, in prison, on our dime. What a wonderful system...

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

If you try and go straight, I can't think of anyone that would need a gun more then a gang banger trying to break away from the gang. Move, and, your instantly identified by your appearance by that gang in another areas. The 13's and 14's, among other mexican gangs, have members in the entire western U.S. It's near impossible to get away.

My heart BLEEDS for the poor man. "Trying to go straight" sympathy leaves out one important fact: HE WENT BAD IN THE FIRST PLACE! I don't care what his problems are. "A" leads to "B" leads to "C" Stupid decisions = Screwed Up Life. TOO BAD FOR HIM.

Now an innocent child is dead because he's a scum bag drug dealer. Innocent until proven guilty and "Manslaughter" instead of "Murder 1" are issues for the judge and jury, not for me. He's guilty, she's dead. Define it however you want.

(Not intending to attack you or your position Socrates)

 

[Erik]

"Erik:"

I think you meant "Danzig."

---
The statututes I cited shouldn't be "clouded" by arguments of who is responsible for what, with the possible exception of the 18-3-105, Criminally Negligent Homicide charge, a relatively light charge compared to what he could receive for drug dealing while involving his daughter and in possession of a firearm.

I'd stack a bunch of charges and convince his lawyer to get him to plead out to a single class 2 count, and throw a don't parole the guy letter in his jacket to boot. But that's probably why such things aren't up to me.

18-1.3-401(V)(A) outilenes Colorado's felony classifications committed on or after July 1, 1993:

Class 1: Life - Death, parole available: none
Class 2: 8-24 years, parole available: after 5 years
Class 3: 4-12 years, parole available: after 5 years
Class 4: 2-6 years, parole available: after 3 years
Class 5: 1-3 years, parole available: after 2years
Class 6: 12-18 months, parole available: after 1 year

 

[Stagger Lee]

Actually many convicts manage to walk out of prison, land a 9-5 straight job, and live the rest of their lives without selling drugs or hanging out with the cons that they knew in prison. And many convicts do just fine outside of prison without a gun. This "he had to have a gun" and "he had to sell drugs" doesn't really mesh with reality.

But if it's a choice between a felon gang-banger possibly being gunned down or that same felon gang-banger armed and possibly posing a threat to the decent people in society, including me and my family, well it sucks to be the gang-banger, but he's just going to have to deal with his own mess without a gun if it's up to me.

 

[Danzig]

S L ....always looking for some reason to take away a person's guns....:barf:

Your posts never fail to disgust me as they always say something negative about a gun owner or the use of a gun. We all know that bad people use guns for bad purposes. No, really, we do.

But we know that they are the minority of firearms owners. Not the majority. So you for to constantly point out the negative is worse than troubling..it's bordering on the infuriating.

I would really like to see some posts from you highlighting the positive aspects of gun ownership and the good things that can come about because people have the right to keep and bear arms and some are even brave enough to exercise that right. Here's link to get you started:
http://lestdarknessfall.blogspot.com/2005/02/civilian-gun-owner-mark-wilson-saves.html Mark Wilson was not afraid to exercise his rights and he was able to save his son's life because he did so.


Socrates, good question. I am not sure about the specifics of Colorado law in this case. I simply know the general principle is part of case law in our country.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

S L ....always looking for some reason to take away a person's guns....

Do you think felons should be allowed to carry?

 

[Stagger Lee]

Danzig is engaging in the time-honored liberal democrat practice of slandering the opposition personally instead of trying to rebut anything said. I can forgive him as he's outclassed intellectually and stuck trying to argue a losing position.

But I freely admit that I do not want people who sell drugs, rob others, rape, murder, or commit other felonies to ever be able to legally possess a firearm. The collective right of all of us to be safe and secure from the criminal element outweighs the desire of any individual criminal to own a gun for further criminal activity or as defense against the police.

Criminals don't have their 2nd amendment rights taken away. They choose to give them up when they decide to embark on the criminal path.

 

[JuanCarlos]

Do you think felons should be allowed to carry?

If they're dangerous enough that we can't trust them to own a gun for their own self-defense, why are they out on the street to begin with?

And that's assuming that forbidding them from owning a gun somehow magically makes them unable to get their hands on one anyway. A convicted felon determined to commit a crime will get ahold of a gun either way.

But I freely admit that I do not want people who sell drugs, rob others, rape, murder, or commit other felonies to ever be able to legally possess a firearm. The collective right of all of us to be safe and secure from the criminal element outweighs the desire of any individual criminal to own a gun for further criminal activity or as defense against the police.

Criminals don't have their 2nd amendment rights taken away. They choose to give them up when they decide to embark on the criminal path.

And it sounds like you feel it's impossible to ever leave that path. In fact, you don't even consider the idea of the desire of an individual convicted felon to own a firearm for his own self-defense against other criminals (you suggest that they could only want it to commit crimes or shoot cops).

I've known a few convicted felons. They weren't all gang-bangers, and even some what were before going to prison aren't anymore.

 

[Danzig]

Peetzakilla, I agree with JuanCarlos, the only felons walking the streets should be those who have been deemed no longer a threat to society. I do not agree with punishing these people for the rest of their lives. If they have served their sentence, then their punishment should be over.

VIOLENT felons should not have guns. They should also be in prison or dead.

My post wasn't about the topic of this thread..it was about the original poster.

SL...I am one of the least liberal persons on this board, most especially when it comes to the Second Amendment.

Everything that you post on this board has been portrayed either the the ownership, bearing, or use of firearms in a negative light. That is about as liberal as you can get on a firearms forum.

 

[Socrates]

Quote:
Do you think felons should be allowed to carry?
If they're dangerous enough that we can't trust them to own a gun for their own self-defense, why are they out on the street to begin with?

Plus one.

Actually many convicts manage to walk out of prison, land a 9-5 straight job, and live the rest of their lives without selling drugs or hanging out with the cons that they knew in prison

SL: I don't believe that for a minute. Facts to back that up?
The entire idea of the three strikes laws in Kali was that once into the penal system, convict's don't get out, and, are MUCH more likely to repeat crime. The theory/fact is that when you get rid of this group, you put a real decent size hole in crime. Therefore, after 3 enumerated crimes, 25-life becomes the penalty.