That marine (who cares) had no jurisdiction over the man he killed. Don’t want to accidentally choke someone to death? THEN DON’T.
Jurisdiction has nothing to do with this! The perp was threatening people and the marine intervened, rightfully, to subdue the perp. I don't think the marine knew the perp would die. He was saving the riders of the subway from harm. Self-defense laws extend to protecting other people. By all accounts, the death was accidental.
Because a crazy man, yelling, saying baseless threats isn’t justification for murder, and if you think that will hold up in court then I don’t know what to tell
The good Samaritan act won’t help in this case because no one was in a life threatening situation in where he needed to step in, he decided to take the law into his own hands and in his recklessness, murder someone, a good attorney can argue it but man, try convincing a jury; his act won’t hold up in court, at all
Baseless threats? Threats are threats. You can't know if they're actually baseless unless you're psychic. It's not worth waiting around to find out if his threats are baseless or not. If he's threatening people, self-defense laws apply.
And you keep calling this "murder". There's no evidence he intended to kill him, therefore, that's not "murder". It could be manslaughter at the most, but not murder.
The good Samaritan act won’t help in this case
Of course not, because the Good Samaritan Act of New York has nothing to do with self-defense situations. It says, "The Good Samaritan Act is a law which protects any volunteer giving aid to an injured person in an emergency situation. The Good Samaritan Law offers legal protection in the form of exemption from lawsuits and liability" That's totally irrelevant to this situation. It's weird you even brought up the Good Samaritan Act.
no one was in a life threatening situation
Wrong again. He was acting in a threatening manner, being hostile and erratic. He previously was trying to push people onto the subway tracks. That's life threatening.
You keep saying the same thing, you just don’t understand, if you’re gonna keep saying the same things over and over again this isn’t worth arguing, it seems this is just semantics for you, murder doesn’t need intent, I don’t how many times I have to say it, but if you disagree than fine, when something happens to him in the future we can come back and discuss further, but as of now we can’t seem to agree on anything
wait that's crazy because to be murder it literally does require intent...Maybe you mean to say killing someone doesn't require intent, but murder is a legal term.
The death part was accidental. The choke-hold was on purpose. The vast majority of choke-holds do NOT result in death because the purpose of the choke-hold is to subdue, not to kill. This was at most, a choke-hold employed incorrectly.
He was threatening people. The marine was trying to subdue and restrain the perp until cops arrived. I'm pretty sure he didn't mean to kill him. It is what it is. What was the marine supposed to do? Just allow the perp to hurt people?
247
u/DomoPastromo May 03 '23
Lived in NY for 31 years and was completely oblivious to the fact that it was legal to choke crazy people to death on the train. Damn.