A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers & self defence

[Petro]

At 7:18 PM -0700 7/23/01, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>Not-a-lawyer wrote:

>
>> No, the cops panicked...
>
>You really should become a lawyer or even a judge.  You seem to already have
>figured this one out by ESP or something.  Wow, I'm fucking impressed with
>your legal acumen.
>
>> And then there is the point that
>> at no time is the police officer
>> relieved of their sworn duty to
>> protect the citizens, including
>> the rioters.
>
>Is THAT what cops swear to?  I'd like to see a citation on that piece of
>bullshit.  There is established case law in the US that says the police have
>no specific duty to protect anyone.

	The kid who fired was not a Cop. He was (near as I understand)
the rough equivalent of a National Guardsman. 

	
>> Self-defence is NOT a sufficient
>> release (there is a term for this
>> policy but it escapes me, I know
>> where to find it though and I'll
>> share it tomorrow).
>
>How convenient.  Now don't you forget to "share" that with us tomorrow
>Little Jimmie.
>
>> This is a perfect example of why
>> the standard police psych
>> requirement of 'likes to be in
>> charge'...
>
>Did you pull that out of your ass or someone else's?
>
>> A police officers primary
>> responsiblity is not to save
>> their own life but to spend
>> it to save another.

	No Jim, the primary responsibility of a Police Officer is to 
enforce the law, which really isn't relevant in this case, since the 
shooter apparently wasn't a cop. He was a soldier. 

	And what is the primary responsibility of a soldier? Well, 
in Basic Training I was informed that my basic task was to seek out
the enemy and destroy him. 

	Which is why using Soldiers in peace keeping missions is a 
really, really boneheaded move. 

>This guy is a laugh riot.  Where does he dig this stuff up?  What a moron.

	Tim calls it "Choatien Prime".