a homicide detective with the Houston Police Department, told KHOU, noting the boy’s death does not appear to involve self-defense because the shooting “wasn’t close to the house.”
Implying that if they rang the doorbell and waited (you know, the entire purpose of a doorbell), it could have been considered self-defense? I know, that’s a bit of logical fallacy but wtf
Everyone is entitled to their day in court. This is a cop doing a good job of cutting out any possibility of bullshit weaseling by pointing out that the possibility of self defense doesn’t even need to be debated or discussed.
It just means they don’t even need to consider if it could have been in self defense because it was ruled out at step 1. Not that if it passed step 1 it would be guaranteed that it was.
They just want to head off that entire line of defense from the get go.
wtf from the cops
Implying that if they rang the doorbell and waited (you know, the entire purpose of a doorbell), it could have been considered self-defense? I know, that’s a bit of logical fallacy but wtf
Everyone is entitled to their day in court. This is a cop doing a good job of cutting out any possibility of bullshit weaseling by pointing out that the possibility of self defense doesn’t even need to be debated or discussed.
Even ICE detainees? Don’t tell trump that. It’ll rile him up no end.
Yeah I was about to say… Not anymore they’re not
It just means they don’t even need to consider if it could have been in self defense because it was ruled out at step 1. Not that if it passed step 1 it would be guaranteed that it was.
They just want to head off that entire line of defense from the get go.
as the other user said, yes, exactly. depending on other factors it could have been