Brewer: Grabbing him is legal as citizens can make arrests and what he did was a crime. He was offered the choice of being turned over to the police for a trial, so I dont see where his rights were violated. He chose public humiliation to having a criminal charge on his record. Sounds like a smart fellow. I dont have a problem with this at all.
"United States:
Each state, with the exception of North Carolina, permits citizen arrests if the commission of a felony is witnessed by the arresting citizen, or when a citizen is asked to assist in the apprehension of a suspect by police. The application of state laws varies widely with respect to misdemeanors, breaches of the peace, and felonies not witnessed by the arresting party. American citizens do not carry the authority or enjoy the legal protections of police, and are held to the principle of strict liability before the courts of civil- and criminal law including but not limited to any infringement of another's rights. A, there is doubt the "arresting citizen" witnessed the act because they had to "hunt him down" according to the article. B, What he did was not a "felony". C, They had no right to force him to make such a choice, one of which was to "go one on one in a fight with a seasoned war veteran" Our legal system is based on the credo you're "Innocent until proven guilty" (in a court of law!) Those VFW people acted like a gang of thugs.
The American flag is sewn together with blood of men and women who did their duty right or wrong. The leaders and not the country is too blame in any wrongs....those leaders only! Those who did thier duty and paid your debt to our way of life are due respect and honor. You are a debtor and with all who owe another these days......you don't pay up and blame the one who did a good turn for your theft. You show disrespect while stealing thier blood and life. A curse upon you ingrates and moochers of others blood given in nobel cause......your freedom!!!!!!
Each state, with the exception of North Carolina, permits citizen arrests if the commission of a felony is witnessed by the arresting citizen, or when a citizen is asked to assist in the apprehension of a suspect by police. The application of state laws varies widely with respect to misdemeanors, breaches of the peace, and felonies not witnessed by the arresting party. American citizens do not carry the authority or enjoy the legal protections of police, and are held to the principle of strict liability before the courts of civil- and criminal law including but not limited to any infringement of another's rights. A, there is doubt the "arresting citizen" witnessed the act because they had to "hunt him down" according to the article. B, What he did was not a "felony". C, They had no right to force him to make such a choice, one of which was to "go one on one in a fight with a seasoned war veteran" Our legal system is based on the credo you're "Innocent until proven guilty" (in a court of law!) Those VFW people acted like a gang of thugs.
Well arson IS felony and he did not deny it, he was offered his choice for a trial. Think what you want but local justice is a tradition here and looking at the south vs say, california or the northeast, I think southern folks have a much better handle on crime.
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
"United States:
Each state, with the exception of North Carolina, permits citizen arrests if the commission of a felony is witnessed by the arresting citizen, or when a citizen is asked to assist in the apprehension of a suspect by police. The application of state laws varies widely with respect to misdemeanors, breaches of the peace, and felonies not witnessed by the arresting party. American citizens do not carry the authority or enjoy the legal protections of police, and are held to the principle of strict liability before the courts of civil- and criminal law including but not limited to any infringement of another's rights.
A, there is doubt the "arresting citizen" witnessed the act because they had to "hunt him down" according to the article.
B, What he did was not a "felony".
C, They had no right to force him to make such a choice, one of which was to "go one on one in a fight with a seasoned war veteran"
Our legal system is based on the credo you're "Innocent until proven guilty" (in a court of law!) Those VFW people acted like a gang of thugs.