this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
704 points (98.6% liked)

JustGuysBeingDudes

822 readers
1 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Uh .. aside from being stupid, why is this illegal?

[–] sus@programming.dev 27 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

well "arrested" doesn't actually mean it's illegal, it just means the cops thought they likely did something illegal

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

Unfortunately true.

[–] brunchyvirus@fedia.io 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Doesn't Arkansas have a mutual combat law?

[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Yes, but use of deadly force is not included in mutual combat.

[–] FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Reminds me of that YouTuber that convinced his pregnant partner to shoot him with a desert eagle while holding an encyclopedia in front of his chest. He died, she was sentenced to 180 days for manslaughter

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Did the bullet penetrate the book and still have enough momentum to penetrate his sternum, or did he die from the force of impact? That's the thing about bulletproof vests too. Sure, they may stop the bullet, but it's still going to fuck you up.

[–] FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It went through the book. I don't know if a bullet proof vest can stop a 50 cal fired from a foot away either tbh, but definitely like you're saying it won't prevent injury

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Probably not, especially not pointed rounds instead of hollow points.

[–] TJDetweiler@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago

Especially in the US?? It's not like they won't be paying for their own healthcare lmao

[–] brian@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago

I would imagine the blanket statute to refer to is something like reckless endangerment, or perhaps more likely would be the firearms themselves being unlicensed.

Additionally, if I shot at someone who was wearing a bulletproof vest, it still would be attempted murder. If they asked me to shoot at them, it still would continue to be attempted murder ("no judge, they asked me to shoot them and I missed").

I mean, even if someone explicitly asked for you to kill them, in writing, notarized, and all that legal jazz, then you're getting into the realm of assisted suicide and that lovely grey area of morality. Though I believe it's still illegal throughout the US.

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Generally a bad idea to allow ppl to shoot at each other.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What do I care if a couple of idiots want to shoot each other while wearing bulletproof vests? The government would almost certainly allow it if they applied for a bunch of special permits and shit. This basically comes down to your philosophy, does the government grant rights, or do you inherently have rights, and only things that harm other people without their consent should be illegal.

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

What if one person was inebriated? Developmentally challenged? homicidal? Suicidal? A really bad shot?

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I mean, both of these guys are probably developmentally challenged or inebriated. They were shooting each other while wearing bulletproof vests.