|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
MI: Charge dismissed against officer whose gun fired at school
Submitted by:
Corey Salo
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A charge has been dismissed against a Michigan police officer whose personal gun accidentally fired into the floor of a high school gymnasium as he watched a wrestling tournament.
WHMI-FM reports the dismissal followed a plea agreement for Flint police Lt. Mark Boudreau, who entered a no-contest plea in August to a misdemeanor charge of reckless discharge of a weapon. Sentencing had been delayed in the case, with a dismissal allowed if Boudreau complied with all court orders.
Livingston County Prosecutor Bill Vailliencourt says Boudreau “satisfied the conditions of that agreement.”
|
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(6/18/2019)
|
| The devil takes care of his own ya'know.. |
| Comment by:
jac
(6/18/2019)
|
The gun did not go off by itself. He was playing with it.
Special treatment for only one. You or I would have been charged and convicted.
At the very least he should have lost his job. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
