SSCC #537–Charlotte

A Richland County jail officer is being charged with killing his pregnant girlfriend and then setting her body on fire. According to police twenty three year old Tristan Gist was arrested Monday and charged with murder and death of a child in utero.

Even cops are capable of actions we only thought possible by monsters.  Due to the extreme circumstances of the crime, he makes the list.

State Sponsored Criminal #537: Tristan Gist

Because when you’re a cop and she doesn’t do what you want and you don’t like responsibility, kill her and light her on fire.

h/t Sean

Tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

About TMM

TMM is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms. Many know his private name and information however due to the current political climate, many are distancing themselves due to the abandonment of Due Process.

4 Responses to SSCC #537–Charlotte

  1. Erin Palette says:

    Realizing full well the can of worms I am about to open…

    Why is “death of a child in utero” a crime when late term abortions are still legal in NC? Either it’s a fetus and has no rights (and thus, it’s not a crime to kill it), or it’s a child and aborting it is killing a human being.

    • Barron says:

      Can’t explain the hypocrisy of that one. Though one could make the argument that ultimately the survival of the parasite is dependent upon the will and actions of the host. If someone attacks the host who wants to keep the parasite, they have robbed the parasite of life as the host intended to see it survive.

      Not saying it’s right or wrong, just an observation. I avoid the whole abortion thing like the plague because honestly there’s no good right answers on either side of the debate. I have no business forcing a woman to deal with consequences that may not have even been a part of her willful choices, just the same I have no right saying that the child has no right to life.

      Honestly it is a very deep philosophical problem because there are two parties and each has rights and the exercise of those rights technically require infringement of some form on the other. More specifically the right of the child for life requires infringement of some of the rights of freedom and choices of the mother.

      • Erin Palette says:

        Ahem — unless there’s been rape, there are also the rights of the father to consider.

        • Barron says:

          Except the father isn’t the host for the parasite. If they can transplant the embryo and make the father carry it to term, I’m all ears on that one.

          For example, the father has no business giving a thumbs up or down unless the wife is unable during a complication or other issue. Lets say the mother may want to dump the baby due to something making the pregnancy high risk and likely to kill her. Does the father have a right to force her to carry it to term?

          Does the father have a right to force the woman to undergo the stress and dangers associated with child birth and labor? Again it’s infringing on the rights of another human being, and while a baby can technically be human, it is also solely dependent on the mother for survival until birth.

          No there are only two specific rights involved here. The child and the mother. The father has no right to claim other than in terms of “property”. While after birth there are claims to rights, most of those are due to required support and responsibility also placed on the father.