Too much ice

[Orange_Crush]

????????????????
link??
Because that is not what I'm seeing at all.

None of that has anything to do with whether the shooting was justified. If that's the purpose of discussion, it's a red herring and not worth discussing.

 

[luthervol]

Again the 3rd video showed the officer being struck by the front of the car...you simply don't know law

lol.....He could have easily moved out of the way. Plus, he started drawing his gun before she ever started moving forward.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Jimmy Kimmel still doing the left talking lying points. Oh, she's so innocent.

 

[InVOLuntary]

If she had been allowed to drive away, nothing would have happened.

If Babbitt had been allowed to continue a mass of violent mob members would have gained access to the capital building inner chambers.

Ashli Babbitt was an unarmed female that posed no harm that one of yours shot. On the other hand, the insurrectionist from yesterday had a 400# weapon that she tried to use to kill a law enforcement officer. It shows your hypocrisy. It's ok for law enforcement to kill as long as it isn't one of yours.

 

[Rickyvol77]

lol.....He could have easily moved out of the way. Plus, he started drawing his gun before she ever started moving forward.

He doesn't have to move out of the way, and he had almost been killed being ran over by a vehicle previously by a similar criminal

 

[EasternVol]

Again the 3rd video showed the officer being struck by the front of the car...you simply don't know law

It sounds like your view is 'if you can get away with it, shoot'. I'm speaking to whether he was in fact justified.

 

[luthervol]

None of that has anything to do with whether the shooting was justified. If that's the purpose of discussion, it's a red herring and not worth discussing.

lol......

It has everything to do with the larger picture.

 

[Rickyvol77]

None of that has anything to do with whether the shooting was justified. If that's the purpose of discussion, it's a red herring and not worth discussing.

The shooting was justified, I was referring to the use of "she was a poor mother who's child was abandoned now"

 

[luthervol]

He doesn't have to move out of the way, and he had almost been killed being ran over by a vehicle previously by a similar criminal

How about providing a link to your previous accusations.

 

[Orange_Crush]

lol......

It has everything to do with the larger picture.

You mean, a bigger discussion than whether he was justified?

 

[Orange_Crush]

The shooting was justified, I was referring to the use of "she was a poor mother who's child was abandoned now"

My bad.

 

[bamawriter]

lol.....He could have easily moved out of the way. Plus, he started drawing his gun before she ever started moving forward.

It looks like he drew his gun when she reversed at first, I assume to try to make her stop. They were trying to detain her, so his draw makes sense, even if the idea of shooting at the driver of a moving vehicle is ill-advised.

Honestly, I'm not sure if she even saw him. She may well have been focused on the agents to her left.

 

[Rickyvol77]

It sounds like your view is 'if you can get away with it, shoot'. I'm speaking to whether he was in fact justified.

No my view is from 25 years experience in law and law enforcement and training, that it was 100% a justified self defense shooting by LEO while attempting to apprehend a suspect.

Again, read TN vs Garner, Graham vs Connor they are both pretty easy to understand even for non-legal types

 

[EasternVol]

She was being stopped and detained & question but didn't comply with LEO orders.
She's a paid (was) antifa member from out of State to harass police & agents.
Any reasonable person w/a brain would have realized not to gamble w/your life.

What in all that warrants getting shot?

 

[luthervol]

The "mother" who allowed her lesbian wife physically abuse her kids and let her put lit cigarettes out on her kids arms/legs (she lost custody of 2 out of 3 kids for good BTW) and then left the 3rd child to get paid by an NGO to go six states over and "protest/resist"

Link please.

 

[Rickyvol77]

What in all that warrants getting shot?

Assaulting an officer with your car as you are resisting/fleeing

 

[theFallGuy]

lol.....He could have easily moved out of the way. Plus, he started drawing his gun before she ever started moving forward.

regardless why is a mother of 3 putting herself in the middle of stopping law enforcement activities? Actions have consequences and what she did was beyond stupid.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[RockyTop85]

Does being non-compliant merit being shot?

Legally or morally?

There’s a difference and a substantial gap in between it really feels like almost everybody is arguing that it falls in between without acknowledging that there is any difference in the two.

 

[EasternVol]

again let me type slow for you....

The fact she was being stupid or scared or wanting to kill the officer whatever went thru her mind doesn't matter at this point.

it's not the "death penalty", that is something leftists say to excuse criminal behavior after the fact.

Did she commit a felony? yes
Did the officers have a right to detain/attempt to arrest her? yes
Did she commit two more felonies one of them an assault on the officer? yes
Did the officer have a reasonable fear of being injured/killed from this assault of a resisting suspect? yes

It's a good shoot, legally 100%

Only the bolded matters. As I see it, his life wasn't in danger when he fired.
He also created a deadly hazard to anyone in a potential path of her car.

 

[luthervol]

regardless why is a mother of 3 putting herself in the middle of stopping law enforcement activities? Actions have consequences and what she did was beyond stupid.

Obviously because she thought the activities by ice were wrong and and deserved/needed to be protested.

 

[EasternVol]

"grazed" is a euphemism for being assaulted by a resisting felon

Yeah, you'd shoot if you thought you could get away with it, really justified or not.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Legally or morally?

There’s a difference and a substantial gap in between it really feels like almost everybody is arguing that it falls in between without acknowledging that there is any difference in the two.

It's a stupid, loaded question. She wasn't shot for being non-compliant. They were reaching for her doorhandle because she was non-compliant. She was shot for accelerating a 4000-ish lb SUV at a federal agent. It seems if folks wanted a discussion in good faith, that's the question they'd be asking.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Only the bolded matters. As I see it, his life wasn't in danger when he fired.
He also created a deadly hazard to anyone in a potential path of her car.

As YOU see it doesn't matter, the officer (who had almost been killed in similar situation previously) made a split second decision, and the law is on his side.

I do believe he absolutely thought after the bumper hit him that he may be seriously injured or killed, which is why the first shot went straight thru the windshield in a straight line to her face

 

[Rickyvol77]

Yeah, you'd shoot if you thought you could get away with it, really justified or not.

I've been in at least a dozen or more incidents where I could have been legally justified to use deadly force, and only once had I came close to doing so.

Stick to what you know