Too much ice

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
Shooting her in the face wouldn't necessarily keep him from being killed, she kept accelerating in the direction her wheels were pointed after she was shot. What would keep him from being killed was stepping out of the way, which he did
 
Can't agree with you there. There are multiple videos that suggest the agent was struck. But even if we give the greatest benefit of the doubt in saying he wasn't, it was still extremely close. Close enough that self-defense was by no means "unreasonable."
Being "struck" as someone turns away, in a way that doesn't injure you at all, doesn't mean your life is in danger
 
Being "struck" as someone turns away, in a way that doesn't injure you at all, doesn't mean your life is in danger
LOL another person who has never worked in a law enforcement capacity ever, trying to act like getting hit by a car is no big deal, but then again you also think that people throwing large rocks at others isn't deadly too
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
It's a federal investigation and outside of the State's jurisdiction. You could acknowledge the reality of how this kind of thing works, or you could view it as a huge conspiracy.
It's simply a lack of understanding of real-world law enforcement and legal investigations...The overton window in full effect here
 
A reasonable person would say this after watching and analyzing the video over and over. He is judged based on what a reasonable officer would do in that .5 - 1 second time frame where the incident took place. Being, him being in front of the vehicle. Not watching it on YouTube 10 times to come up with a theory on what happened.
Exactly. It's not sports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
Shooting her in the face wouldn't necessarily keep him from being killed, she kept accelerating in the direction her wheels were pointed after she was shot. What would keep him from being killed was stepping out of the way, which he did
What would keep her from getting killed would be to have stepped out of her vehicle and followed directions.

Fact, first and foremost, This ladies actions were the catalyst that generated everything that happened. And we're not even seeing video, unless I missed one, that shows what she was doing to impede the officers before the videos posted on VN.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
It did end someone's life, there was never a threat and most people who aren't all-in for law enforcement aren't buying "self-defense" either
1) yes due to her actions, it ended her life
2) the officer made a decision of self-defense based on his perception of if he was in danger of death or serious bodily injury
3) Constitutionally it's 100% a good shoot of self defense
4) I am not "all-in" for LE, I just am educated on law, especially in these areas
5) "most people" that you know or follow your leftist spectrum probably do think that, but the majority of normal people do not
 
Being "struck" as someone turns away, in a way that doesn't injure you at all, doesn't mean your life is in danger
The law will not look at outcomes when judging whether the shooting was justified. It will look at the totality of circumstances within the duration of time that he had to make a decision. I will bet 1,000 VolNation bucks that he is found justified in the shooting.
 
Self defense? Is he not faster than an 87 year old woman?
Meaningless in the legal discussion. If a 90 year old woman pulls a gun on me, I am "faster and stronger" than her, but if i shoot her, I was well within my rights.

You are simply trying to assign blame to the LEO doing his job legally instead of the criminal who committed at least 3 felonies
 

Advertisement



Back
Top