Too much ice

#1,704
#1,704
GVF said:
Wrong. You have yet to say what her business was to be in that spot in the middle of LE impeding their jobs that would cause them to order her out of her vehicle in the first place. Actions. Reactions. She was wrong to be there. Should have been at a safe distance instead.
Click to expand...
Correction: right, not wrong. You asked a question and I answered it. I don't need to say why she was there. If you want to play Why back to the dawn of time then help yourself but I'll pass.
She very likely shouldn't have been there. That doesn't justify killing her. So, does being non-compliant in and of itself justify getting shot?
 
Last edited:
#1,705
#1,705
EasternVol said:
Correction: right, not wrong. You asked a question and I answered it. I don't need to say why she was there. If you want to play Why back to the dawn of time then help yourself but I'll pass.
She very likely shouldn't have been there. That does justify killing her. So, does being non-compliant in and of itself justify getting shot?
Click to expand...
Why do you keep asking that? It's been pointed out that she was not killed for being non-compliant. They reached for her doorhandle due to her being non-compliant. She was shot for accelerating her SUV toward a federal agent. Why do you continue to discuss this in bad faith?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#1,706
#1,706
bamawriter said:
Rambling thoughts on this:

Politics has replaced religion for far too many people. Left vs Right stands in for Good vs Evil. And like any religion, the most fervent adherents will perform completely irrational acts in the name of their faiths.

The comparisons to Ashli Babbitt throughout this thread are quite apt. Good and Babbitt were two women that had polar opposite political views. But politics had become religion for both. Now, it's true that I know nothing about what either one believed in terms of spiritual matters, but their actions tell me all I need to know about where they put their faith. Both women put themselves in incredibly stupid and dangerous situations either believing that their political beliefs would be enough to protect them, or that their political beliefs were worth being killed.
Click to expand...
100 % agree. What has unfolded is an absolute tragedy. A completely unnecessary tragedy. Think about how this occurred, how avoidable this was. She was a mother to 3 children . 3 kids no longer have a mom because she was willing to put herself in a position where she was confronting Federal Officers in a way of protest or obstruction . She was willing to, probably in her mind, worst case scenario, be arrested for obstructing ICE agents from doing what they’re there to do. So she probably had made plans, gonna drop the kids off at school and get together w/ my protest friends and I may or may not be there for a day or 2 for my kids bc mommy got arrested for obstructing federal officers. That’s where we are. She put her political religion ahead of her family and now they don’t have a mom. For what?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77, Behr and hog88
#1,707
#1,707
Orange_Crush said:
Doesn't change the importance of the question. Whose standard are you going to enforce on the conversation? Or is it just an attempt to get a leg up on the discussion using emotion as opposed to facts?



That's not the only philosophy that gives a **** about human life. But that aside, the question stands. Why should you expect humanism (or care for human life) to be the default? Why should anyone else care that you're establishing that as the standard?

You seem to be picking some very subjective lines in the sand, as opposed to "Was he legally justified?". Why?
Click to expand...
Did you see the question to which I replied? If you did then you'll understand my answer.
What's a better word then?
Are you seriously asking why someone should care about human life?
Legality isn't the ultimate test of right and wrong, moral and immoral, justified or unjustified, etc. but then you know that. It's perfectly reasonable to pass judgment on something without considering the legality of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen and NashVol11
#1,709
#1,709
RDU VOL#14 said:
100 % agree. What has unfolded is an absolute tragedy. A completely unnecessary tragedy. Think about how this occurred, how avoidable this was. She was a mother to 3 children . 3 kids no longer have a mom because she was willing to put herself in a position where she was confronting Federal Officers in a way of protest or obstruction . She was willing to, probably in her mind, worst case scenario, be arrested for obstructing ICE agents from doing what they’re there to do. So she probably had made plans, gonna drop the kids off at school and get together w/ my protest friends and I may or may not be there for a day or 2 for my kids bc mommy got arrested for obstructing federal officers. That’s where we are. She put her political religion ahead of her family and now they don’t have a mom. For what?
Click to expand...
People that are here illegally because the left machine conned her into thinking she had to to help keep them here, still illegally, so the con-machine can profit from their presence.
 
#1,710
#1,710
NashVol11 said:
And if the passengers killed on 9/11 hadn't boarded the plane, their lives wouldn't be at risk either. Both narratives ignore the giant fatal thing that happened in between
Click to expand...
Boarding an airplane is not an unlawful act. Impeding a law enforcement operation is.
A better example would be a getaway driver for a bank robbery.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#1,713
#1,713
NashVol11 said:
My post about intent was in response to luther saying the guy wasn't going to get run over, and SpaceCoast calling that idiotic because "you don't know what her intent was." I think it's pretty obvious that her intent wasn't to run him over.

You're raising a different discussion about "what then" if she "ran over" him unintentionally, and given the posts I was responding to, I'm not sure why. He seemed like he got grazed, not really "run over" and without any indication of broken bones or injury. I mentioned her intent (IMO) because someone else specifically mentioned intent, but saying "what if she ran him over" in response to luther saying she wasn't going to run him over seems to be rejecting the discussion entirely.
Click to expand...
Most people are unaware that this same officer was drug 50 yards by a vehicle driven by an illegal driver evading arrest last summer in Minnesota and was hospitalized with serious injuries.
Do you think that might POSSIBLY have been in his mind when he had a split second to make a life or death decision
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#1,714
#1,714
Orange_Crush said:
Why do you keep asking that? It's been pointed out that she was not killed for being non-compliant. They reached for her doorhandle due to her being non-compliant. She was shot for accelerating her SUV toward a federal agent. Why do you continue to discuss this in bad faith?
Click to expand...
Where's the bad faith?
Sometimes a question is for the person asked. This is one of those times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
#1,715
#1,715
EasternVol said:
Correction: right, not wrong. You asked a question and I answered it. I don't need to say why she was there. If you want to play Why back to the dawn of time then help yourself but I'll pass.
She very likely shouldn't have been there. That doesn't justify killing her. So, does being non-compliant in and of itself justify getting shot?
Click to expand...
Ya'll act like LEO's wake up every morning and ponder who they can go kill today. Her actions justified his reaction.She was already commiting a felony while blocking ICE to let the other vehicle escape hte driveway. She had intentions. Only she knows what they were. Officer merely reacted to a situation she lay squarely on him by her own cognitive stupidity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and Rickyvol77
#1,717
#1,717
EasternVol said:
Did you see the question to which I replied? If you did then you'll understand my answer.
What's a better word then?
Are you seriously asking why someone should care about human life?
Legality isn't the ultimate test of right and wrong, moral and immoral, justified or unjustified, etc. but then you know that. It's perfectly reasonable to pass judgment on something without considering the legality of it.
Click to expand...
I did. I made a point of looking.

Legal. Unless you want to create a unified moral standard for everyone.

What if I were?

"She's nothing more than a bald primate living out Darwinism. Obviously she's not very fit for life. So, she got what she deserved. And what does "deserve", or "value" even mean in this cycle of mere animated flesh, produced by time and chance? She played stupid games. She got stupid prizes. She won't be around to do it again."

What is the "ultimate" test of right and wrong? I'm interested. I know I have my ideas on it. But then, I'm not in here trying to enforce it or use it to manipulate the discussion. I'm content to discuss whether the ICE agent was legally justified in his actions.
 
Last edited:
#1,720
#1,720
The whole fever dream lunacy infecting the left right now boils down to one simple thing. You do not get to simply stop law enforcement from making lawful arrests simply because you disagree with the law being enforced. I don’t like a lot of laws but you don’t see me trying to get in the faces of law enforcement.
If you don’t like the laws, use the legislative process to change the laws. Dont think you are playing some sort of game and drive your 2 ton vehicle into a crowd of heavily armed agents.
This ain’t GTA. You don’t get to respawn when you lose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#1,721
#1,721
OrangeTsar said:
Most people are unaware that this same officer was drug 50 yards by a vehicle driven by an illegal driver evading arrest last summer in Minnesota and was hospitalized with serious injuries.
Do you think that might POSSIBLY have been in his mind when he had a split second to make a life or death decision
Click to expand...
Seems like he'd have been faster to bail then.
Shooting her didn't and wouldn't have done a thing to save his life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen, NashVol11 and newarkvol
#1,724
#1,724
Orange_Crush said:
I did. I made a point of looking.

Legal. Unless you want to create a unified moral standard for everyone.

What if I were?

"She's nothing more than a bald primate living out Darwinism. Obviously she's not very fit for life. So, she got what she deserved. And what does "deserve", or "value" even mean in this cycle of mere animated flesh, produced by time and chance? She played stupid games. She got stupid prizes. She won't be around to do it again."

What is the "ultimate" test of right and wrong? I'm interested. I know I have my ideas on it. But then, I'm not in here trying to enforce it or use it to manipulate the discussion.
Click to expand...
So then why are you belaboring my answer? Do you not like arguing moral points instead of legal ones?
I was asking for a better word for someone who cares about human life.
It would be odd to say the least, maybe unless you're a Vulcan.
Some people do view things that way. It's a profound level of sociopathy.
Reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top