Too much ice

[Orange_Crush]

NM

That wasn't to @luthervol.

 

[lawgator1]

If course the next question is, if her wife can't sue the government, and by some indices it appears they were being rewarded/compensated for for their actions, can she file a workman's comp claim, OSHA violation against whoever was training and "rewarding" them.

No, a workers' comp claim would be made by the officer if he were injured.

The family can sue, I am sure they will. But I do not think it would get to a jury. I certainly don't see this administration settling such a claim. Wouldn't shock me a la Babbit to see a Dem administration do so.

 

[lukeneyland]

I seriously doubt he was counting 1..2..3. Ok that's enough and my 2-3 seconds are up anyway.

Quantity of shots is not my issue. It’s the position that the follow up shots came from

 

[Rickyvol77]

I think our difference of opinion is based on you using time as the determining factor while I’m using the position of the officer relative to the threat.

Your brain doesn't react in enough time to account that the car hit you and moved you a foot over to the left in time he fired those rounds.

2 seconds is quick...go to a local police agency and ask to go thru the full citizen's police academy if they have one, they will put you in similar situations and you will understand better

 

[NashVol11]

How did she "unintentionally" become part of a group specifically tracking and harassing ICE agents and then blocked them in purposefully so her wife could video it?

If you didn't follow the conversation, don't try to start now IMO

I'm not a back the blue guy, I think most cops are cops (federal LE included) because either they aren't smart enough to do anything else, have a bully or macho man complex or are just plain crooked. So why on earth would anyone in their right mind give someone like that the opportunity to legally kill them? Don't give LE a reason because they will take it.

I understand where you are coming from. I just think she panicked and was driving away (and was also potentially told by at least one officer to "MOVE") rather than trying to attack or provoke them to kill her

I'm sure she didn't intend on provoking them into killing her.

Well if the provocation was unintentional, then the "why would she provoke them/give them a reason" stuff is less meaningful to me

 

[Rickyvol77]

That wasn't to @luthervol.

I caught it

 

[GVF]

I think our difference of opinion is based on you using time as the determining factor while I’m using the position of the officer relative to the threat.

His position in that instant was his left leg on her front bumper moving at him. Intentional or not. That will never be answered.

 

[luthervol]

So, you're equating your personal, contradictory morality as the legal system?

Or have you had enough of getting embarrassed when you try to lecture us according to your contradictory personal moral code, so you tried to slip it by via equivocation? How does your personal moral code == a "legal" proclamation?



No. It's not. A facemask is a penalty, illegal in football rules. To call it "illegal" is to refer to the rules, not your preferences. You didn't say that the killing was uncalled. You said that it was illegal. There is a major difference, which is why I quoted both posts to point out the difference.

View attachment 805116

You weren't claiming that she was killed by a piece of paper, were you?

And you don't teach anything having to do with vocabulary, logic or critical thinking, do you?

And it's OK to @me if you want to discuss further.

A facemask is only a penalty IF it gets called by the refs.
It's illegal even if it is not called....BUT it is only classified as a penalty if it is called.

When I saw the facemask (it was the ga game), I yelled "hey that's illegal, that should be a penalty", but the refs didn't see it that way......so no penalty. I knew there would be a lot of illegal activity in the game that the refs would not call (ga bias).

Same thing holds true in these types of instances......increasingly so.

 

[appvol]

We know that her wheels were pointed away from him when he shot her, and that he wasn't seriously injured at all

She tried to hit him

 

[GVF]

Quantity of shots is not my issue. It’s the position that the follow up shots came from

No prob. Valid question. But in that instant as positions are shifting, how do you judge changing positions in an instant of time verses continuation of an action. Fine line and a tough call. We're not talking a sniper that took her out. We're talking the agent who was clearly in contact with the front of the vehicle making a decision.

 

[CobbVol]

the cops bad decisions, standing in front of a vehicle he wanted moved, made it legal. he justified his shooting by putting himself in danger. which is arsebackwards as anything. self defense doesn't work that way.

They ordered her to get out of the car, not move it.

 

[NashVol11]

She tried to hit him

There's a reason they have to doctor the hell out of each clip and then immediately cut it off to try to make their point, and you still fall for it every single time

 

[lukeneyland]

Your brain doesn't react in enough time to account that the car hit you and moved you a foot over to the left in time he fired those rounds.

2 seconds is quick...go to a local police agency and ask to go thru the full citizen's police academy if they have one, they will put you in similar situations and you will understand better

I think we just disagree on that first part. I will need to try to find other similar cases to see what the legal precedent is.

 

[NashVol11]

They ordered her to get out of the car, not move it.

An eyewitness told MPR News that ICE agents gave conflicting orders to a driver in south Minneapolis on Wednesday, with one agent ordering her to drive away from the scene where an ICE vehicle was stuck in a snowbank while another yelled for her to get out of her car as he reached for the door handle.

The scene ended with an agent shooting into the car, killing the woman.

Caitlin Callenson said she was walking down Portland Avenue with her partner when she saw who she assumed were Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/01/07/shooting-south-minneapolis-ice-agents-federal-operation

 

[CagleMtnVol]

 

[NashVol11]

They're so dangerous that Border Patrol shot them and just left the scene, and then they voluntarily called the cops themselves

 

[tim]

You couldn't argue the point to started talking nonsense, unsurprising

Doofus, you’re the one talking about cults.

 

[NashVol11]

Doofus, you’re the one talking about cults.

See? You still can't

 

[GroverCleveland]

Who on earth wouldn’t panic if people were trying to get into your vehicle. What happens while you panic is a different question all together,, but to say not everyone would have a sense of panic is bonkers.

There is a whole world full of people out there who would not panic in this situation.

 

[GVF]

Ahem...


View attachment 805125

As in... She did hit him (intentional not impied by me but taken as such and can see why). And considering the circumstances by which that happened...

I should have known better than to short change a response around here. lol. That's on me.

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

Can a slow 4,000 pounds kill you if it's on top of you?

Are you exploring a fatty fetish?

 

[Orange_Crush]

A facemask is only a penalty IF it gets called by the refs.
It's illegal even if it is not called....BUT it is only classified as a penalty if it is called.

When I saw the facemask (it was the ga game), I yelled "hey that's illegal, that should be a penalty", but the refs didn't see it that way......so no penalty. I knew there would be a lot of illegal activity in the game that the refs would not call (ga bias).

Same thing holds true in these types of instances......increasingly so.

Again, please tell us that you don't teach critical thinking.

I'll try to take it slowly.

What were you referencing when you called it a facemask, and illegal? Your definition of a facemask? What would the referees be referring to your opinion, or the rules? In our legal system, which would be the equivalent to the standard? Our laws, or your opinion?

I really, really shouldn't have to do this a second time, but I will.





So, it's your view that it was a justifiable homicide, but he also killed her illegally. Despite what the words actually mean?




IOW, "illegal" is literally and merely describing the eyes of the law.

 

[GroverCleveland]

A lot of people would panic sure, but most would keep their cool and comply then deal with any injustice later. Panic gets people killed.

Absolutely.

 

[tim]

Quantity of shots is not my issue. It’s the position that the follow up shots came from

Go visit the Force Science website or wartch some testimony online from them. It was good training for OIS. Particularly with your questions about reaction time and I would suggest the “looming” effect as it pertains to cars moving toward the person. Fascinating stuff and they’ve done tons on f practical testing

 

[lukeneyland]

No prob. Valid question. But in that instant as positions are shifting, how do you judge changing positions in an instant of time verses continuation of an action. Fine line and a tough call. We're not talking a sniper that took her out. We're talking the agent who was clearly in contact with the front of the vehicle making a decision.

Are you saying that he may have still perceived himself to be in the path of the vehicle when he took the follow up shots ?