What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Ashli Babbitt’s shooter is—Lieutenant Michael Leroy Byrd.

Status
Not open for further replies.

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
144,403
Reaction score
19,528
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
Would you like a tissue, snowflake? :itsok:

Maybe just don't try to breach a barricaded section of the Capitol with an angry mob next time. How does that sound?

If you refuse, then I welcome you to try it and see what happens.

You're celebrating the death of an unarmed veteran that was no threat to anyone and then calling me a "snowflake" for objecting.

Yea. It's not like an angry mob can be a threat or anything.

Brilliant logic there, snowflake.
An angry mob, maybe. An unarmed woman, never.
At the head of an angry mob.....don't think we don't notice you left that little factoid out.
Exactly right. She was the tip of the spear the moment she went climbing through that window. As she was doing that, others were smashing in the doors and windows. Had that hero not shot her, the rest of that mob behind her would have poured into the House chamber where members of Congress were still hiding.

No, the dozens of fully armed and armored cops on the stair could have prevented any entry through through those doors and windows if there was any threat to any members of congress.
But all members of congress had left by then.
Shows how tolerant the Capitol Police were towards the protestors.
They allowed the mob to penetrate areas where they were not directly threatening Congress.

Ashli was the final straw, there were no more doors between her and Congress members


Ashli was an unarmed broad who posed no threat to Mr. Byrd.

No need for her to be wasted.

Would you like a tissue, snowflake? :itsok:

Maybe just don't try to breach a barricaded section of the Capitol with an angry mob next time. How does that sound?

If you refuse, then I welcome you to try it and see what happens.

You're celebrating the death of an unarmed veteran that was no threat to anyone and then calling me a "snowflake" for objecting.

Yea. It's not like an angry mob can be a threat or anything.

Brilliant logic there, snowflake.
An angry mob, maybe. An unarmed woman, never.
At the head of an angry mob.....don't think we don't notice you left that little factoid out.
Exactly right. She was the tip of the spear the moment she went climbing through that window. As she was doing that, others were smashing in the doors and windows. Had that hero not shot her, the rest of that mob behind her would have poured into the House chamber where members of Congress were still hiding.

No, the dozens of fully armed and armored cops on the stair could have prevented any entry through through those doors and windows if there was any threat to any members of congress.
But all members of congress had left by then.
Shows how tolerant the Capitol Police were towards the protestors.
They allowed the mob to penetrate areas where they were not directly threatening Congress.

Ashli was the final straw, there were no more doors between her and Congress members


Ashli was an unarmed broad who posed no threat to Mr. Byrd.

No need for her to be wasted.
Was she by herself?

Actually she was alone at that point.
No one else went through the window.
They were busy trying to bust the doors down; which they would have accomplished had she not been shot.
I've been thinking she was small enough to get through the window, and that she planned to open the door for the mob behind her. No cops had shot at them yet, so I'm sure she thought they'd let them get away with this, too. But she had stumbled on the inner sanctum; there were many Congressional lives behind that door, and the police at that door weren't playing.

The people who leaked his name are identifying him by a beaded bracelet he wears on his wrist. He will be murdered, if they find him, for defending his government, and he will be the first REAL martyr in this episode.
These people would have been shot too had they also tried to enter the House chamber with lawmakers still inside. Police didn't sectively choose Ashli Targetpractice -- she just happened to be the first to penetrate their barricade.

Stopped the rest.
They still shot her without just cause. Their lives weren't being threatened. She didn't have a weapon.

How do you know their lives weren't being threatened?
How would the police know she had no weapon until after the fact?
And what about the rest of the mob coming in behind her?

No one had any weapons. Police cannot assume someone has a weapon. They have to see it. None of the poeple behind her had any weapons either.
When 3 policemen, charged with protecting people from a violent mob that had already outnumbered them, and forced them BACK into the chamber, where they and elected representatives were barricaded - how are they to know who does or does not have a weapon? What are 3 men supposed to do? Let 'em in? The mob already beat bloody a large number of their force who did not shoot.

How were they supposed to stop the mob from entering and possibly killing our elected representatives? These were the same people looking for Pence and Pelosi and calling for execution after all.
So you believe the police can just shoot people in a crowd because they are outnumbered?

:cuckoo: :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:
No....but perhaps a simple mind that cannot comprehend very much without exploding might think that. Right?
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,593
Reaction score
29,559
Points
2,180
Why didn't other terrorists follow Babbitt?
That whole situation reminds me of what Adele Penguins in Antarctica do when they are all bunched together on the edge of an ice floe, ready to jump in the water but not sure if there's a seal or killer whale down there. They push and shove until one in front falls in. And they wait.
That's bullshit. Penguins don't do that. They don't huddle together near the water, moron.
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
144,403
Reaction score
19,528
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
and all the scum demonRATS thing g. floyd is a martyr...how fucked up can you retarded asswipes get?
this guy is a MURDERER
Nope...he's a hero who did his duty as a Capitol police officer when faced with the first of a rabid mob trying to break thru.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,593
Reaction score
29,559
Points
2,180
Would you like a tissue, snowflake? :itsok:

Maybe just don't try to breach a barricaded section of the Capitol with an angry mob next time. How does that sound?

If you refuse, then I welcome you to try it and see what happens.

You're celebrating the death of an unarmed veteran that was no threat to anyone and then calling me a "snowflake" for objecting.

Yea. It's not like an angry mob can be a threat or anything.

Brilliant logic there, snowflake.
An angry mob, maybe. An unarmed woman, never.
At the head of an angry mob.....don't think we don't notice you left that little factoid out.
Exactly right. She was the tip of the spear the moment she went climbing through that window. As she was doing that, others were smashing in the doors and windows. Had that hero not shot her, the rest of that mob behind her would have poured into the House chamber where members of Congress were still hiding.

No, the dozens of fully armed and armored cops on the stair could have prevented any entry through through those doors and windows if there was any threat to any members of congress.
But all members of congress had left by then.
Shows how tolerant the Capitol Police were towards the protestors.
They allowed the mob to penetrate areas where they were not directly threatening Congress.

Ashli was the final straw, there were no more doors between her and Congress members


Ashli was an unarmed broad who posed no threat to Mr. Byrd.

No need for her to be wasted.

Would you like a tissue, snowflake? :itsok:

Maybe just don't try to breach a barricaded section of the Capitol with an angry mob next time. How does that sound?

If you refuse, then I welcome you to try it and see what happens.

You're celebrating the death of an unarmed veteran that was no threat to anyone and then calling me a "snowflake" for objecting.

Yea. It's not like an angry mob can be a threat or anything.

Brilliant logic there, snowflake.
An angry mob, maybe. An unarmed woman, never.
At the head of an angry mob.....don't think we don't notice you left that little factoid out.
Exactly right. She was the tip of the spear the moment she went climbing through that window. As she was doing that, others were smashing in the doors and windows. Had that hero not shot her, the rest of that mob behind her would have poured into the House chamber where members of Congress were still hiding.

No, the dozens of fully armed and armored cops on the stair could have prevented any entry through through those doors and windows if there was any threat to any members of congress.
But all members of congress had left by then.
Shows how tolerant the Capitol Police were towards the protestors.
They allowed the mob to penetrate areas where they were not directly threatening Congress.

Ashli was the final straw, there were no more doors between her and Congress members


Ashli was an unarmed broad who posed no threat to Mr. Byrd.

No need for her to be wasted.
Was she by herself?

Actually she was alone at that point.
No one else went through the window.
They were busy trying to bust the doors down; which they would have accomplished had she not been shot.
I've been thinking she was small enough to get through the window, and that she planned to open the door for the mob behind her. No cops had shot at them yet, so I'm sure she thought they'd let them get away with this, too. But she had stumbled on the inner sanctum; there were many Congressional lives behind that door, and the police at that door weren't playing.

The people who leaked his name are identifying him by a beaded bracelet he wears on his wrist. He will be murdered, if they find him, for defending his government, and he will be the first REAL martyr in this episode.
These people would have been shot too had they also tried to enter the House chamber with lawmakers still inside. Police didn't sectively choose Ashli Targetpractice -- she just happened to be the first to penetrate their barricade.

Stopped the rest.
They still shot her without just cause. Their lives weren't being threatened. She didn't have a weapon.

How do you know their lives weren't being threatened?
How would the police know she had no weapon until after the fact?
And what about the rest of the mob coming in behind her?

No one had any weapons. Police cannot assume someone has a weapon. They have to see it. None of the poeple behind her had any weapons either.
When 3 policemen, charged with protecting people from a violent mob that had already outnumbered them, and forced them BACK into the chamber, where they and elected representatives were barricaded - how are they to know who does or does not have a weapon? What are 3 men supposed to do? Let 'em in? The mob already beat bloody a large number of their force who did not shoot.

How were they supposed to stop the mob from entering and possibly killing our elected representatives? These were the same people looking for Pence and Pelosi and calling for execution after all.
So you believe the police can just shoot people in a crowd because they are outnumbered?

:cuckoo: :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:
No....but perhaps a simple mind that cannot comprehend very much without exploding might think that. Right?
Are you referring to yourself?
 

toobfreak

Tungsten/Glass Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
37,249
Reaction score
22,387
Points
1,915
Location
On The Way Home To Earth
That's not entirely true.
So, it is mostly true. That's better than SNOPES.

There were multiple security failures on multiple levels - much of which has to do with the fact that no one though the mob was really that dangerous and no one wanted the "optics" of a militarized looking capital.
JOE BIDEN took care of that real quick.

Many rioters came prepared for violence. They came with baseball bats, solid metal "flag poles", zip ties, bear spray (you don't find that hanging around the capital), pepper spray and stun guns.
That is mostly true. So I point out again, the riot was planned, and secret service doesn't let people bring bats and poles and bear spray and other things into close proximity with a president, so none of that shit was at the Eclipse Rally. Whatever showed up at the Capitol was premeditated and brought there with the intent of doing battle with security, NOT because of anything Trump said at the rally, UNLIKE EVERYTHING CLAIMED BY BOTH THE LEFT-WING MEDIA AND THE IMPEACHMENT OFFICERS DURING THAT 2ND STUPID FARCE TRIAL.

The mob was a mix of people - those who came for the protest and got caught up in the moment, those who came as individuals looking to cause mayhem, those who came as part of organized groups.
Most of them were simple family people with their wives and children looking to hear Trump and to show simple harmless support at the Capitol.

Screen Shot 2021-02-14 at 4.49.47 PM.png

Screen Shot 2021-02-14 at 4.59.25 PM.png

Screen Shot 2021-02-14 at 5.09.06 PM.png



The police did not have the time or the luxury to assume that because Babbit was a "little woman" she posed "no danger". For all they knew she could have had a gun on her they didn't see
Pure speculation. A few people trapped behind locked doors with no weapons couldn't be stopped with pepper spray or some other agent?
I'm sorry. The real victim here was America's pride. First, a few irate people essentially wearing street clothes unarmed not even covering their faces nearly took out the entire Congress? At one of its highest moments certifying a new president? And were labeled "insurrectionists looking to overturn democracy" after a stolen election?

America looks like an idiot. Little Richard could have knocked over the Capitol that day wearing a dress. Our enemies are laughing. And that is the REAL STORY: Biden put those 25,000 troops around Washington after that claiming fear of reprisal from Trump supporters. THE TRUTH is they realized ANYONE could come in there and kick their ass and they feared one of our real enemies would try next!
 
Last edited:

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,593
Reaction score
29,559
Points
2,180
and all the scum demonRATS thing g. floyd is a martyr...how fucked up can you retarded asswipes get?
this guy is a MURDERER
Nope...he's a hero who did his duty as a Capitol police officer when faced with the first of a rabid mob trying to break thru.
He murdered an innocent person.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
77,253
Reaction score
15,643
Points
2,210
I see a few mods posting here (including the one who started this thread) -- I have a question for y'all....

Whether you think the cop was right or wrong for shooting her, the shooting was thoroughly investigated and it was deemed justifiable. The question is... why are y'all allowing his name to be broadcast on this website? Especially given since the ONLY reason the OP put his name out there is with the hope of vigilante justice.
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
144,403
Reaction score
19,528
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
Why didn't other terrorists follow Babbitt?
That whole situation reminds me of what Adele Penguins in Antarctica do when they are all bunched together on the edge of an ice floe, ready to jump in the water but not sure if there's a seal or killer whale down there. They push and shove until one in front falls in. And they wait.
That's bullshit. Penguins don't do that. They don't huddle together near the water, moron.
They sure do.....
1618703717283.png
1618703731062.png
1618703758926.png
Once again, you dazzle us with your.....er....."brilliance". :heehee:
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
144,403
Reaction score
19,528
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
and all the scum demonRATS thing g. floyd is a martyr...how fucked up can you retarded asswipes get?
this guy is a MURDERER
Nope...he's a hero who did his duty as a Capitol police officer when faced with the first of a rabid mob trying to break thru.
He murdered an innocent person.
Not so innocent and he did his duty which was to protect members of Congress from the insurrectionist mob.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
77,253
Reaction score
15,643
Points
2,210
She is a despicable person for outing a police officer whose identity was being protected. She hopes the mob will get to him

No excuse, especially for a poster who is protected
Trumptards are an enemy of America.
Hate. Why do you hate Americans who wanted and election properly investigated for integrity. Do not try to tell me that happened. The enemies of America are in power.
It was investigated. Some states did recounts. Some did audits. Court cases were filed and state Senates held hearings. The fact of the matters is enemies of America like you reject anything and everything that doesn't echo your delusions.

According to you nations, the FBI can't be trusted ... the Department of Justice can't be trusted ...voters can’t be trusted ... the poll workers can’t be trusted ... the voting machines can’t be trusted ... the canvasing boards can't be trusted ... the recounts can't be trusted... the audits can't be trusted ... Democrats can't be trusted ... Republicans can't be trusted ... the media can’t be trusted ... the news can't be trusted ... Sydney Powell can't be trusted ... William Barr can’t be trusted ... Christopher Wray can't be trusted ... the guy who was in charge of election security can’t be trusted ... Georgia's Republican Secretary of State can't be trusted ... Gabriel Sterling, his Republican COO and Trump voter, can't be trusted ... Mike Pence can't be trusted ... the lower courts can’t be trusted ... the appellate courts can’t be trusted ... and the Supreme Court can’t be trusted.

But Donald Trump can be trusted.

1233796371590.gif
LOL, that was frickkin awesome! LOL
Sadly for the un-American right, it's 100% accurate.
 

Eric Arthur Blair

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Messages
20,846
Reaction score
11,340
Points
1,265
ow do you know their lives weren't being threatened?
The police?
Because they were armed and behind doors probably pissing themselves. And they
were in a bottleneck where no one could get to them.
Why would anyone be so stupid as to say the police were in danger? If they left their safe haven and wandered out where the crowds were perhaps you'd have a point. But as it was you have none at all.

How would the police know she had no weapon until after the fact?
She brandished no weapon because she had none. What made Michael Leroy Byrd think she was armed? He had ample time to observe she had no weapon before he shot her like a coward.

I guess he felt safer just executing her for good measure.


And what about the rest of the mob coming in behind her?
What mob?
There was no mob coming behind her. Ashli Babbitt herself was not entering the Capitol building
because she could not possibly do so.
How many people do you think could squeeze thrown a window with half a pane of safety glass in it?
Get bent, apologist for killers.
 

Lastamender

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
12,729
Reaction score
7,710
Points
1,050
I see a few mods posting here (including the one who started this thread) -- I have a question for y'all....

Whether you think the cop was right or wrong for shooting her, the shooting was thoroughly investigated and it was deemed justifiable. The question is... why are y'all allowing his name to be broadcast on this website? Especially given since the ONLY reason the OP put his name out there is with the hope of vigilante justice.
:shutupsmiley:
 

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
92,508
Reaction score
13,268
Points
2,220
Location
Native America
I see a few mods posting here (including the one who started this thread) -- I have a question for y'all....

Whether you think the cop was right or wrong for shooting her, the shooting was thoroughly investigated and it was deemed justifiable. The question is... why are y'all allowing his name to be broadcast on this website? Especially given since the ONLY reason the OP put his name out there is with the hope of vigilante justice.

Amen! I totally agree! Apparently USMB has sunk lower than I thought. I reported this thread as soon as I saw it today. I can't believe it's still up and running.
 
Last edited:

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,593
Reaction score
29,559
Points
2,180
That's not entirely true.
So, it is mostly true. That's better than SNOPES.

There were multiple security failures on multiple levels - much of which has to do with the fact that no one though the mob was really that dangerous and no one wanted the "optics" of a militarized looking capital.
JOE BIDEN took care of that real quick.

Many rioters came prepared for violence. They came with baseball bats, solid metal "flag poles", zip ties, bear spray (you don't find that hanging around the capital), pepper spray and stun guns.
That is mostly true. So I point oput again, the riot was planned, and secret service doesn't let people bring bats and poles and bear spray and other things into close proximity withna prtesident, sdo none of that shit was at the Eclipse Rally. Whatever showed up at the Capitol was premeditated and brought there with the intent of doing battle with security, NOT because of anything Trump said at the rally, UNLIKE EVERYTHING CLAIMED BY BOTH THE LEFT-WING MEDIA AND THE IMPEACHMENT OFFICERS DURING THAT 2ND STUPID FARCE TRIAL.

The mob was a mix of people - those who came for the protest and got caught up in the moment, those who came as individuals looking to cause mayhem, those who came as part of organized groups.
Most of them were simple family people with their wives and children looking to hear Trump and to show simple harmless support at the Capitol.

View attachment 481099
View attachment 481100
View attachment 481101


The police did not have the time or the luxury to assume that because Babbit was a "little woman" she posed "no danger". For all they knew she could have had a gun on her they didn't see
Pure speculation. A few people trapped behind locked doors with no weapons couldn't be stopped with pepper spray or some other agent?
I'm sorry. The real victim here was America's pride. First, a few irate people essentially wearing street clothes unarmed not even covering their faces nearly took out the entire Congress? At one of its highest moments certifying a new president? And were labeled "insurrectionists looking to overturn democracy" after a stolen election?

America looks like an idiot. Little Richard could have knocked over the Capitol that day wearing a dress. Our enemies are laughing. And that is the REAL STORY: Biden put those 25,000 around Washington after that claiming fear of reprisal from Trump supporters. THE TRUTH is they realized ANYONE could come in there and kick their ass and they feared one of our real enemies would try next!

There were no bats or solid flag poles. I doubt anyone makes such things. "Zip ties" are not weapons. And bear spray is purely defensive.

The whole story is pure horseshit, just like everything else she posts.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
5,125
Reaction score
2,304
Points
365
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
This addresses the "but she was unarmed" argument, however Ashli was also a part of a mob. The following is for private citizens but the reasoning and examples are applicable to both law enforcement and private citizens:

DISPARITY OF FORCE
...Simply put, a disparity of force means that the attackers — even without weapons — had such an overwhelming amount of force available to them that the lawful defender was at risk of death or serious bodily injury.​
Case 1: Doctor Sweet
On Sept. 8, 1925, a young doctor named Ossian Sweet moved into a house in a respectable neighborhood in Detroit. There were several threats against Sweet and his family because of their race and, despite police standing guard at his home, crowds gathered at night to protest. Sweet did the prudent thing and exercised his Second Amendment rights by inviting several friends over and providing them with firearms to help him guard his family.​
On the second night, a mob gathered at his house. Rocks were thrown at the residence, breaking a window, and several members of the mob rushed the house. The defenders opened fire, wounding one man and killing another. Sweet and his friends were held and tried for murder, and legendary attorney Clarence Darrow defended them. The first trial ended in a mistrial; the second in an acquittal.​
This case is important because it is cited in the book Warren: On Homicide, which is the definitive book on homicide law in the United States. A critical legal concept for self-defense in Warren is, “Where several are apparently preparing to join in an attack on defendant, his right of self-defense extends to each participant.”1 The concept was set as a precedent in State (WV) v. Foley.​
What this means for the law-abiding armed citizen is that, when faced with a violent mob whose words or actions indicate the participants intend on doing violence, each member of the mob shares the responsibility of the entirety of the mob and is equally and individually fair game for the defensive actions of the innocent defender. One important caveat in Warren is that, after the mob is whittled down to one member, any disparity of force caused by the number of attackers is gone.​
If an armed citizen uses a firearm to defend himself against an unarmed mob, no matter how many participants there are, no matter what threats the mob makes or how many fires they’re setting, an overzealous lawyer is going to make the argument that, “This maniac used a gun on unarmed people. If they were unarmed, what threat were they against someone with a gun?” The following case will illustrate exactly what threat multiple unarmed attackers can be against a trained person with a gun.​
Case 2: Darrell Lunsford
In 1991, Nacogdoches County, Texas, Police Constable Darrell Lunsford initiated a traffic stop on a suspicious vehicle. Constable Lunsford pulled the driver of the car out to speak to him, and, despite being told to stay in the car, one of the other two occupants exited the vehicle. Without warning, the second occupant attacked Lunsford. The third occupant got out of the car and joined the attack. Within five seconds of the initial attack, Lunsford was on the ground and immobile. Nine seconds later, one of the suspects took Lunsford’s pistol from his holster and shot him in the neck, killing him instantly.​
Lunsford was considerably larger than his attackers. He was well-trained in unarmed arrest control. One on one, he was more than a match for any them. Two on one, the outcome of the fight could go either way. Three on one, he had no chance.​
The lesson here for the armed citizen is that even though your attackers might not be armed, if you are armed and become unable to defend yourself, there is a very real chance your attackers will find your gun, take it away from you and murder you with it.​
According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, between 2011 and 2015, 7.9 percent of police officers killed in the line of duty were slain with their own firearms. These were men and women who were trained in unarmed combat and weapons retention. One can argue that the risk to private citizens is even higher.​
One aspect of riots that isn’t new but has recently made headlines is a group of protesters blocking traffic. I’ve been asked many times if deadly force is justified in such a situation, and the next cases are the ones I usually bring up.​
“When the other protestors put the driver in fear for his life, the passive protestors were equally and individually lawful targets of the driver’s defensive actions.”
“When the other protestors put the driver in fear for his life, the passive protestors were equally and individually lawful targets of the driver’s defensive actions.”​
Cases 3 and 4: Reginald Denny and the Abortion Clinic Protest
In 1992, Reginald Denny was a construction truck driver who suddenly found himself in the middle of the Los Angeles Riots. He was pulled from his vehicle and savagely beaten, resulting in years of rehabilitative therapy. After being released from prison, one of his attackers said he and the others never intentionally targeted Denny; they just got caught up in the moment.​
Mob mentality is well-documented. In short, people in riots will do things they wouldn’t normally do. A riot is a very dangerous organism, and even people who plan on peacefully protesting can suddenly become threats or can block your escape if other protesters become threats.​
That was the case when a group of activists were protesting outside a Sacramento abortion clinic. Several protesters decided to lie on the ground in front of an SUV arriving at the clinic, which, by itself, is not a threat meriting a deadly force response. However, other protesters surrounded the SUV and began pounding on the windows. The driver felt threatened enough to drive over the protesters lying in front of him.​
The protesters on the ground were passive; by themselves, they presented no threat. However, remember what Warren says about mobs. When the other protesters put the driver in fear for his life, the passive protesters were equally and individually lawful targets of the driver’s defensive actions. The driver was not charged, and, fortunately, no one was seriously injured.​
Protests are, by their nature, potentially dangerous, and the prudent course of action is to avoid them. If you do inadvertently find yourself in the middle of a protest or riot, treat it like a wild animal preserve: Stay in your car and keep moving, even if you are only moving at a slow crawl. Be aware of your escape routes and get out of the area as soon as possible.​
Case 5: Michael Strickland
Michael Strickland was a conservative blogger who, while filming a protest in 2015, was beaten. His cameras were stolen, and he was hospitalized with his arm broken in three places.​
In July 2016, he was filming another protest in Portland, Oregon. Several members of the crowd became hostile, surrounding Strickland and yelling at him. Feeling threatened, Strickland drew his pistol, scanned for threats and backed up. The crowd backed off; Strickland reholstered and left the scene.​
Strickland was arrested and found guilty of 10 counts of unlawful use of a weapon, 10 counts of menacing and one count of second-degree disorderly conduct. At the time of this writing, he has not been sentenced.​
In looking at the facts of the case as dispassionately as I can, I identified three things Strickland did that hurt his self-defense claim. Two of the things Strickland did were what I call “tactically sound legal suicide.”​
The first thing? Anticipating a possibly violent crowd, he had an extended magazine in his Glock and possessed five spare standard magazines. The prosecution made a very big deal about Strickland carrying more than twice the ammunition some police officers typically carry.​
In the American legal system, the concept of “mutual combat” voids the claim of self-defense: Knowing of the extra risk of attending this protest, Strickland took extra ammunition with him. While not as bad as agreeing to an outright duel, he knowingly went to a location where he anticipated the need to use his gun.​
While taking extra ammunition was a tactically smart thing to do, it damaged his self-defense claim. Remember: Deadly force is only legally justified when it is employed to stop an immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent. By going somewhere he thought the need to use a gun was likely, Strickland eroded his claim as an innocent party and that the danger was unavoidable.​
The second act of “tactically smart legal suicide” was to scan for threats with his gun at high-ready, or with the gun just below eye level. I was taught to do this as a deputy sheriff, in the Army and as an overseas contractor, and many firearms instructors teach their students to do the same.​
The problem with this technique is that, when the gun is at high-ready as you scan, you can end up pointing your gun at people who are not threats. Strickland was convicted of menacing for pointing his gun not at the people threatening him but at bystanders who were trying to see what was going on. A more legally defensible option is to scan at low-ready, with the gun pointed at the ground. Yes, your reaction time to respond to a threat will be slower, but it sounds better on the witness stand.​
The third thing that hurt his case was, after he was in a safe location, he didn’t call 911. The first person who calls 911 is assumed to be the victim; the other party is automatically listed as the suspect. Equally importantly, if two people call 911 on each other, it should give the cops a clue that there is more going on than what just one of the parties says. The prosecutor made a big deal out of Strickland not calling 911.​
Avoid, Evade, Prevail
In any violent encounter, but especially against an agitated mob, there is no winning, just degrees of losing. By knowing the applicable laws and making sure your training dovetails with those laws, you have a better chance of not only surviving the streets but surviving the courtroom. As with any use of deadly force, though, nothing beats avoiding it in the first place, so be certain that remains in the forefront of your consciousness as a responsibly armed American.​
 
Last edited:

Lastamender

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
12,729
Reaction score
7,710
Points
1,050
I see a few mods posting here (including the one who started this thread) -- I have a question for y'all....

Whether you think the cop was right or wrong for shooting her, the shooting was thoroughly investigated and it was deemed justifiable. The question is... why are y'all allowing his name to be broadcast on this website? Especially given since the ONLY reason the OP put his name out there is with the hope of vigilante justice.

Amen! I totally agree! Apparently USMB has sunk lower than I thought.
Didn't that happen July 14, 2011
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,593
Reaction score
29,559
Points
2,180
I see a few mods posting here (including the one who started this thread) -- I have a question for y'all....

Whether you think the cop was right or wrong for shooting her, the shooting was thoroughly investigated and it was deemed justifiable. The question is... why are y'all allowing his name to be broadcast on this website? Especially given since the ONLY reason the OP put his name out there is with the hope of vigilante justice.
It was deemed "justifiable" by some deep state hacks. His name is supposed to be public information, just like the name of every other perp involved in a homicide.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
68,650
Reaction score
18,780
Points
2,220
wowza - tweet is unavailable?

Tayler Hansen
@TaylerUSA
·
Apr 13
The Identify of Ashli Babbitt’s shooter is—

Lieutenant Michael Leroy Byrd.

Multiple Mainstream Media Outlets have known this, but they REFUSE to run the story.

Why is that?

An American Hero

Saved Congress Members from a trained assassin

Murderer. Thats who he is.

Babbitt was trying to kill a member of Congress
She got what she deserved
No, she wasn't. More lies.
She was a trained killer trying to kill a member of Congress
Fuck you, :ahole-1: !
Rightwinger went a bit too far, but not by much. We don't know she was going to kill anyone herself, but she was attempting to allow into the area a howling mob that was saying they were going to.
They said they were going to kill people?
Yup. KILL MIKE PENCE!!! Etc. Through a bullhorn, EXECUTE THE TRAITORS!! Groups planning to kidnap and kill Nancy Pelosi. WHERE ARE YOU, NANCY?
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
68,650
Reaction score
18,780
Points
2,220
I see a few mods posting here (including the one who started this thread) -- I have a question for y'all....

Whether you think the cop was right or wrong for shooting her, the shooting was thoroughly investigated and it was deemed justifiable. The question is... why are y'all allowing his name to be broadcast on this website? Especially given since the ONLY reason the OP put his name out there is with the hope of vigilante justice.
It was deemed "justifiable" by some deep state hacks. His name is supposed to be public information.
What are you going to do with his name once you know it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$20.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top