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.

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,913
Reaction score
29,769
Points
2,180
...
And the consequence for Ashli Targetpractice was earning the first Darwin award for 2021.

:abgg2q.jpg:


I think we all can agree it was foolish for Ashli to go through the window after everyone else saw the cop pointing the gun, and everyone was yelling about how there was a gun being pointed.

But that does not negate the fact the cop committed murder since Ashlie was not a lethal threat to anyone.
The video clearly shows that the cop who shot was sticking his arm through a very dense barricade.
You can talk about where people were, the last steps they took, and what direction they happened to turn their heads at the time they were murdered, but that does not negate the premeditation, planning, and set-up for the murders -- including extensive travel plans and itineraries -- that took place leading up to the events of January 6.
"premeditation"? Who premeditated Babbit's death? How does that work out?

Cops were standing right next to Ashli as she attempted to climb through the window, and they felt no urgent need to arrest her. She could easily have been arrested at amy time. Therefore there was no valid reason to shoot her.

Those cops were told if they interfered they who be beaten up or killed... They were woefully outnumbered, if they arrested her they were putting themselves in untold danger...

The officer followed his training. To handcuff her was to leave his position and put himself and the people he was protecting in danger...
Told by whom? Every riot is a dangerous situation. What makes this one any difference other than the fact that NAZI thugs like you hate conservatives and believe any use of force against them is justified?

Police aren't trained to shoot people who aren't a threat to their lives.

how the f*** can you even say that they weren't a threat to the police officers lives they were blatantly attacking the officers screaming kill them kill them. There are plenty of videos of these f****** traitors calling for the officers to be killed and attacking them with various weapons. The officers have every right to open fire on the entire group. they showed remarkable constraint and that restraint is the only reason that several of these people are alive today.
They hadn't even touched those officers, and I have noticed any of them shouting "kill them." You're mixing difference events together and spouting horseshit.

Through out this event there were calls for help, officer down, etc throughout the capitol, and plenty of video evidence of what that mob was doing to them.
We're talking only about the officers confronting Ashly Babbit.

This wasn't happening in a vacuum.
For the purposes of this discussion, it is. What was going 10,000 feet away is irrelevant.

That's the definition of insanity.
ROFL! You're the one who is spouting insanity. You dont' get to blame Ashly Babbit for anything going on in any part of the capitol. That's the tactic of a NAZI.

Nazi's have nothing to do with this (and neither does Stalin). You're trying to take one discrete part (the portion where Ashli led the mob through the window) of a whole (the mob overrunning the capital) and pretend that the whole has no bearing on that one moment. But it does. There is no way the police, listening to what is going on around them within the capital, hearing about officers beaten by the mob, a mob that is roaming through the building largely unchecked, would be operating on the assumption that this one portion of the mob is all they need to be concerned with.

You seem to think that the officer should have...what, engaged in hand to hand combat with her (leaving a hole in their defenses for the rest of the mob to exploit?). If she had been a big burly Antifa guy you KNOW you wouldn't be defending him :lol:
You have no idea what the police were hearing, and what goes on 10,000 have no bearing on whether an officer's life is immediately in danger. Just like a fucking Nazi, you want to hold some individuals responsible for the actions of others.

This line of reasoning was coined by the NAZIs. That's why you get called a NAZI.
 

justinacolmena

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
6,996
Reaction score
2,240
Points
210
Location
alaska, usa
There were...what...3 police officers there holding the fort from the angry mob.
Why do you keep insisting that mobsters in blue uniforms with guns and badges are always on the right side of the law no matter whom they hurt or kill, or how much property they damage or steal?
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
77,720
Reaction score
15,905
Points
2,210
It's pure evil to expose this American patriot and his family to further danger from Trump terrorists. That's why the mainstream media isn't doing it.

That is why mebelle did t.

Alert the vigilantes to their target.....a truly despicable act

Amen! I'm sort of puzzled why USMB would even allow such a thread - especially from a mod.

Indeed, Belle should have posted this "news" based on a stupid TWEET in Badlands or Rubber Room. :)
Most would have been banned for posting restricted personal information. But some posters get away with it

When a person becomes a public figure by actions of their own, like shooting someone, then the law says they no longer have some rights to privacy they had before. Such as their picture, name, and even address appearing in national publications. You can not legally take a picture of someone and publish it, but if they were already in a TV commercial, then you can. It paparazzi rules that then apply.

And I would totally disagree this cop who shot is a hero.
He was behind a further barricade, with many other police.
Ashli was only going from the senate to the lobby, not to the actual House where the cop was.
So there was at least one more layer of barricade before one could claim it was the last ditch defense effort.
There is just no way to claim the shooting was necessary.

The officers identity was being intentionally withheld for his safety and the safety of his family.

The same crazies who attacked the Capitol would attack him in retaliation.

The original poster does not care about the officers safety and gloated about it. USMB Mods do not care either.
Stop with the drama. Babbitt was shot for political reasons. It was to intimidate Trump supporters and the justice she received, which was no justice at all, is also to intimidate conservatives and embolden those violent thugs that do the Democrats dirty work.
She was shot for political reasons

She believed the lies and rhetoric coming out of Trump about a stolen election.
She tried to do something about it.
Cost her life
She did nothing that warranted being shot with no warning. You know it but would rather support the murderer. Absolutely no surprise there.

Rightwinger the award winning scumbag.
She was leading an angry mob in the process of attacking members of Congress

Wrong.
She was not a leader and no members of congress were at risk, yet.

As this was happening, how would anyone know she was not a leader?
How do you know no members were at risk? They were there, behind the police. And a mob was trying to get in.

The fact she was the first to try to go through the window was just because she was smaller than anyone else there.
It is not likely anyone else would even follow.

The window was in fact quite large. It is very likely others would take her lead and follow her in either through the window or by opening up the doors. Why do think they wouldn't?

View attachment 481417

Nor would access to the lobby have threatened members of Congress, who had already left.

They had not all left, some were still trapped.

Also - the police are living beings with lives to worry about. Their lives were being threatened. This is the same mob that savagely beat a police man with a metal pole, attempted to gouge out another's eyes, squashed a police officer between the doors, and injured over 140, some seriously, and one dying as a result.


There was at least one more barricade to even get to the House Chamber, much less house members.

Great - only one barricade remaining to get through! They should have just let Ashli through. Sheesh.
And it's a lie, there was not another barricade to get through.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,913
Reaction score
29,769
Points
2,180
...
And the consequence for Ashli Targetpractice was earning the first Darwin award for 2021.

:abgg2q.jpg:


I think we all can agree it was foolish for Ashli to go through the window after everyone else saw the cop pointing the gun, and everyone was yelling about how there was a gun being pointed.

But that does not negate the fact the cop committed murder since Ashlie was not a lethal threat to anyone.
The video clearly shows that the cop who shot was sticking his arm through a very dense barricade.
You can talk about where people were, the last steps they took, and what direction they happened to turn their heads at the time they were murdered, but that does not negate the premeditation, planning, and set-up for the murders -- including extensive travel plans and itineraries -- that took place leading up to the events of January 6.
"premeditation"? Who premeditated Babbit's death? How does that work out?

Cops were standing right next to Ashli as she attempted to climb through the window, and they felt no urgent need to arrest her. She could easily have been arrested at amy time. Therefore there was no valid reason to shoot her.

Those cops were told if they interfered they who be beaten up or killed... They were woefully outnumbered, if they arrested her they were putting themselves in untold danger...

The officer followed his training. To handcuff her was to leave his position and put himself and the people he was protecting in danger...
Told by whom? Every riot is a dangerous situation. What makes this one any difference other than the fact that NAZI thugs like you hate conservatives and believe any use of force against them is justified?

Police aren't trained to shoot people who aren't a threat to their lives.

how the f*** can you even say that they weren't a threat to the police officers lives they were blatantly attacking the officers screaming kill them kill them. There are plenty of videos of these f****** traitors calling for the officers to be killed and attacking them with various weapons. The officers have every right to open fire on the entire group. they showed remarkable constraint and that restraint is the only reason that several of these people are alive today.
They hadn't even touched those officers, and I have noticed any of them shouting "kill them." You're mixing difference events together and spouting horseshit.
View attachment 481427 View attachment 481428 View attachment 481430 View attachment 481431 View attachment 481432 You were saying?
We're talking only about the officers confronting Ashley Babbit. Officers who were 10,000 feet away are irrelevant.

Your pictures don't appear to show any serious violence, just pushing.

There is a violent mob of hundreds of people rampaging through the capitol and you're attempting to say it's irrelevant. It's not irrelevant when the police are vastly outnumbered and there is no knowing when or where another part of the mob will enter the scene engage them. You're really grasping at straws.
It is irrelevant when we're talking about whether that particular cop's like is in danger.

Your theory of law is utterly absurd.

There is a mob that already (using equipment looted from fallen officers) - smashed the window in the door - a large window. The front person in the mob was climbing through, the rest were behind her.

There were...what...3 police officers there holding the fort from the angry mob.

But...their lives weren't in danger. You saw what the mob did to the police in those videos. Where do you come up with this crap?
You obviously aren't amendable to reason, so I'm done arguing with you about it.
 

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
70,066
Reaction score
30,200
Points
2,330
The DOJ, in defense of this man, just gave legal protection for every police officer in the nation that shoots someone.

This man shot and killed an unarned white female vet, and tge DOJ declared they will not press charges because he was justified because he 'was in fear if his life.

EVERY Police officers should now be afforded the exact same UNQUESTIONED defense.

Most are. You realize that right?

It's interesting what you choose to include and exclude.

Include:
- the fact that she was a vet (as if being a vet meant a person was automatically not culpable of crime).
- the fact she was white (part of the rightwing victimization card set)
- the fact she was female (because we all know females are never violent or dangerous, even when combat trained)

Exclude
- her troubled military record (if she were black you'd have scoured her personal life and career for anything that would justify her death)
- the fact - and this is very important - she was engaged in committing a very serious crime when she was shot
- she ignored orders to stop by the police

Trumpist take away
- Blue Lives Matter (until they shoot a Trump supporting extremist)
- if a Trumpist is engaged in crime, they're Patriots not criminals
- if you don't have a gun you're harmless - which kind of begs the question since the two people Rittenhouse shot and killed were unarmed....
Your entire argument is bullshit, nothing I said or intended. ALL of it is what YOU said and inferred / projected.

Din't try to speak for me or attempt to claim what I intended because you suck at it / are wrong.

You did so because your own argument fails...so you had to attempt to undermine mine by falsely claiming I inferred/ meant things I did not.

I accept your surrender based on your lack of your own argument resulting in your failed attempt to 'translate' mine.


I think the intent is quite clear by what you CHOOSE to emphasize and what you CHOOSE to leave out. You aren't fooling anyone.

There's a saying from somewhere, not sure where - throw a stone in a pack of dogs and the one that yelps loudest is the one that probably got hit. You sure are yelping.
I pointed out facts. I did not try to insinuate or speak for anyone else...like you snowflakes always do, as demonstrated AGAIN....as YOU just tried to do.

You can not make your own arguments because you have none. So you try to undermine, misrepresent, and project on others.

Sad.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,913
Reaction score
29,769
Points
2,180
There were...what...3 police officers there holding the fort from the angry mob.
Why do you keep insisting that mobsters in blue uniforms with guns and badges are always on the right side of the law no matter whom they hurt or kill, or how much property they damage or steal?
Except when lefties are rioting.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
77,720
Reaction score
15,905
Points
2,210
...
And the consequence for Ashli Targetpractice was earning the first Darwin award for 2021.

:abgg2q.jpg:


I think we all can agree it was foolish for Ashli to go through the window after everyone else saw the cop pointing the gun, and everyone was yelling about how there was a gun being pointed.

But that does not negate the fact the cop committed murder since Ashlie was not a lethal threat to anyone.
The video clearly shows that the cop who shot was sticking his arm through a very dense barricade.
You can talk about where people were, the last steps they took, and what direction they happened to turn their heads at the time they were murdered, but that does not negate the premeditation, planning, and set-up for the murders -- including extensive travel plans and itineraries -- that took place leading up to the events of January 6.
"premeditation"? Who premeditated Babbit's death? How does that work out?

Cops were standing right next to Ashli as she attempted to climb through the window, and they felt no urgent need to arrest her. She could easily have been arrested at amy time. Therefore there was no valid reason to shoot her.
How do you know those cops knew there were still House members in the chamber?
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
144,625
Reaction score
19,747
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
...
And the consequence for Ashli Targetpractice was earning the first Darwin award for 2021.

:abgg2q.jpg:


I think we all can agree it was foolish for Ashli to go through the window after everyone else saw the cop pointing the gun, and everyone was yelling about how there was a gun being pointed.

But that does not negate the fact the cop committed murder since Ashlie was not a lethal threat to anyone.
The video clearly shows that the cop who shot was sticking his arm through a very dense barricade.
You can talk about where people were, the last steps they took, and what direction they happened to turn their heads at the time they were murdered, but that does not negate the premeditation, planning, and set-up for the murders -- including extensive travel plans and itineraries -- that took place leading up to the events of January 6.
"premeditation"? Who premeditated Babbit's death? How does that work out?

Cops were standing right next to Ashli as she attempted to climb through the window, and they felt no urgent need to arrest her. She could easily have been arrested at amy time. Therefore there was no valid reason to shoot her.

Those cops were told if they interfered they who be beaten up or killed... They were woefully outnumbered, if they arrested her they were putting themselves in untold danger...

The officer followed his training. To handcuff her was to leave his position and put himself and the people he was protecting in danger...
Told by whom? Every riot is a dangerous situation. What makes this one any difference other than the fact that NAZI thugs like you hate conservatives and believe any use of force against them is justified?

Police aren't trained to shoot people who aren't a threat to their lives.

how the f*** can you even say that they weren't a threat to the police officers lives they were blatantly attacking the officers screaming kill them kill them. There are plenty of videos of these f****** traitors calling for the officers to be killed and attacking them with various weapons. The officers have every right to open fire on the entire group. they showed remarkable constraint and that restraint is the only reason that several of these people are alive today.
They hadn't even touched those officers, and I have noticed any of them shouting "kill them." You're mixing difference events together and spouting horseshit.

Through out this event there were calls for help, officer down, etc throughout the capitol, and plenty of video evidence of what that mob was doing to them.
We're talking only about the officers confronting Ashly Babbit.

This wasn't happening in a vacuum.
For the purposes of this discussion, it is. What was going 10,000 feet away is irrelevant.

That's the definition of insanity.
ROFL! You're the one who is spouting insanity. You dont' get to blame Ashly Babbit for anything going on in any part of the capitol. That's the tactic of a NAZI.

Nazi's have nothing to do with this (and neither does Stalin). You're trying to take one discrete part (the portion where Ashli led the mob through the window) of a whole (the mob overrunning the capital) and pretend that the whole has no bearing on that one moment. But it does. There is no way the police, listening to what is going on around them within the capital, hearing about officers beaten by the mob, a mob that is roaming through the building largely unchecked, would be operating on the assumption that this one portion of the mob is all they need to be concerned with.

You seem to think that the officer should have...what, engaged in hand to hand combat with her (leaving a hole in their defenses for the rest of the mob to exploit?). If she had been a big burly Antifa guy you KNOW you wouldn't be defending him :lol:
You have no idea what the police were hearing, and what goes on 10,000 have no bearing on whether an officer's life is immediately in danger. Just like a fucking Nazi, you want to hold some individuals responsible for the actions of others.

This line of reasoning was coined by the NAZIs. That's why you get called a NAZI.
Nor do you.

Another serious question: IF you get paid everytime you use the word "NAZI", how much DO you get paid each time? (you might have gotten paid 3 times for that post)
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
77,720
Reaction score
15,905
Points
2,210
Regardless of her size, Ashli was the first one through the window making her an immediate threat.
Nobody followed because a message was sent
So there was no "charge through the window"? I wish all your lies were so easy to debunk.
And how about retracting your second lie.
Ashli Babbitt never made it through that window. New videos capture fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt during Capitol siege

She was in the process of climbing through when she was shot. Now you are just arguing semantics.

Doesn't matter.
It would have been just as easy to handcuff her as to shoot her.
So there was no need to shoot.
Shooting is only legal in self defense from a deadly threat.
That did not exist, so then shooting was not legal.
How does handcuffing her stop the rest of the mob from pouring in? That mob was already angry and hostile; if anything, arresting her could have agitated them further.
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
144,625
Reaction score
19,747
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
77,720
Reaction score
15,905
Points
2,210
Regardless of her size, Ashli was the first one through the window making her an immediate threat.
Nobody followed because a message was sent
So there was no "charge through the window"? I wish all your lies were so easy to debunk.
And how about retracting your second lie.
Ashli Babbitt never made it through that window. New videos capture fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt during Capitol siege

She was in the process of climbing through when she was shot. Now you are just arguing semantics.

Doesn't matter.
It would have been just as easy to handcuff her as to shoot her.
So there was no need to shoot.
Shooting is only legal in self defense from a deadly threat.
That did not exist, so then shooting was not legal.

A mob IS a deadly threat. At that moment, she was part of a mob - she just happened to be the first.
... and only thanks to that cop.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,913
Reaction score
29,769
Points
2,180
...
And the consequence for Ashli Targetpractice was earning the first Darwin award for 2021.

:abgg2q.jpg:


I think we all can agree it was foolish for Ashli to go through the window after everyone else saw the cop pointing the gun, and everyone was yelling about how there was a gun being pointed.

But that does not negate the fact the cop committed murder since Ashlie was not a lethal threat to anyone.
The video clearly shows that the cop who shot was sticking his arm through a very dense barricade.
You can talk about where people were, the last steps they took, and what direction they happened to turn their heads at the time they were murdered, but that does not negate the premeditation, planning, and set-up for the murders -- including extensive travel plans and itineraries -- that took place leading up to the events of January 6.
"premeditation"? Who premeditated Babbit's death? How does that work out?

Cops were standing right next to Ashli as she attempted to climb through the window, and they felt no urgent need to arrest her. She could easily have been arrested at amy time. Therefore there was no valid reason to shoot her.

Those cops were told if they interfered they who be beaten up or killed... They were woefully outnumbered, if they arrested her they were putting themselves in untold danger...

The officer followed his training. To handcuff her was to leave his position and put himself and the people he was protecting in danger...
Told by whom? Every riot is a dangerous situation. What makes this one any difference other than the fact that NAZI thugs like you hate conservatives and believe any use of force against them is justified?

Police aren't trained to shoot people who aren't a threat to their lives.

how the f*** can you even say that they weren't a threat to the police officers lives they were blatantly attacking the officers screaming kill them kill them. There are plenty of videos of these f****** traitors calling for the officers to be killed and attacking them with various weapons. The officers have every right to open fire on the entire group. they showed remarkable constraint and that restraint is the only reason that several of these people are alive today.
They hadn't even touched those officers, and I have noticed any of them shouting "kill them." You're mixing difference events together and spouting horseshit.

Through out this event there were calls for help, officer down, etc throughout the capitol, and plenty of video evidence of what that mob was doing to them.
We're talking only about the officers confronting Ashly Babbit.

This wasn't happening in a vacuum.
For the purposes of this discussion, it is. What was going 10,000 feet away is irrelevant.

That's the definition of insanity.
ROFL! You're the one who is spouting insanity. You dont' get to blame Ashly Babbit for anything going on in any part of the capitol. That's the tactic of a NAZI.

Nazi's have nothing to do with this (and neither does Stalin). You're trying to take one discrete part (the portion where Ashli led the mob through the window) of a whole (the mob overrunning the capital) and pretend that the whole has no bearing on that one moment. But it does. There is no way the police, listening to what is going on around them within the capital, hearing about officers beaten by the mob, a mob that is roaming through the building largely unchecked, would be operating on the assumption that this one portion of the mob is all they need to be concerned with.

You seem to think that the officer should have...what, engaged in hand to hand combat with her (leaving a hole in their defenses for the rest of the mob to exploit?). If she had been a big burly Antifa guy you KNOW you wouldn't be defending him :lol:
You have no idea what the police were hearing, and what goes on 10,000 have no bearing on whether an officer's life is immediately in danger. Just like a fucking Nazi, you want to hold some individuals responsible for the actions of others.

This line of reasoning was coined by the NAZIs. That's why you get called a NAZI.
Nor do you.

Another serious question: IF you get paid everytime you use the word "NAZI", how much DO you get paid each time? (you might have gotten paid 3 times for that post)
The truth hurts, eh?
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,913
Reaction score
29,769
Points
2,180

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
91,407
Reaction score
23,529
Points
2,180
Location
in between
...
And the consequence for Ashli Targetpractice was earning the first Darwin award for 2021.

:abgg2q.jpg:


I think we all can agree it was foolish for Ashli to go through the window after everyone else saw the cop pointing the gun, and everyone was yelling about how there was a gun being pointed.

But that does not negate the fact the cop committed murder since Ashlie was not a lethal threat to anyone.
The video clearly shows that the cop who shot was sticking his arm through a very dense barricade.
You can talk about where people were, the last steps they took, and what direction they happened to turn their heads at the time they were murdered, but that does not negate the premeditation, planning, and set-up for the murders -- including extensive travel plans and itineraries -- that took place leading up to the events of January 6.
"premeditation"? Who premeditated Babbit's death? How does that work out?

Cops were standing right next to Ashli as she attempted to climb through the window, and they felt no urgent need to arrest her. She could easily have been arrested at amy time. Therefore there was no valid reason to shoot her.

Those cops were told if they interfered they who be beaten up or killed... They were woefully outnumbered, if they arrested her they were putting themselves in untold danger...

The officer followed his training. To handcuff her was to leave his position and put himself and the people he was protecting in danger...
Told by whom? Every riot is a dangerous situation. What makes this one any difference other than the fact that NAZI thugs like you hate conservatives and believe any use of force against them is justified?

Police aren't trained to shoot people who aren't a threat to their lives.

how the f*** can you even say that they weren't a threat to the police officers lives they were blatantly attacking the officers screaming kill them kill them. There are plenty of videos of these f****** traitors calling for the officers to be killed and attacking them with various weapons. The officers have every right to open fire on the entire group. they showed remarkable constraint and that restraint is the only reason that several of these people are alive today.
They hadn't even touched those officers, and I have noticed any of them shouting "kill them." You're mixing difference events together and spouting horseshit.

Through out this event there were calls for help, officer down, etc throughout the capitol, and plenty of video evidence of what that mob was doing to them.
We're talking only about the officers confronting Ashly Babbit.

This wasn't happening in a vacuum.
For the purposes of this discussion, it is. What was going 10,000 feet away is irrelevant.

That's the definition of insanity.
ROFL! You're the one who is spouting insanity. You dont' get to blame Ashly Babbit for anything going on in any part of the capitol. That's the tactic of a NAZI.

Nazi's have nothing to do with this (and neither does Stalin). You're trying to take one discrete part (the portion where Ashli led the mob through the window) of a whole (the mob overrunning the capital) and pretend that the whole has no bearing on that one moment. But it does. There is no way the police, listening to what is going on around them within the capital, hearing about officers beaten by the mob, a mob that is roaming through the building largely unchecked, would be operating on the assumption that this one portion of the mob is all they need to be concerned with.

You seem to think that the officer should have...what, engaged in hand to hand combat with her (leaving a hole in their defenses for the rest of the mob to exploit?). If she had been a big burly Antifa guy you KNOW you wouldn't be defending him :lol:
You have no idea what the police were hearing, and what goes on 10,000 have no bearing on whether an officer's life is immediately in danger. Just like a fucking Nazi, you want to hold some individuals responsible for the actions of others.

This line of reasoning was coined by the NAZIs. That's why you get called a NAZI.

Actually, ya, I do. It's been reported.

All the officer knows is there is a mob of people (and no one knows whether or not they are armed with anything) - savagely breaking down the doors. If that officer is hearing reports of "officer down" and that the mob is roaming freely, you better believe it has a bearing on how he views the immediate situation. You would be nuts not think your life is in danger when you are facing an angry mob and they ignored orders to stop (which Ashli did).

The only person responsible for her death is Ashli herself: she committed multiple illegal acts, she ignored orders by the police.

Normally - that is enough justification to you guys, for a police to shoot.


 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,913
Reaction score
29,769
Points
2,180
There were...what...3 police officers there holding the fort from the angry mob.
Why do you keep insisting that mobsters in blue uniforms with guns and badges are always on the right side of the law no matter whom they hurt or kill, or how much property they damage or steal?
Except when lefties are rioting.
So, you are cool with righties rioting. (that's not a question)
So you're cool with lefties rioting?
 

justinacolmena

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
6,996
Reaction score
2,240
Points
210
Location
alaska, usa
So if they lynch a black man in one state, that isn't a violation of his rights because it's still against the law in other states?
They get reciprocity from state to state for their concealed carry as mobsters licensed to kill on the orders of city hall only.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
91,407
Reaction score
23,529
Points
2,180
Location
in between
The DOJ, in defense of this man, just gave legal protection for every police officer in the nation that shoots someone.

This man shot and killed an unarned white female vet, and tge DOJ declared they will not press charges because he was justified because he 'was in fear if his life.

EVERY Police officers should now be afforded the exact same UNQUESTIONED defense.

Most are. You realize that right?

It's interesting what you choose to include and exclude.

Include:
- the fact that she was a vet (as if being a vet meant a person was automatically not culpable of crime).
- the fact she was white (part of the rightwing victimization card set)
- the fact she was female (because we all know females are never violent or dangerous, even when combat trained)

Exclude
- her troubled military record (if she were black you'd have scoured her personal life and career for anything that would justify her death)
- the fact - and this is very important - she was engaged in committing a very serious crime when she was shot
- she ignored orders to stop by the police

Trumpist take away
- Blue Lives Matter (until they shoot a Trump supporting extremist)
- if a Trumpist is engaged in crime, they're Patriots not criminals
- if you don't have a gun you're harmless - which kind of begs the question since the two people Rittenhouse shot and killed were unarmed....
Your entire argument is bullshit, nothing I said or intended. ALL of it is what YOU said and inferred / projected.

Din't try to speak for me or attempt to claim what I intended because you suck at it / are wrong.

You did so because your own argument fails...so you had to attempt to undermine mine by falsely claiming I inferred/ meant things I did not.

I accept your surrender based on your lack of your own argument resulting in your failed attempt to 'translate' mine.


I think the intent is quite clear by what you CHOOSE to emphasize and what you CHOOSE to leave out. You aren't fooling anyone.

There's a saying from somewhere, not sure where - throw a stone in a pack of dogs and the one that yelps loudest is the one that probably got hit. You sure are yelping.
I pointed out facts. I did not try to insinuate or speak for anyone else...like you snowflakes always do, as demonstrated AGAIN....as YOU just tried to do.

You can not make your own arguments because you have none. So you try to undermine, misrepresent, and project on others.

Sad.

That stone must have really stung since you're getting all personal here :lol:

Why did you leave out the fact she was engaged in an illegal act when she was shot?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$350.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top