Breaking: Woman shot while trying to kill ICE agents in Minnesota

[Godboy]

Only an idiot would recommend police stand in front of an idling car.

Nah, its totally safe. A car can only get so much speed in a couple seconds. Not enough to really hurt you. Generally the car will stop if you shoot the driver, but if not, just roll off the hood before the car gains any real speed.

NO ONE will ever escape you if you do this.

 

[postman]

Yes, SHE WAS BREAKING THE LAW ALL DAY.

STALKING IS AGAINST THE LAW.

Just how braindead are you?

Stalking isn't against federal law. (except when done interstate)
Therefore ICE has no jurisdiction to enforce laws against stalking.

 

[Godboy]

So the bullet went through the windshield sideways at an extreme angle, fired from the side of the car.

And? The idea was to shoot her dead. Who cares about the angle? He has a duty to kill armed and dangerous criminals.

 

[postman]

Nah, its totally safe. A car can only get so much speed in a couple seconds. Not enough to really hurt you. Generally the car will stop if you shoot the driver, but if not, just roll off the hood before the car gains any real speed.

NO ONE will ever escape you if you do this.

I've never seen a cop put himself in front of an automobile with the engine running. Nor to the rear.
They will tell the driver to shut off the vehicle if they need to look closely at the front or rear of the vehicle.

 

[westwall]

Stalking isn't against federal law. (except when done interstate)
Therefore ICE has no jurisdiction to enforce laws against stalking.

She crossed state lines to stalk the ICE agents. That IS a federal crime.

You might want to spend more time reviewing the laws.

 

[Concerned American]

I feel bad for you newbie.

Searching for that CULT support.
So desperate.View attachment 1205027View attachment 1205028


View attachment 1205029View attachment 1205031

TDS unbridled. Rent free in your head 24/7/365.

 

[postman]

... but if not, just roll off the hood before the car gains any real speed.

Or if you get knocked over, the car will drive on top of you. Which even if done slowly, is worse than if done quickly.

 

[postman]

And? The idea was to shoot her dead. Who cares about the angle? He has a duty to kill armed and dangerous criminals.

She wasn't an armed dangerous criminal. Once the car was no longer pointed at the officers, it's the same as an armed criminal dropping his weapon.

 

[eagle1462010]

Let's take that arguably false premise and assume it's true.

You still have part two of the shooting, where the officer fired at her while her vehicle was moving away from the ICE agents, and no federal agents were in danger.

Think of it like the castle doctrine. Where you can shoot someone while they're breaking into your house.
If they manage to escape, you can't pursue them, and shoot them in the back as they run away.

Master At Arms security training is 2 shots center mass via SOP.

He circled the vehicle SOP. Ensuring no danger. That is how he ended up in front.
She CHOSE TO DRIVE AND THAT GOT HER KILLED.

END OF STORY. He WILL NOT BE CHARGED no matter the whining.

 

[eagle1462010]

She wasn't an armed dangerous criminal. Once the car was no longer pointed at the officers, it's the same as an armed criminal dropping his weapon.

By Law a Vehicle is a deadly weapon if used to run you over.

 

[postman]

She crossed state lines to stalk the ICE agents. That IS a federal crime.

You might want to spend more time reviewing the laws.

Where's the proof she crossed state lines, WHILE stalking them?
Interstate crimes have to be committed in both states in order to be interstate. So only local (state) stalking laws would apply. Which ICE has no authority to enforce.

 

[eagle1462010]

Your first lie is she tried to murder the officer with her car. She did not try to kill the ice agent who shot her three times at point blank range and killed her.

Any bump by a car is NOT a murder attempt under the law that guides him...

Intent doesnt matter. In 2 seconds you dont have time to worry about intent.

She drove at him. Had she stayed in park she would be alive today.

 

[Bitterhook]

She wasn't an armed dangerous criminal. Once the car was no longer pointed at the officers, it's the same as an armed criminal dropping his weapon.

You just indicated that she was until she wasn't, and the 'was', was enough to get her killed.
She never got out of the vehicle, and even in your stupid analogy pointing the gun in another direction would not be dropping it, nor does it remove any danger to the officer(s) or anyone else in the area.

 

[postman]

Master At Arms security training is 2 shots center mass via SOP.

He circled the vehicle SOP. Ensuring no danger. That is how he ended up in front.
She CHOSE TO DRIVE AND THAT GOT HER KILLED.

END OF STORY. He WILL NOT BE CHARGED no matter the whining.

That is two shots in rapid succession while the threat exists.
The danger to the officers ended before he could take a second shot. And was clearly ended when he took the third shot.

 

[postman]

By Law a Vehicle is a deadly weapon if used to run you over.

Only if it's pointed at you.
If it's driving away, it's no longer a deadly weapon to you.
No different than an armed criminal dropping his weapon.

 

[postman]

By Law a Vehicle is a deadly weapon if used to run you over.

And not a deadly weapon if used to drive PAST you.

Remember that.

 

[Bitterhook]

Only if it's pointed at you.
If it's driving away, it's no longer a deadly weapon to you.
No different than an armed criminal dropping his weapon.

She didn't drop the weapon, she tried to drive it off down the road, which would not make it any less dangerous to whoever was where it could be headed, and she obviously hadn't thought that damn far down the road or she wouldn't be dead.

 

[postman]

Intent doesnt matter. In 2 seconds you dont have time to worry about intent.

She drove at him. Had she stayed in park she would be alive today.

Actually intent does matter.
We've seen on an icy street, where a car goes into a skid, and strikes a law enforcement officer. Intent determines if it's an accident or an assault.

 

[Dirk the Daring]

ICE has no jurisdiction over US Citizens.

False.

Can ICE agents detain U.S. citizens? What powers do they have to arrest people? Your most common questions answered.

The agency has spearheaded President Trump's immigration crackdown and been at the center of some of its most controversial incidents.

www.yahoo.com

ICE can detain citizens if they allegedly commit a crime, such as interfering with an immigration operation or assaulting officers.

 

[Bitterhook]

Actually intent does matter.
We've seen on an icy street, where a car goes into a skid, and strikes a law enforcement officer. Intent determines if it's an accident or an assault.

Negligent homicide in no way requires intent, so just shut the **** up, before you get more people killed or injured saying absolutely incorrect bullshit, making up foolish analogies that are full of holes produced by you utter ignorance, and that will serve no beneficial purpose to anyone, ever.