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

Damn rockwell I said those exact words that she was shot through the lower "left " corner of the front windshield in another post
But I know how you like to follow me around.
Hey dumbass! The hole is in the lower right side of the windshield. I don't intentionally follow idiots, but I do point out when they **** up, just like you just did!
 
Whomever is encouraging these idiots to try that shit, or making excuses for their stupidity, is not doing them any favors, because it will get them shot.

We know who those people are: Jacob Frey, Tim Walz, Hakeem Jeffries, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, all the media talking heads telling people to "fight back" and "resist", et al. They need to be arrested and prosecuted as accessories to these terrorist attacks.
 
Get out of ICE's way, and everyone gets to go home safely.
Pretty simple, it's unfortunate that Dimocrats are not intelligent enough to understand that.
 
Why was she perpendicular to the flow of traffic?

If a police car is blocking the road, I am justified in trying to run over one of the police officers?
Looks like she was initially trying to do a 3 point to turn around, but that’s just inferring.

We have seen examples of ICE going after and threatening people who are following or recording them. That’s not illegal, but these low information thugs don’t seem to know that.
 
Law enforcement are trained to stop people running away in a car because they are a danger to the public.
AI Overview



Many police departments, particularly in urban areas, have adopted
stricter pursuit policies or limited high-speed chases due to the significant risk they pose to public safety, officers, and suspects. The core reason for these policy changes is the high potential for accidents, injuries, and deaths, often involving innocent bystanders.

Key Reasons for Limiting Pursuits in Urban Areas
  • Public Safety Risks: Urban environments have heavy traffic, pedestrians, schools, and dense infrastructure, significantly increasing the likelihood of a dangerous crash.
  • Civil Liability: Police departments have faced significant lawsuits after crashes with injuries or deaths, making them civilly liable for the outcomes of a chase. Restrictive policies help manage this legal exposure.
  • Risk vs. Reward Assessment: Officers and supervisors are trained to weigh the immediate danger of a pursuit against the severity of the suspected crime. If the suspect's identity is known and they can be apprehended later without a high-speed chase, or if the initial offense is minor (e.g., a traffic infraction or low-level offense), the pursuit is typically called off.
  • Effectiveness of Alternatives: Departments are increasingly using technology and other tactics to apprehend suspects safely, such as:
    • Tire deflation devices (e.g., Stop Sticks) deployed ahead of the suspect's vehicle.
    • Helicopters for tracking the vehicle from above, allowing ground units to back off.
    • GPS trackers that can be deployed onto a fleeing car.
    • Data collection and later apprehension, based on the principle that "nobody can outrun Motorola" (radio communication).
  • Policy and Training: National organizations, such as the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), recommend that pursuits only be initiated for violent crimes where the suspect poses an imminent threat to others, urging agencies to adopt more restrictive guidelines.

Examples of Policy Changes
  • New York City Police Department (NYPD): Implemented a policy banning high-speed chases for low-level offenses.
  • Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD): Restricted pursuits to reduce liability and danger, contrasting with U.S. Park Police who have different policies.
  • Aurora, CO: After previously having very strict rules, the policy was changed to allow officers to pursue stolen vehicles, DUI suspects, and felony offenders, in an effort to combat rising crime, but still emphasizes weighing risks.
The general trend among many urban police departments is toward more cautious and restrictive policies to enhance community safety, although the specifics can vary significantly by jurisdiction.
 
The officer should have let her run him over and then let his living partner give her her Miranda rights.

******* brilliant!
He wasn’t run over. Jesus the pearl clutching.
 
Facts appear to be facts. Have watched video of the incident and heard the Mayor speak. A grand jury, would definitely indict, if shown the video. It would be very hard to back ICE Barbie's claims. So, it would be up to a Minnesota jury to decide. But, the deceased was definitely trying to get away with her life, not run over agents. Video evidence is the best evidence on earth. Think what you like.
Then you need ******* glasses! Maybe your TDS is causing your vision to fail.

You heard the lily-livered Somali speaking mayor? Well, that changes things! NOT!

If he was a federal officer performing his duties, Minnesota has no jurisdiction, dumbass!
 
15th post
Back
Top Bottom