Actually I do agree with that part.
Police are now armed with tasers and are told to use such tasers in lieu of hand guns.
They are only to use guns to protect themselves if being attacked with weapons.
The could have shot the vehicle engine or shot out the womans tires. An easy arrest.
Shooting her in the shoulder would have been logical as well.
But she was thinking she had the right to harass law enforcement and then attempt to escape in a vehicle that was surrounded by agents, hitting one of them. SHE made THAT decision. If she had left her vehicle in park and TALKED to them like civilized people, she'd be home with her kids right now.
#1 I don't condone her actions, however DHS Agents chose to engage. She did not obstruct their operations, she stopped her vehicle perpendicular to the flow of traffic, a traffic violation outside the jurisdiction of Federal law enfocement. She did not impede their movement, as a matter of fact Officer Ross drove around here vehicle and exited his vehicle from the other side of Good. The shooting took place on Portland Avenue around the interstection of East 32nd street. The images/video of the event clearly show (as does the image below) there was plenty of room to proceed but DHS Agents decided to engage.
#2 DHS Policy is that agents do not place themselves in front of a running vehcile and that they do not attempt to shoot a fleeing vehicle. Because unlike the movies a sidearm isn't going to stop the motion of a multi-ton vehicle in motion.
#3 There was one shot in the windshield (lower drivers side near the A-Frame), the 2nd and 3rd shotsd were from the side when Officer Ross was already out of the way. So he continued to fire at a fleeing vehciel in violation of policy and training and put one through the drivers side window through the right side of Good's head.
Same with the other guy. The agents were attempting to ignore him, but he kept harassing them and getting closer and closer.
Then he vandalized a government vehicle. They stopped and tried to get him to go away. Thats when they saw his gun, and all hell broke loose. Once again, PRETTI was not forced to harass officers nor was he forced to leave the safety zone to get close to the agents in question. Pretti made those decisions all on his own.
#1 No the agents didn't "attempt to ignore him" he was filming from the street, attempted to help another woman and DHS agents approched him after crossing the street.
#2 He did not damage a vehicle that day, that was 11 days before the shooting and had no bearing on the events of the day he was killed.
#3 ".They stopped and tried to get him to go away", ah no. Again they approced him and initiated violence, when he attemptet to help another woman they OC sprayed him in the face and then threw him to the ground. Ever been sprayed with OC in the face? You are blinded and it causes severe pain in the eyes, nose, and mouth. At this point they had no idea that Pretti was a legal CC holder and had a firearm holstered on his back. Pretti never once reached for any weapon and through the entire event his hands are visible in front and holding his cell phone.
#4 During the scrum where 4-5 officer are holding Pretti face down on his knees/belly his jacket rides up an officer in a gray coat sees it, calls it out, removes it from the holster, exits the scrum. After officer departed and the firearm was clear, then the officer in the black mask shot Pretti in the back. He then continued to fire at an unarmed man on the ground and triggered another offcer to fire his weapon.
Yes, these agents can be better trained in marksmanship, so just shooting someone in the shoulder or leg would stop the assailant.
I don't now, their marksmenship seemed just fine. The fired and hit their targets. They shot an unarmed woman attempting to drive away through the temple and shot an unarmed man on the ground in the back 10 times.
But when you are being attacked by screaming lunatics, you have no idea what their plans are.
I don't give a rat fart "what their plans are". What I judge is actions. In both cases DHS Agents escallated the violence instead of descalating the scene. The violated the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments of citizens who where:
- Exercising their right to protest and assemble.
- 2nd Amendment right to lawfully carry a firearm.
- 4th Amendment right to be secure in their persons because of violence committed against them.
But thats not my question. I just want to know what the left thinks would be a better plan at allowing the NON-criminal people to stay here.
OK.
Then respond to this if you wish but I'll disengage on the specifics of the shooting which you seemed uninformed about.
WW
