...The Proud Boys Jury Got it right.....

[bripat9643]

The mob that day was quite a bit more violent, having beaten scores of officers to get to that point. A fact which was known to the officers defending Congress members.

The entire mob wasn't up against the window, moron

 

[bripat9643]

Almost right. The officer merely needs to have a reasonable fear that they or someone around them may be subject to great bodily harm or death.

There was no such rational fear..

 

[Marener]

The entire mob wasn't up against the window, moron

It’s the same mob. They were all a part of it.

 

[Marener]

There was no such rational fear..

Why not? People breaking through a barricaded door doesn’t seem like a reason to fear?

 

[Chillicothe]

America would be better of the the right rioted more often

Of course you do, because you're a fucking NAZI

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you, poster.
Your contributions to the adult discourse of this message-board is generally quite notable.
You are ...whether you intend to or not... a good illustration of the prevailing mindset and abilities of MAGA-world.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

You proved you're a fucking moron again.

bripat flopped again

 

[toobfreak]

You can come up with any excuse you want, the end result is that you are hiding from anyone who tells you what you don’t want to hear.

Dude, do you realize you are only talking about yourself? I've not seen you prove a single thing you've claimed! You are the epitome of excuses! You even hide from that!

 

[toobfreak]

No, the law and precedent told me that.

WHAT law and WHAT precedent?

 

[Marener]

WHAT law and WHAT precedent?

WHAT law and WHAT precedent?

10 CFR § 1047.7 - Use of deadly force.

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[toobfreak]

the end result is that you are hiding from anyone who tells you what you don’t want to hear.

Then WHY ARE YOU HIDING from the truth of what you and your party represent? I dare you to prove any of these wrong:

1. You oppose the Constitution,
2. You oppose the 1st Amendment,
3. You oppose the 2md Amendment,
4. You oppose election laws,
5. You oppose and violate human rights of the accused,
6. You oppose women's rights,
7. You oppose child and decency laws,
8. You run a network of radical, extremist leftwing propaganda you call the media,
9. You suppressed the truth of Russiagate,
10. You suppressed the truth of Biden's laptop,
11. You trample the rights of American citizens such as the J6 hostages while protecting criminals,
12. You violate immigration and border laws,
13. You sanction mass crime in cities,
14. You funded and orchestrated the stealing of elections,
15. You sanctioned and supported hundreds of riots in US cities doing billions in damage, looting and violence injuring thousands of police killing dozens,
16. You oppose religion,
17. You oppose home schooling,
18. You oppose parental rights,
19. And you try to make criminals out of peaceful gun owners trying to make guns illegal blaming them for all the violence your people illegally commit with them.

 

[toobfreak]

10 CFR § 1047.7 - Use of deadly force.

www.law.cornell.edu

What specifically in that link do you refer to!!!! What precedent is listed in that link!

 

[Marener]

I dare you to prove any of these wrong:

You’re the accuser which means you are responsible for proving your accusation.

 

[Marener]

What specifically in that link do you refer to!!!! What precedent is listed in that link!

The link is pretty succinct and self explanatory. It describes the situation when deadly force is authorized.

Here’s the content:
§ 1047.7 Use of deadly force.
(a) Deadly force means that force which a reasonable person would consider likely to cause death or serious bodily harm. Its use may be justified only under conditions of extreme necessity, when all lesser means have failed or cannot reasonably be employed. A protective force officer is authorized to use deadly force only when one or more of the following circumstances exists:

(1) Self-Defense. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to protect a protective force officer who reasonably believes himself or herself to be in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm.

(2) Serious offenses against persons. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to prevent the commission of a serious offense against a person(s) in circumstances presenting an imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm (e.g. sabotage of an occupied facility by explosives).

This description is basically identical to what I described. Do you deny this?

 

[toobfreak]

You’re the accuser which means you are responsible for proving your accusation.

Bullshit. Look at the pussy run. You've made 150 posts in this thread accusing others of stuff and stood up, you now cannot defend a single fucking claim you make just like the usual demtard sack of shit. I'm prepared to defend everything I say, while you are nothing but a bag of excuses. Run, pussy, run. You have no counter for the truth.

 

[toobfreak]

The link is pretty succinct and self explanatory.

In other words, you can't defend shit. Its a whole fucking page long of fine print and you cannot tell us in your OWN WORDS WHAT LAW or precedent it proves.

It describes the situation when deadly force is authorized.

So it describes and tries to define deadly force. So what? What law and precedent is held there and what is the relevance and why don't you answer any of my 19 charges? What's wrong BIG MOUTH, pussy got your tongue?

 

[Marener]

I'm prepared to defend everything I say

Apparently you’re not prepared to defend any of the accusations you made against me.

Until you do, they’re baseless.

 

[Marener]

In other words, you can't defend shit. Its a whole fucking page long of fine print and you cannot tell us in your OWN WORDS WHAT LAW or precedent it proves.

I already did.

Deadly force is authorized when the person has a rational fear for their own safety or the safety of those they’re protecting.

The link was me defending what I’ve already said.

This is the standard under which Ashlii Babbitt was shot and is a reasonable use of deadly force.

 

[toobfreak]

Apparently you’re not prepared to defend any of the accusations you made against me.

Ready anytime you are. You're obviously deflecting and running like a scalded dog from defending any of your accusations!

1. You oppose the Constitution,
2. You oppose the 1st Amendment,
3. You oppose the 2md Amendment,
4. You oppose election laws,
5. You oppose and violate human rights of the accused,
6. You oppose women's rights,
7. You oppose child and decency laws,
8. You run a network of radical, extremist leftwing propaganda you call the media,
9. You suppressed the truth of Russiagate,
10. You suppressed the truth of Biden's laptop,
11. You trample the rights of American citizens such as the J6 hostages while protecting criminals,
12. You violate immigration and border laws,
13. You sanction mass crime in cities,
14. You funded and orchestrated the stealing of elections,
15. You sanctioned and supported hundreds of riots in US cities doing billions in damage, looting and violence injuring thousands of police killing dozens,
16. You oppose religion,
17. You oppose home schooling,
18. You oppose parental rights,
19. And you try to make criminals out of peaceful gun owners trying to make guns illegal blaming them for all the violence your people illegally commit with them.

Which one do you want me to prove first as you piss your leg running from defending one word you have said, pussy?

 

[Marener]

Which one do you want me to prove first

Pick one. Dealers choice.

 

[toobfreak]

I already did.

Where exactly. Link me to it. I must have blinked. Why is all of your evidence and proof so hard to find? What law and what precedent were you referring to exactly in your link to USC on self defense? All that did what support what the Proud Boys did, a-hole!