There is no controversy over Babbett

[bodecea]

Bottom line, an unarmed woman being moved along by the crowd should not have been shot. I can only coclude it was murder for intimidation. Cold blooded and planned.

A woman, who's "armed" status was unknown to the police, was part of a mob who had bashed open a window and were forcing their way into a chamber where people were being protected.

You seem to miss that part.

You seem to miss there was just no reason to shoot her, period. You are condoning murder.

When should they shoot someone? When they are already overrun and the situation is out of control, and the mob has their hands on the remaining congressman? Just curious.

It was nowhere near out of control. There were a lot of armed police there. Why wasn't anyone else shot. Some people did much worse.

Murder for intimidation purposes and sending a message Trump supporters are not equal under the law. Open season.

"It was nowhere near out of control"......................

 

[bodecea]

And crazy negroes on drugs and committing crimes get shot all the time. You ever going to stop whining about that?

So military service automatically makes you dangerous in civilian society and warrants murder
Where were you the day brains got passed out?

HOWEVER considering that one element of her job as a member of the Air Force Security Forces was the protection of military installations, you would think that she would have a better grasp on the concepts of intrusions and what it means to have a law enforcement officer pointing a weapon at you and tell you to cease advancing.

Have you bothered even watching the video? There were a hundred people in the area, shouting and pushing, and you really think this girl, stepping through a door with dozens of others amidst all the loud confusion, saw and could respond to one sole person, far off to one side, pulling out a gun knowing he would actually shoot her with it? Crazy.

I've seen the video but nothing in it changes my perception of the situation the officer was facing. I don't know about other people but I judge his decision to shoot based on what I would have done had I been in his shoes and that decision would be based on the way I've been trained.

They/He didn't want anyone breaching that locked door which led to the House chambers were several congressional members had retreated for safety. When the mob found the door to the chambers locked, they began breaking out the windows in order to facilitate the breach of the locked door. The fact that the officers were right there are could see what they were doing and planning goes to strengthen the officers' case.

The door was locked for a reason, to keep people out, so once the mob decided to attempt to breach the locked door by breaking out the windows and then going through the broken window, they became fair game to the officers whose sole job was to protect the lives of the House members sheltering from harm in the chambers. The officers owed the intruders no special warnings or considerations because they were "breaking in" to an area that the officers where defending (the entrance to the chambers).

I've said this before, the officer who shot Ashli neutralized the threat he perceived with one shot. The fact that no one else attempted to breach that window is pretty much testament and proof that he correctly assessed the situation and took the appropriate action.

You know how the police were always being cleared for shooting a subject in the back while they were attempting to run away from the cops? The reason for so many of the complaints is because once a subject is no longer advancing on you and is in fact turned away from you and attempting to escape, they are no longer considered a threat to you and deadly force is no longer justified as a defense. Therefore, when someone who is advancing on you even when you have a firearm pointed at them, refuses to comply with your commands to stop AND has an angry mob at their back waiting to pour in as soon as they clear the window, a protection officer is allowed to use deadly force in that situation due to the disparity of numbers (one shooters versus a violent mob), failure to comply with verbal orders, etc.

Put more simply, you are OK with murdering a person who poses no visible threat, carrying no visible weapon, aiming to kill them not simply maim and stop them or scare them away for simple misdemeanor trespassing?

Why didn't they simply fire at the ceiling? Or at a kneecap? Ever occur to you that a few gunshots into the ceiling might have been enough to stop or scare away most or all of these people without taking anyone's life?

You are in your home, an unknown number of hostile people have invaded, you have your family barricaded behind you, and you are armed and facing the door where the mob has broken it down and the first person enters. You have seconds to make a decision.

What do you do?

Offer milk and cookies?

 

[bodecea]

why yes ... yes you are.

you don't think that video exists? or the one where the basket dwelling trump humping insurrectionist was going thru the halls calling out pelosi'd name - specifically ...in a very intimidating & sick way? lol ... they exist alright.

has fox, newsmax, AONN or RT shown that?

doubtful.

If you think what you see on Fake News CNN is real then you are delusional.

If you think what you see on FAUX News is real, then you are delusional. You'll believe anything fed you in Orange koolaid.

 

[bodecea]

The crazy bitch got shot. What dummy thinks she is a martyr?

"martyr" ? depends on the "ethos" In my perception----there are and have
been only a few martyrs----maybe Thomas Paine. She was a victim of MURDER---
far more than the """martyr""" criminal fat floyd. -----I am a cop supporter----
and believe the poor jerk made a MISTAKE

He didn't make a mistake. He told the crazy bitch to back off and she continued. So he popped her ass. Good riddance.

Because she was conservative and white then it’s ok, because she was a “terrorist”, really? Your going to run with that narrative? What would your sorry pathetic excuse for existence say if she was black, conservative, and a vet would you again say pop her ass, because she was a “terrorist”? and if she were black, liberal, drug addict, burning, looting, and assaulting police officers, would she then be a martyr, and not by your definition seen as a “terrorist”? Your hypocrisy is a disgrace. The officer will have to live with himself, however unfortunately by your own demented standards be protected.

Specifically because she was a white conservative i say she was a stupid bitch and good riddance. Anyone else I would have said too bad but what did they expect after being warned 4 times?

So warn someone 4 times then shoot to kill? Really? That only applies to White, Hispanic, and Asian people. I would love to see how a judge and jury would rule.

You wont see that because he was cleared of all possible crimes in popping her ass.

Wrong. Babbitt’s death was ruled homicide. Her family is suing. Meaning an independent investigation will be done. And this murderer will be jailed, broke, or both. Because George Floyd was a piece of shit drug addict criminal, he was a dummy and good riddance.

justified homicide.

Wrong as always you drunk. Let’s see one of those INDEPENDENT investigations you morons always cry for, yet are avoiding like the plague in this case.

Independent investigations....the ones being blocked by Republicans. What are they hiding? How many of the GOP Congresscritters are complicite?

 

[bodecea]

Lantern and all the other retards are actually entitled to their opinion no matter how bass ackwards it is. I wonder whats going to happen when reality and their fantasy violently collide?

You kidding? They'll all be hiding under their beds, worried about when they'll have time to change their chonies.

 

[bodecea]

Bottom line, an unarmed woman being moved along by the crowd should not have been shot. I can only coclude it was murder for intimidation. Cold blooded and planned.

A woman, who's "armed" status was unknown to the police, was part of a mob who had bashed open a window and were forcing their way into a chamber where people were being protected.

You seem to miss that part.

No warnings, she was unarmed, and the police IN THE ROOM saw no threat. You seem to keep missing that important part. Kind of like how you fail to do your job.

The police in the room with the crazy bitch punked out due to the large number of hostiles. The officer that euthanized her wasnt havent any of it.

Go try that in court. Sorry, you’re not ever going to find proof of your idiotic claims. Funny how those officers saw no threat.

No one is going to court facing criminal charges over shooting the bitch. He was already cleared.

Not by any REAL investigation. The coward can still be charged. This isn’t over.

Oh no! "This isn't over"!!!!!! Right, even more insurrectionist thugs are being found out and charged every week.

 

[Dana7360]

why yes ... yes you are.

you don't think that video exists? or the one where the basket dwelling trump humping insurrectionist was going thru the halls calling out pelosi'd name - specifically ...in a very intimidating & sick way? lol ... they exist alright.

has fox, newsmax, AONN or RT shown that?

doubtful.

If you think what you see on Fake News CNN is real then you are delusional.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!! duuuuuuuuuude......... i i don't watch CNN - or MSNBC.

i don't even have cable - so yer wrong right outa the gate. those videos are there- unedited, anytime you wanna actually research them. youtube is chock full of videos. they ALL can't be doctored. or stay the poorly educated trump humper that donny counts on & loves you long time for your ignorant loyalty.

Not just the places you listed but videos of the violence have been posted on this board countless times. I have posted some of them.

The problem is that the reader has to actually click on the video and watch it to get the information.

As I've been saying for years, you can post link after link. Video after video. Photo after photo.

The far right will never click the link, watch the video or view the photo.

It's a waste of time to provide any honest facts to far right wing trump people.

 

[bodecea]

Bottom line, an unarmed woman being moved along by the crowd should not have been shot. I can only coclude it was murder for intimidation. Cold blooded and planned.

A woman, who's "armed" status was unknown to the police, was part of a mob who had bashed open a window and were forcing their way into a chamber where people were being protected.

You seem to miss that part.

No warnings, she was unarmed, and the police IN THE ROOM saw no threat. You seem to keep missing that important part. Kind of like how you fail to do your job.

The police in the room with the crazy bitch punked out due to the large number of hostiles. The officer that euthanized her wasnt havent any of it.

Go try that in court. Sorry, you’re not ever going to find proof of your idiotic claims. Funny how those officers saw no threat.

No one is going to court facing criminal charges over shooting the bitch. He was already cleared.

Not by any REAL investigation. The coward can still be charged. This isn’t over.

it's really doubtful that her husband will even win in civil court. but if he does - & only because of a trump humping judge presiding, not a penny will be from that cop's pocket.

It's like winning the lottery....you have to play first. In order to win a lawsuit, he has to file one. Still waiting......

 

[bodecea]

Bottom line, an unarmed woman being moved along by the crowd should not have been shot. I can only coclude it was murder for intimidation. Cold blooded and planned.

A woman, who's "armed" status was unknown to the police, was part of a mob who had bashed open a window and were forcing their way into a chamber where people were being protected.

You seem to miss that part.

No warnings, she was unarmed, and the police IN THE ROOM saw no threat. You seem to keep missing that important part. Kind of like how you fail to do your job.

The police in the room with the crazy bitch punked out due to the large number of hostiles. The officer that euthanized her wasnt havent any of it.

Go try that in court. Sorry, you’re not ever going to find proof of your idiotic claims. Funny how those officers saw no threat.

No one is going to court facing criminal charges over shooting the bitch. He was already cleared.

Not by any REAL investigation. The coward can still be charged. This isn’t over.

it's really doubtful that her husband will even win in civil court. but if he does - & only because of a trump humping judge presiding, not a penny will be from that cop's pocket.

If justice is served that cop will not finish his natural life.

Ah...threatening the life of a police officer. Interesting.

 

[bodecea]

Your definition literally says you are wrong. Homocide IS a crime, sometimes, and sometimes it isnt.

That's what he said, retard.

"Homicide is when one human being causes the death of another. Not all homicide is murder, as some killings are manslaughter, and some are lawful, such as when justified by an affirmative defense, like insanity or self-defense."

However, he did say "Homicide is not a crime".
Obviously some of the time it IS indeed a crime.

I tried to explain this to him multiple times. He never understands. Dont even bother pointing out the obvious to him, it just goes over his head every single time.

He'll just claim he never said what he clearly did.

You two are adorable. We all know what a homicide is. You’re just splitting hairs again. This one is even worse than your argument that she didn’t get a warning before she was shot.

All's you have to do is go back and read post #6, then to my first response (post #171) then follow our back and forth from there.
You will see that Aclepias specifically stated that the cop warned her before he fired. When I challenged his claim, he not only refused to post his proof, but he then went further and bobbed and weaved (lied) about what he had stated in his posts.

You won't bother to check however, because you have no balls to call him out when he is wrong and he has lied.

It’s a stupid argument. She was warned.

Whether it was a verbal warning or not isn’t important to me.

It's not a stupid argument because it could mean the difference in whether the cop could be charged with negligence or even a more severe charge.

So far the powers that be are protecting their own, but it's obviously possible the cop could eventually be charged with a crime.

The poster claims the cop himself warned her before shooting her. Even when called out, he's failed to prove his claim, and now of course he's tried to lie his way out of his claims.

He’s not going to be charged and you’re splitting hairs over something that’s not important.

The fact you say Babbitt's death is unimportant lacks the empathy you nitwits are famous for. I mean the virtue signaling that you do. I am speaking of a group, not just you.

Babbitt's death is VERY important....so important trump keeps talking about it and went to her funeral and calls her a hero. No? How odd.

 

[bodecea]

Your definition literally says you are wrong. Homocide IS a crime, sometimes, and sometimes it isnt.

That's what he said, retard.

"Homicide is when one human being causes the death of another. Not all homicide is murder, as some killings are manslaughter, and some are lawful, such as when justified by an affirmative defense, like insanity or self-defense."

However, he did say "Homicide is not a crime".
Obviously some of the time it IS indeed a crime.

I tried to explain this to him multiple times. He never understands. Dont even bother pointing out the obvious to him, it just goes over his head every single time.

He'll just claim he never said what he clearly did.

You two are adorable. We all know what a homicide is. You’re just splitting hairs again. This one is even worse than your argument that she didn’t get a warning before she was shot.

All's you have to do is go back and read post #6, then to my first response (post #171) then follow our back and forth from there.
You will see that Aclepias specifically stated that the cop warned her before he fired. When I challenged his claim, he not only refused to post his proof, but he then went further and bobbed and weaved (lied) about what he had stated in his posts.

You won't bother to check however, because you have no balls to call him out when he is wrong and he has lied.

It’s a stupid argument. She was warned.

Whether it was a verbal warning or not isn’t important to me.

It's not a stupid argument because it could mean the difference in whether the cop could be charged with negligence or even a more severe charge.

So far the powers that be are protecting their own, but it's obviously possible the cop could eventually be charged with a crime.

The poster claims the cop himself warned her before shooting her. Even when called out, he's failed to prove his claim, and now of course he's tried to lie his way out of his claims.

He’s not going to be charged and you’re splitting hairs over something that’s not important.

The fact you say Babbitt's death is unimportant lacks the empathy you nitwits are famous for. I mean the virtue signaling that you do. I am speaking of a group, not just you.

I didn’t say her death is unimportant. I said the way she was warned is unimportant.

Pardon me.

Do you need one? Sorry, but your orange god is no longer in a position to pardon you................nor do I think you have the importance nor money for him to even con-sider it.

 

[Faun]

Bottom line, an unarmed woman being moved along by the crowd should not have been shot. I can only coclude it was murder for intimidation. Cold blooded and planned.

A woman, who's "armed" status was unknown to the police, was part of a mob who had bashed open a window and were forcing their way into a chamber where people were being protected.

You seem to miss that part.

No warnings, she was unarmed, and the police IN THE ROOM saw no threat. You seem to keep missing that important part. Kind of like how you fail to do your job.

The police in the room with the crazy bitch punked out due to the large number of hostiles. The officer that euthanized her wasnt havent any of it.

Go try that in court. Sorry, you’re not ever going to find proof of your idiotic claims. Funny how those officers saw no threat.

No one is going to court facing criminal charges over shooting the bitch. He was already cleared.

Not by any REAL investigation. The coward can still be charged. This isn’t over.

it's really doubtful that her husband will even win in civil court. but if he does - & only because of a trump humping judge presiding, not a penny will be from that cop's pocket.

If justice is served that cop will not finish his natural life.

Ah...threatening the life of a police officer. Interesting.

And it's these same freaks who are still asking why his name hasn't been released.

 

[bodecea]

Your definition literally says you are wrong. Homocide IS a crime, sometimes, and sometimes it isnt.

That's what he said, retard.

"Homicide is when one human being causes the death of another. Not all homicide is murder, as some killings are manslaughter, and some are lawful, such as when justified by an affirmative defense, like insanity or self-defense."

However, he did say "Homicide is not a crime".
Obviously some of the time it IS indeed a crime.

I tried to explain this to him multiple times. He never understands. Dont even bother pointing out the obvious to him, it just goes over his head every single time.

He'll just claim he never said what he clearly did.

You two are adorable. We all know what a homicide is. You’re just splitting hairs again. This one is even worse than your argument that she didn’t get a warning before she was shot.

All's you have to do is go back and read post #6, then to my first response (post #171) then follow our back and forth from there.
You will see that Aclepias specifically stated that the cop warned her before he fired. When I challenged his claim, he not only refused to post his proof, but he then went further and bobbed and weaved (lied) about what he had stated in his posts.

You won't bother to check however, because you have no balls to call him out when he is wrong and he has lied.

It’s a stupid argument. She was warned.

Whether it was a verbal warning or not isn’t important to me.

It's not a stupid argument because it could mean the difference in whether the cop could be charged with negligence or even a more severe charge.

So far the powers that be are protecting their own, but it's obviously possible the cop could eventually be charged with a crime.

The poster claims the cop himself warned her before shooting her. Even when called out, he's failed to prove his claim, and now of course he's tried to lie his way out of his claims.

He’s not going to be charged and you’re splitting hairs over something that’s not important.

On a legal basis, I think it is important.

Regardless, you are proving you are not man enough to admit Aclepias was wrong to say the cop warned her. Where I come from, we either admit we made a mistake, or we show proof of our claims, or we simply say it's our opinion.
The poster has failed in each case, and you have failed to call him out.

If youre looking to find integrity with these people, you are wasting your time.

Any trump fluffers? I agree.

 

[bodecea]

Bottom line, an unarmed woman being moved along by the crowd should not have been shot. I can only coclude it was murder for intimidation. Cold blooded and planned.

A woman, who's "armed" status was unknown to the police, was part of a mob who had bashed open a window and were forcing their way into a chamber where people were being protected.

You seem to miss that part.

You seem to miss there was just no reason to shoot her, period. You are condoning murder.

When should they shoot someone? When they are already overrun and the situation is out of control, and the mob has their hands on the remaining congressman? Just curious.

It was nowhere near out of control. There were a lot of armed police there. Why wasn't anyone else shot. Some people did much worse.

Murder for intimidation purposes and sending a message Trump supporters are not equal under the law. Open season.

It was nowhere NEAR out of control? Did you not see all the video footage and damage? How they overran police and beat them? That this particular part of the mob had smashed open the windows in an effort to get through?

Get real? They were so "in control" they were frantically calling for help.

As to why they didn't shoot more, it's because we are not China. Police are shoot people in riots or demonstrations as a last resort. Surely you have noticed this over the past year. This occassion was no different.

I'm of the opinion that this first and only shot pretty much took the fight out of the rest of the mob.

Effective then, wasn't it?

 

[bodecea]

Bottom line, an unarmed woman being moved along by the crowd should not have been shot. I can only coclude it was murder for intimidation. Cold blooded and planned.

A woman, who's "armed" status was unknown to the police, was part of a mob who had bashed open a window and were forcing their way into a chamber where people were being protected.

You seem to miss that part.

You seem to miss there was just no reason to shoot her, period. You are condoning murder.

When should they shoot someone? When they are already overrun and the situation is out of control, and the mob has their hands on the remaining congressman? Just curious.

It was nowhere near out of control. There were a lot of armed police there. Why wasn't anyone else shot. Some people did much worse.

Murder for intimidation purposes and sending a message Trump supporters are not equal under the law. Open season.

It was nowhere NEAR out of control? Did you not see all the video footage and damage? How they overran police and beat them? That this particular part of the mob had smashed open the windows in an effort to get through?

Get real? They were so "in control" they were frantically calling for help.

As to why they didn't shoot more, it's because we are not China. Police are shoot people in riots or demonstrations as a last resort. Surely you have noticed this over the past year. This occassion was no different.

I'm of the opinion that this first and only shot pretty much took the fight out of the rest of the mob.

They vast vast majority were not fighting. Were there FBI agents in those videos? Do you think the FBI would point them out?

"They [sic] vast majority were not fighting." That's nice.....they weren't arrested or shot then. And as for your FBI lunacies, you sure are easily manipulated by lil'tucker, aren't you?

 

[bodecea]

Bottom line, an unarmed woman being moved along by the crowd should not have been shot. I can only coclude it was murder for intimidation. Cold blooded and planned.

A woman, who's "armed" status was unknown to the police, was part of a mob who had bashed open a window and were forcing their way into a chamber where people were being protected.

You seem to miss that part.

No warnings, she was unarmed, and the police IN THE ROOM saw no threat. You seem to keep missing that important part. Kind of like how you fail to do your job.

How did the police in that moment know she was unarmed?

excellent precedent----anytime a cop shoots someone he can say ----"I did not know if he/she
was armed or not"

And that's what they do...............where have YOU been?

 

[B. Kidd]

To some, she's a martyr. To others, a terrorist

Months after Ashli Babbitt was shot dead during the Capitol Hill riot, her memory has become as polarizing and as politicized as the day itself.

www.cnn.com

What controversy? Babbett was a domestic terrorist bent on Trump inspired insurrection and the violent overthrow of the United States. She got just what she deserved for attempting, with her cohorts, to break into the inner sanctum of the Capital.

She deserved on mercy, and got none. Good riddance!

There are 735 replies in this thread so far and you contend 'no controversy'.
This makes you a full blown moron!

 

[bodecea]

Lantern and all the other retards are actually entitled to their opinion no matter how bass ackwards it is. I wonder whats going to happen when reality and their fantasy violently collide?

We aren’t the retard who claimed homicide isn’t murder, then posted a link proving you lied.

Homicide isn't murder.

Homicide is homicide.

All murders are homicides (which by definition is nothing more than causing the death of a person period) - but not all homicides are murder.

Good luck with explaining something simple to that one.

 

[bodecea]

Floyd violently resisted arrest. Why shouldnt he die?

Violently resisted arrest is an overstatement. But the real reason he didn’t need to die because he posed zero threat to anyone as he was laying face down on the ground with his hands behind his back.

Was Babbit climbing through a window a real threat? We already know what happened when the people finally got inside.... nothing. She simply climbed through a window, lets be clear about that.

She didn't make it through the window.

Yep, she died for "an attempt to climb through a window".

A mob is breaking down the door to your home or business.....what do you do?

 

[bodecea]

Should we also be arresting BLM "protesters"? As we all know, they are mostly rioters, not protesters.

The ones looting, fighting police, burning buildings, braking into buildings, etc. should all be arrested. See my signature.

Well, at least we agree on that. You left out one of the most dangerous ones... blocking the streets. Most of the deaths have taken place where mobs stop traffic. Its extremely dangerous for both parties and therefore unacceptable. It should be a felony.

People disrupting traffic should also be arrested.

Tell that to the normal people (there are a few still) in Portland who practically on a daily basis are treated to leftist protesters blocking traffic.

And then they are arrested.