Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Constitution doesn't contain the details about the use of deadly force. We get that from the U.S. Supreme Court.
"We conclude that such force may not be used unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others." Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)
It doesn't matter if Babbitt was unarmed. A key point here: Babbitt was not the only person there. She was essentially spearheading a violent mob. Ask the 140 officers who were injured during the Capitol riot whether there was a significant threat of death or serious physical injury in that circumstance. Under Garner, the shooting was justified.
And what additional "information and details" do you need "given to the public"? We've got the incident on video! What more do you want?
“ significant threat “
An unarmed female ? Have you been watching too many movies?
“ spearheading a violent mob”
That’s an opinion.
“ ask the 140 Officers”
Does that include the suspended ones, the ones being investigated, the ones who resigned, and sadly, we can’t ask the ones that committed suicide or died of natural causes.
Hopefully the Civil suit will go through, and Nancy will be forced to surrender all the video, all the facts , all the details, and get the House to lift the cloak of secrecy from the entire affair. I won’t hold my breath. That is why she is forming a “ committee” . She needs another Dog and Pony Show since she can’t Impeach Trump again.
Maybe a few fires, riots and burned buildings might have changed their mind. Let’s see their “ investigation”. Let’s have the name of the Officer, so we can look at his background. Let’s do what the media does to every other LEO that shoots a citizen. How about his record as a LEO ? What witnesses did they interview ? On and on.
Like I said, Banana Republic all the way. That’s where we are headed. I guess it means there will not be a statue for Ashli anytime soon.
Too bad the GOP isn't interested in investigating, isn't it?
If you find someone inside the building that they just broke into and entered, "innocent until proven guilty" is pretty nonsensical. This argument is grasping at nonexistent straws.
It includes the officers who were injured by the violent mob that Trump inflamed minutes before.
It's got nothing to do with Nancy. The Department of Justice will defend any suit against the United States. Its attorneys are the toughest of the tough.
You sound just like NPR “ Trump fueled rioters storm the Capitol “
Can we hear from the 150 injured LEO defending the White House ? You know, when it was a joke by Progressives that Trump was moved tot he bunker?
Nancy runs it all. The Capitol Police. The DOJ, all of it. She holds the purse of the US Treasury , all all her places and decisions are the whim of her donors and Elites. Nothing a Democrat in Government at the top levels does is without Nancy knowing about it.
Did I ever tell you about the website selling all the trinkets with her name on it ?
So the Republicans took their toys and left? They were offered a place at the table but refused. So the investigation will be conducted without them.
You do realize the difference between a Commission and a Committee, right ?This is another Dog and Pony show. Another diversion from the violence in the cities , the border, inflation, the economy and jobs, and whispering Biden.
If you find someone inside the building that they just broke into and entered, "innocent until proven guilty" is pretty nonsensical. This argument is grasping at nonexistent straws.
Really?
Shoot first, ask questions later?
An unarmed female. Trained Law Enforcement.
I’m almost. 70. I wouldn’t fear any unarmed female unless she was some kind of super charged athlete , and even then….
“ significant threat “ is the standard.
Progressives are freaking out about finding a noose in a construction site , and you are saying shoot an unarmed white female because she crawled through a window.
So that Babbitt chick is antifa? The one who was clearly a Trump supporter who was tweeting about insurrection and fighting? You know the one that got her self killed rightfully so by breaking into the capital? She’s antifa is that what you’re trying to say? Trumplettes were there to disrupt the certification of the election. And you know it. End of story. Don’t bother responding.
If someone hits you over the head or forcefully pokes you in the gut with a flagpole, would you consider that person unarmed?
I wouldn't consider that an insurrection.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
