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.
Should the police have shot and killed the insurrectionists in Lafayette Park attempting to breach the White House? Should the police have shot and killed the insurrectionists invading a police station in Minneapolis? Should the police have shot and killed the insurrectionists attempting to burn down a federal building in Portland?
The Left went ape doo doo when the police in DC used pepper pellets to move the crowd in Lafayette Park after the refused to comply with orders to move, but somehow they should have slaughtered protestors because you disagree with them politically?
So you'd be okay with shooting to kill all those looters in Minneapolis, Seattle, Santa Monica, etc?
Hey and I feel Derek Chauvin deserves a medal and a TWO million dollar bonus for eliminating a multiple felon like George Floyd, but he isn't getting a medal is he?
Not sure why you single out Texas, but even in TX people are held accountable. A 74 year old man who shot a home invasion burglar in TX just a few days ago will be facing a grand jury. Another elderly TX man who shot and killed an intruder in 2019 has been charged with murder. So apparently there isn't anything automatic about TX.
You have no idea what her intent was. If you have seen the private videos people took you see several policemen blocking the doors then they moved away calmly. One of those officers was standing next to Babbitt when she was shot. Whomever shot Babbitt was incredibly irresponsible for shooting with a fellow LEO so close by. There were also tactical officers in the crowd and regular officers and none of them seemed in any kind of a panic over the protestors. Only this single officer drew and fired a weapon. The public deserves to know why; his background and training.
This is the United States. We don't have secret proceedings.
Really? Who was telling her to stay out? The man who shot her never said a word, he just started shooting. Certainly the police officers right next to her didn't tell her to not go through that door window, so who was it telling her to stay out?
There were maybe 20 or 30 protestors with her in that section. She could have been arrested. Or the favorite rubric of the Left, "he could have shot her in the leg". Why weren't the police officers and SWAT officers on the same side of the doors attempting to stop her or clear the room?
Really? The legal punishment for trespass is execution?
He wasn't alone. There were a ton of officers there including heavily armed ones.
They didn't block an investigation of the Ashli Babbitt shooting, they blocked a useless partisan attempt to keep a narrative going and put on a Soviet style show trial.
See above.
If you think it was going to be an independent, fair "bipartisan" investigation then I'd invite you to become an investor in my Los Angeles To Catalina Bridge Company.
The videos that have been seen are all from private parties like Jayden X, not Capitol Building surveillance video or LEO body cams.
I don't hold the Capitol in any higher esteem than I do police stations, other federal buildings, mosques, churches and private property. I don't think any should be violated, but apparently huge swaths of the Left do.
But Babbitt, unlike Floyd doesn't have shrines and statues being dedicated to her; her family hasn't been given $27million in wrongful death compensation and her killer has not been tried for her murder.
Well yes, but his source is the Washington DC Medical Examiners office. Your source is the NY Times that apparently is very challenged in sorting facts these days.
It's a sad commentary that you apparently think it is okay to violate police stations, other federal buildings, mosques, churches and private property.
Who was it that warned her? Do you have links of her being warned? Love to see them.
Keep deflecting about months of violent protests and pretending they were "mostly peaceful". Why do supporters of the BLM movement, of the antifa movement, of looting, burning and in the cult of the "1619 Project", Critical Race Theory and Defund The Police excuse all the violent, insurrectionist behavior?
If you equate breaking and entering the United States Capitol with breaking and entering "all over the country" then that is a sad commentary.
The fact that there's this laissez faire attitude towards the literal center of the United States Federal government is alarming. Especially from the people who supposedly are part of the "law and order" crowd.
Do you want to live in a place where people are subjects to a person and distort reality to fit a narrative? I don't. Realize that people broke and entered the center of our Republic to try and stop the Vice President from discharging his lawful duties. All of this chaos in the name of an unpopular President who lost an election.
Ashli Babbitt's death could have been prevented. She knew what she was getting into and chose to proceed. She was warned not to enter the area which was in proximity to the number two and many other in the line of succession to the Presidency. She proceeded. I would rather have officers protecting those who need to be protected than sitting around asking for idiots like Babbitt to "please stop" "pretty please". Come on.
But keep deflecting to "breaking and entering all over the country". This is why supporters of President Trump are marginalized and not taken seriously. They literally sell their morals and values to further his cult of personality.
The Constitution makes no distinction in the Bill of Rights regarding the location, circumstances and possible exception or suspension of those Rights. She was killed , she was unarmed. She was a US citizen and a Veteran. Please point to a precedent where an unarmed US citizen could be shot dead for trespassing by LEO, and not have information and details given to the public, or was allowed to skirt the Constitutional Right of due process.
Quite the opposite. The issue is strictly about the action to kill her, and not have to give any public disclosure of the circumstances. Law and Order starts with respecting the Bill of Rights.
“ distort reality ‘
We don’t know reality beyond the lies and fabrications by Democrats and their supporting a cast of media talking heads and “ journalists”. Is the reality that the Times and others lied about the death by Fire extinguisher? How about the lie that it was a “ white Supremacists insurrection” , a lie put into the Congressional Record.
You fail to recognize the fact that Congress itself, by their own hand, is preventing the public from knowing more, they have put a cloak of secrecy around the Capitol Police.
Nancy ,she’’ll now form a “ committee” . It wouldn’t be necessary if they just lift the cloak. Treat it just like ny other case in America when a citizen gets killed by a LEO.
However that would take the spotlight off her. That would ruin the chance to use more Propaganda. That would take away the opportunity to feed the talking heads of media more ammunition in their narrative and hate America campaign.
You are relying on speculation to make your point. It is very simple. She was killed by a LEO. The circumstances and issues regarding that need to be addressed in a Court of Law. that’s where the system we have addresses potential violations of Constitutional Rights. Just because they say “ no charges will be filed” doesn’t take constitutional Rights away. Only a Court, with due process , has the power to do that.
This is Banana Republic, Socialist Republic, Third World secret Police shenanigans, aided and supported by Democrats with a sinister plan to use it to continue to attack the Civil Liberties of American citizens.
Just part and parcel of their agenda. If you listened to Babbling Biden yesterday, you can see the path they are on. All those guns coming from Indiana to Illinois. Strange as it seems, they aren’t using all those guns in Indiana to kill people like they are in Illinois. Magically, when they are smuggled into Chicago, they start killing.
Pelosi planned it. FBi had numerous people instigating it. Identified in docs as Peron 1 2, etc.
Trump offered military/suggested NG, and Pelosi denied them. Tens of thousands of hrs of video were taken, but not released to public, because it shows antifa, and Capitol police breaking in/escorting people in thru open doors.
Uh huh. Sure. it was antifa, because we all know antifa really desperately wanted to keep Trump in office right?
Ohhh...sorry not antifa then. must have been the FBI!
Meanwhile in reality it was Trump supporters. Many of them fairly well known as well. How do people fall for this it wasnt us nonsense? Im just...stunned.
The Constitution makes no distinction in the Bill of Rights regarding the location, circumstances and possible exception or suspension of those Rights. She was killed , she was unarmed. She was a US citizen and a Veteran. Please point to a precedent where an unarmed US citizen could be shot dead for trespassing by LEO, and not have information and details given to the public, or was allowed to skirt the Constitutional Right of due process.
Quite the opposite. The issue is strictly about the action to kill her, and not have to give any public disclosure of the circumstances. Law and Order starts with respecting the Bill of Rights.
Once again, this is not just "trespassing". This was breaking and entering into the chambers which contained numbers 1, 2, & 3 in the line of succession to the Presidency. She wasn't shot for "trespassing". She was shot for attempting to enter, via broken window, the aforementioned chambers.
Reasonable force was exercised by law enforcement and stopped further advances. I'd say it was successful.
If trespassing doesn't matter, we sure do spend a lot of money on Secret Service detail protecting the White House. Someone ought to write to them and let them know that a random person on the internet said they are not allowed to shoot.
Edited to address your other comment - yes of course they are allowed to air their grievances in a court of law. That's expected and encouraged in this country. It's kind of like someone breaking into your house then suing you because they got injured. There's nothing saying they can't sue, if they want to waste the money, go for it.
I was watching the hearing live streaming when the "riot" broke out. I watched what went on inside and outside the Capitol livestream. I know my State Legislators were there to present Pence with evidence that justified postponing certification and further investigation of election fraud. I know the "riot" stopped their presentations.
Obviously, the mainstream media has been gaslighting.
Yeah, it matters. He was acting in his official capacity.
That doesn't mean he has to be sued in his "official capacity", he can be sued in an "individual capacity" only, but that's not where the big bucks are.
The Constitution doesn't contain the details about the use of deadly force. We get that from the U.S. Supreme Court.
I thought about touching that issue but then again it's amusing when the self proclaimed "Constitutional conservatives" have no clue what is addressed in the Constitution.
This is like a two-for-the-price-of-one deal. We also get to watch the self proclaimed "patriots" justify breaking and entering into the United States Capitol to try and disrupt the Vice President from executing his duties.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,982 posts, read 12,780,673 times
Reputation: 10625
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12-stringer
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?
Babbitt was not fleeing.
There was not an immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm while she was climbing through the window.
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.
