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.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,649 posts, read 12,561,414 times
Reputation: 10493
Advertisements
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speegleagle
$ 12. Million. Is what the family seeks. The Capitol Police and the Officer will be served within 10 days.
You.,, and others , are missing the point....still.
This wasn’t a residence,, it was not a “ home invasion””
It was not an “ insurrection”.. as no Proceedings have legally declared it so. It is just a description of the events , an opinion.
Trespassing is not enough to be shot dead.
A “ terrorist “ may not be an American Citizen, protected by the Bill. Of Rights. The Government can’t have an Officer shoot and kill a citizen, an. Unarmed citizen, unlike the lies. Spread by Leftist MSM about some other shootings..
Pay attention. This Lawsuit is based on Constitutional Matters.
A true and honest media would treat this as they treat all the other situations in which Police kill citizens. However that is another story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speegleagle
It is irrelevant.
Had the noose been. Around Pence’’s neck , and she was ready to open the. Trap door, then she could be shot. A clear and defined reason.
Mere words can not institute a deadly response. Unless those words are a justifiable reason, to defend oneself. The Capitol Police Officer. Was not in harm’’s way from a small unarmed woman.
You still don’t get it. It wasn’t a home.
And the part about the Constitutional issues appears to be way over your head.
Read The Applicable Amendments
She'd had no weapon in her hands. That was clear because her hands were busy hanging on to the window frame, and surely the cop saw that since he was close to her. I don't buy the cops lawyers claim that he'd told her to stop. He was close to those taking videos and his voice, muffled or not, was not heard.
You got that part right. Summarily killed for crawling unarmed into a door window of a public building in the middle of day. That doesn't qualify as killing in self defense.
The DOJ is going to totally protect its extra special VIP officer, but if it had any integrity would at least pay the family for his reckless killing.
I don't think a police officer has to be directly threatened to take action... they can take action if there is an eminent threat to others. The Capitol police primary role is protection of the members of congress.
I don't think a police officer has to be directly threatened to take action... they can take action if there is an eminent threat to others. The Capitol police primary role is protection of the members of congress.
She wasn't an imminent serious physical or deadly threat to anyone at the point she was shot. Who and where in proximity was the Congressmember she was immediately about to pummel or kill?
She wasn't an imminent serious physical or deadly threat to anyone at the point she was shot.
No way for the officer to know that. If someone broke into your home, you going to stop them and ask?
The fact that they broke into your home and started to breach the room you are taking shelter in is threat enough. This situation is no different. Obviously the hall of offices was used for shelter in place and barricaded. Any idiot would know force entry in that area is a threat. If she and others simply went through the areas of the building that weren't barricaded and guarded then left then she would still be alive today.
This is about as illogical as the idiots that ask "Why not just shoot them in the leg?"
No way for the officer to know that. If someone broke into your home, you going to stop them and ask?
The fact that they broke into your home and started to breach the room you are taking shelter in is threat enough.
This is about as illogical as the idiots that ask "Why not just shoot them in the leg?"
This Capitol officer doesn't have sense enough to know where a Congressmember immediately is and about to be physically attacked? The Capitol is not a personal residence. It's a public building. No democrat ever says democratic rioters can be summarily shot for trespassing into public buildings.
The Capitol is not a personal residence. It's a public building. No democrat ever says democratic rioters can be summarily shot for trespassing into public buildings.
If VP or any other Capitol hill member was seriously hurt or killed, do you really think it matter if it was a residence or not? That's just dumb.
You are wrong by the way about your use of "public buildings"... by far.
Public (tax payer building) does not equate to publicly accessible building. A military installation for example is not publicly accessible but is publicly funded.
Similarly
A private property can be publicly accessible. A mall for example is publicly accessible but still remains private property with all the rights afforded therein.
A rioter (doesn't matter which party affiliation) threatens private property or those therein, the residence/owner do have a right to protect their property. I personally think any rioter threatening life/property within private property, should be shot. It doesn't matter if the property is publicly accessible or not.
If VP or any other Capitol hill member was seriously hurt or killed, do you really think it matters? That's just dumb.
You are wrong... by far.
Public (tax payer building) does not equate to publicly accessible building. A military installation for example is not publicly accessible but is publicly funded.
Similarly
A private property can be publicly accessible. A mall for example is publicly accessible but still remains private property.
A rioter (doesn't matter which party affiliation) threatens private property or those therein, the residence do have a right to protect their property.
The Capitol is still a public building and not a residence and you still are arguing a double standard.
The Capitol is still a public building and not a residence and you still are arguing a double standard.
Just because you say it is... doesn't make it true. White House is a public funded building.. good luck trying to walk in saying it is publicly accessible.
There is no double standard here.. just your lack of understanding of the difference between publicly accessible and publicly funded property.
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.
