Was it justified? Should the shooter be publicly identified? Yes- No


If justified why?

1. No
2. Yes

1. No
2. Yes

What they said ^^

You would think by now someone on the right would have named her killer...

Good luck with that!!!!!!!

I think it's about time they admit to many of the lies that the media has been telling. For example the guy that was beat to death with a fire extinguisher. NEVER HAPPENED. Was never struck at all. Died the next day from a stroke according to family. At some point the media has got to be held to some standards of truth. I don't see that happening, far to many creatures in the swamp.

Nancy Pelosi needs to be publicly BLAMED for the shooting of an unarmed woman. No defense like a good offense. It was her show.

Yes, definitely justified! If you don't want to be shot, don't be part of a massive mob rampaging through the capitol, breaking glass, busting through doors and trying to enter the secure area behind the house Chamber itself as representatives are being evacuated!

"Waaa! They should have pepper sprayed her! They should have used a taser!" as hundreds of rioters are swarming the building. The right wing became such humanitarians all of a sudden! Gimme a break!

POP!

And I notice suddenly no one else attempted to climb through after that. Seemed pretty effective.

No reason to identify the officer and plenty not to!

Unarmed person shot for trying to get thru a broken window. Hmmm. Ya I would be totally terrified of her. She might unleash her fingernails on me. Yup kill her for sure. Your such a pussy gooses you probably would be scared enough to shoot her. You Knut. Edk

1. Of course not.
2. Of course.

Liars.


https://m.theepochtimes.com/capitol...l&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-02-23-2

Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick’s Mother: ‘He Wasn’t Hit on the Head’ on Jan. 6

BY JACK PHILLIPS

February 23, 2021 Updated: February 23, 2021
FacebookTweetEmail
6160 Shares
942 Comments

The mother of Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick said her son was not beaten with a fire extinguisher by a mob on Jan. 6, saying he likely suffered a stroke instead—refuting reports from the New York Times and other outlets claiming otherwise.

“He wasn’t hit on the head, no. We think he had a stroke, but we don’t know anything for sure,” Gladys Sicknick told the Daily Mail in an exclusive interview on Feb. 22. “We’d love to know what happened.”

The NY Times, CNN, and NBC updated their reports weeks after the Jan. 6 breach to assert that Sicknick was not killed by a fire extinguisher. Originally, the NY Times reported, based on anonymous sources, that Sicknick was beaten to death.

According to the NY Times’ update in February, “New information has emerged regarding the death of the Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick that questions the initial cause of his death provided by officials close to the Capitol Police.” However, there were reports of new information emerging about the circumstances of Sicknick’s death around the same time the NY Times published its report on Jan. 8.

The allegation Sicknick was killed by a protester was cited during the House impeachment managers’ presentations and arguments that former President Donald Trump should be convicted in the Senate impeachment trial over his speech on Jan. 6. Since the Capitol breach, some pundits and elected officials have cited Sicknick’s death while pushing claims that new domestic terrorism laws are needed.

Sicknick’s brother also disputed the reports about his death in early January. “[Officer Sicknick] texted me last night and said, ‘I got pepper-sprayed twice,’ and he was in good shape,” his brother, Ken Sicknick, said to news outlets last month, appearing to dispute key details of the original NY Times report.

Medical examiners have not released an official report on Sicknick’s cause of death. An autopsy report also was not released.

MOST READ
Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick’s Mother: ‘He Wasn’t Hit on the Head’ on Jan. 6
Justice Thomas Issues Dissenting Opinion From Supreme Court in Election Case
Meanwhile, there have been no arrests related to the slain officer’s death, and officials have not released details about a potential suspect. And while the breach was captured via live-streaming video, there is no footage that surfaced of demonstrators hitting Sicknick with a fire extinguisher.

An official Capitol Police statement said that “officer Brian D. Sicknick passed away due to injuries sustained while on duty,” continuing to say, “Officer Sicknick was responding to the riots on Wednesday, January 6, 2021, at the US Capitol and was injured while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed. He was taken to a local hospital where he succumbed to his injuries.”

Investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald noted last week that Sicknick’s death was referenced so much because it is “the only example the media had of the pro-Trump mob deliberately killing anyone,” adding that “none of the other four deaths” during the riots “were at the hands of the protesters: the only other person killed with deliberate violence was a pro-Trump protester, Ashli Babbitt, unarmed when shot in the neck by a police officer at close range.” Two other protesters, according to officials, died of medical-related causes while another died allegedly due to a crush of fellow protesters.

RELATED
Kentucky Police Officer Fired for Allegedly Giving Officers' Information to Black Lives Matter Protesters
Kentucky Police Officer Fired for Allegedly Giving Officers' Information to Black Lives Matter Protesters

The Epoch Times has reached out to the U.S. Capitol Police for comment.

Go suck a bag of dicks you coward.

Absolutely NOT justified!
Yes, shooter should be named, indicted, and tried!
Word on the street is that it was David Bailey that fired the shot. Bailey was wounded at the softball practice along with Steve Scalise.
I've tried to pry that info from some of my Capitol Police shooting buddies....nobody will cough up a name, but none deny that it might have been Bailey , either. I get mixed reactions as to whether they thought it was a righteous shooting, too. The guys that have left the Capitol Police for the Air Marshal service, pretty much don't think Babbit should have been shot under the circumstances. The others won't commit to a hard stance.....basically covering for their own...to some degree. One is an ASSWHOLE.....

Only Babbit died of intentional violence, the rest were strokes, heart attacks, and a probable trampling.

No
Yes

Trump praised LE efforts at the Capitol
calling them heroic true Americans.

So in his mind a good shoot.

I'd say he was much better briefed on the
matter than anyone here.

My non-professional take:
It was a legal shoot.

I wouldn't call it moral or right though.

Would anyone on here be arrested if they shot and killed an unarmed person coming through a broken window into their house ? I'm not defending Babbitt , she never should have been there. I personally think someone had to die to put blood on the hands of Trump. Watch the Video--- why did the police guarding the doors leave ?

I cannot say until the investigation is over. To many unknowns, like ..... Who fired the shot. What item , area or human asset were they protecting. What is that agency's use of force policy? That information would allow me to try answer the key questions. We do not know and may not ever know what the facts of the incident are. know that.

No they wouldn’t be arrested at all in our state. Perfectly legal to kill them. Does not matter if they are armed or not. You bust a window in a residence and try to climb through it in Oklahoma and you get what’s coming even if you are a white 14 year old choirboy. You are assumed to be there to cause bodily harm.

I don’t know. There are different rules for deadly force in certain applications and I have not read that they are different under those circumstances.

I can tell you that as the 4th Amendment applies to most any other LE or security application it was 100% unjustified.

No I don’t think the shooter should be identified.

Govt buildings don't fall under the definition of "residence" - as they are owned by the public.
Apples and oranges.

Fully justified.

When domestic terrorists have breached the capitol and are within feet of elected lawmakers, deadly force is justified and PERFECTLY OK.

Had the traitors that day been Blacks or Muslims you would by enraged if the Police hadn't opened up fire at ONCE they broke the barricades.



Meanwhile... Trump watched it on TV for 2 hours, refusing to send help while the US Government was in danger.

If Ashi had been black, the guard would have been crucified.

1. No Unnecessary but she did cross a bright line. But John Sulivan who was filming did not warn her of a drawn firearm until the last second as she broke the plane of the broken interior door light she was climbing through.

2. Yes.that is the law and is required within 48 hours I believe.

However yesterday the Sargent at Arms denied that he had spoken to the (now fired by Pelosi)Chief of the Capitol Police several times over the period from January 4-6. At those times the now former Chief of the Capitol Police repeatedly requested National Guard reinforcements

https://beckernews.com/2-ex-capitol...y-were-warned-about-capitol-riots-37047/

Hahaahaahaahaahaahaahaahahaahahaahahaaha!

Fuc-king Moron.

Totally brain-washed and completely devoid of truth.

No.......not from what I had seen in video. She didn't pose an imminent danger or threat, was unarmed, female, officers in stairwell. Nope not justified unless other facts come to light. The shooter did not give verbal commands, did not attempt to subdue her or block her, opted to shoot her instead. If the dignitary had been in hallway, or she attacked the executive protection team that would be different. The dignitary was behind a solid core door.....if there was even one.

This isn't exactly a resident, it is a place of business. So if a BLM rioter enters a store through a broken window or door, they should be shot also and it would be justified?

When you are asked "How stupid can you be?"

It really isn't a challenge.........

Lol, what a dumbfuqk.

He specifically asked about entering a house.

However since you ask about a dwelling (any building) or business, here is the Oklahoma statute. Simply apply the facts to the statute’s text without infusion of morals, ethics, religion or political implications. It’s pretty lenient to green light a justified shooting.

But the DC obviously has different statutes. Anyway:


Title 21. Penal Code

§ 21-1289.25 PHYSICAL OR DEADLY FORCE AGAINST INTRUDER

A. The Legislature hereby recognizes that the citizens of the State of Oklahoma have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes or places of business.

B. A person or an owner, manager or employee of a business is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

1. The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, occupied vehicle, or a place of business, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against the will of that person from the dwelling, residence, occupied vehicle, or place of business; and

2. The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

C. The presumption set forth in subsection B of this section does not apply if:

1. The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not a protective order from domestic violence in effect or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person;

2. The person or persons sought to be removed are children or grandchildren, or are otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

3. The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, occupied vehicle, or place of business to further an unlawful activity.

D. A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

E. A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter the dwelling, residence, occupied vehicle of another person, or a place of business is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

F. A person who uses defensive force, as permitted pursuant to the provisions of subsections B and D of this section, is justified in using such defensive force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such defensive force. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes charging or prosecuting the defendant.

G. A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of defensive force, but the law enforcement agency may not arrest the person for using defensive force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the defensive force that was used was unlawful.

H. The court shall award reasonable attorney fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection F of this section.

I. The provisions of this section and the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act shall not be construed to require any person using a weapon pursuant to the provisions of this section to be licensed in any manner.

J. A person pointing a weapon at a perpetrator in self-defense or in order to thwart, stop or deter a forcible felony or attempted forcible felony shall not be deemed guilty of committing a criminal act.

K. As used in this section:

1. “Defensive force” includes, but shall not be limited to, pointing a weapon at a perpetrator in self-defense or in order to thwart, stop or deter a forcible felony or attempted forcible felony;

2. “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people;

3. “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest; and

4. “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

The Capitol Police found the shooting of Ashli Babbitt to be justified. They gave no explanation why they came to this conclusion. They have not released the name of the officer who shot her and it seems doubtful that this person's name will be released.

Personally, I thought the shooting looked very questionable based on the videos. Ashli Babbitt was unarmed and was not doing anything threatening. She was directly in front of a broken window but had not gone through it. If we use this as a standard for justifiable police shootings, then there are many, many people who could have been justifiably shot during the summer riots.

If the same situation happened at the Federal Courthouse in Portland and the officer was a white male and the person shot was an unarmed black female, then the situation would be quite different. First of all, there would be terrorists, real terrorists, burning, stealing and murdering throughout the country much like the summer.

People need to be educated

BLM/Antifa is now the armed militant wing of the Democratic Party. They will destroy and murder on order.

The reason for all the “white supremacy / white terrorists ” talk you hear in the big media and Hollywood, is to thwart any efforts at creating something to counter the BLM/Antifa threat. Remember, BLM was given north of a billion dollars over the summer. They are well funded.

This is all designed and implemented at cocktail parties of the very powerful. You don’t see this, you are really missing the boat.

Talk about double standards.All last summer and fall Antifa and BLM rioted,burned,killed and did this on Federal property.Cops and US Marshals were told to stand down.The National Guard was not used to quell these riots and no one was punished for them.January 6TH Cops are video taped leading protestors into the Capitol building and a woman is shot in the head & killed for trespassing.You can`t tell me this is justified when worse things happened all summer with no type of retribution.Those who were arrested in the summer had their bail paid by US Congress critters,but none were offed on purpose.At the most Ashi made a mistake that she got executed for.This is the same way The KGB executed those that opposed them in any way.A bullet to the head.You can`t tell me that the Cops were not ordered to make an example of somebody,anybody.If we allow this to happen with no consequences,we are done.This whole January 6th deal was a setup by Pelosi,Schumer and their minions.I hope all the gleeful trolls here, get theirs the same way.

If that is how you feel I think your comment is good enough for me to take a shot at you. Obviously you are of low moral character and a leftist POS. The cops were literally right behind her and she was about to be arrested you idiot.

Yes and yes


When you're tasked with protecting individuals and have retreated to the last defensive position and the crazy Qtard lackeys are breaking through the last fortified barrier, it's time to make it rain.

But ya, the shooter should be released along with the reports that document the incident.

Was it a tragic incident? Yes. Was it justified? Yes.

Help in what way retard? He called for the violence to stop but I do feel that a stolen election should lead to violence. In fact just seeing the face of some POS leftist scum Biden voter should lead to violence.

You are still nothing but a POS leftard. That is more grounds for shooting than Babbit had and she was murdered, not threatening anyone. Unlike you exalting in the murder of an American citizen.

I voted for Trump and believe the election was stolen by fraud, dumbas s

It wasn't murder. It was a justified homicide

Well then Fuqtard stop exalting in the death of someone who did and felt the same way! If you fail to show moral character go ahead and be a leftist POS because if you think murder is ok with you, especially that of one of us then GFY.

It wasn't murder. If that moron hadn't smashed a window that was barricaded and attempted to breach it, she wouldn't be dead. Sometimes stupid hurts, especially if you're a Qtard.

Would you do what she did?

If the president had been in the house chamber and it was blm storming the capitol, this question would not have been asked

Her life didn't matter to the left. What if law enforcement would have shot every unarmed person that entered a private business during the riots in various cities? The elites will make sure the public is only kept out of public property. Like when they ran Levoy into an L ambush and shot him in the back while his hands were in the air. I guess it's OK to shoot some unarmed people.

Bb

It’s funny how defensive you clans get over basic questions.

The techniques used by Chauvin are part of handcuffing 101 and all you ignorant fugks pissed all over yourself about it.

You are truly an idiot. What in your simple mind did she do? Why would you be so afraid that you would shoot her. If you shoot someone who is unarmed and posing no threat then it is murder you jackass.

You mean when he was reaching for a pistol, that he was carrying? That guy was 100% nutcase and got what he wanted. Old droop face bundy is lucky he didn't have the balls to shoot the gun he was holding or he would've been stitched up too...

It would be easy to articulate that it was justified.

I'll ask again, would you do what she did?

You are no Trump voter and you are a lying worthless POS. Fuq off. Funny how you soak up what MSN tells you. If you had a brain (too funny) you would know much more about what happened to Levoy And if you actually had a brain or were even a little curious about what happened to him you would know that the agents in charge caught some hell over the incident one being indicted.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/28/us/oregon-lavoy-finicum-fbi-arrest/index.html

Even used your own favorite news source fuqtard.

Not from a favorite news source of yours.

https://www.independentsentinel.com/latest-news-from-oregon-and-the-death-of-lavoy-finicum/

There is no lower scum that someone that is happy about the deaths of Americans willing to stand up for their rights and country, which obviously you won't do.

LoL ..some folks forget LaVoy ran a Felony Stop.
the others who complied had their day in court.

As for AshB. she was voluntarily spearheading an
armed mob committing a felony - and was
shot only after defying repeated LE commands
to cease such activity.

So you wouldn't do what ashli Babbit did?

Probably a wise decision not to attempt to breach a last line barrier with a rabid mob behind you, especially with an armed security guard pointing a gun at you.

I guess they should've just let them in and asked what they wanted? Lol



And lavoy was as dumb as babbit.


Moral of these tales? Don't be a qtard or listen to some whack-nut welfare rancher. I take no joy in their deaths, but they died because of their foolish decisions.

Your already on real ignore Starman, as you have proved to be another worthless individual.

The truly sad part of the story is the people duped by Qanon into thinking they were going there to arrest members on congress (ie kidnap them).

Probably good well meaning people that were brainwashed.

I think the Officer had a use of force continuum that required the use of deadly force if anyone went past the locked doors. There were Congressmen inside. The rule was designed to protect the people inside. Whether we like the people inside, or think they are stealing from us makes no difference. If you are security you have to do your job. Be Well, RZ.

Unarmed white girl gets killed and nobody cares.

AshB spent yrs of her mil. career protecting Fed sites
and was even part of Air National Guard designated
to protect DC in event of riot...and she did her duty in
sworn compliance to uphold the constitution.

She then throws all that "out the window"
when Q comes along taking over her mind
and thwarting her better judgement.

I have said it before. I will say it again. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

We have been begging for cops and private property owners both, to kill rioters, arsonists, and looters ever since BLM hit Ferguson.

And I sincerely wish they had killed several hundred of the vermin.

Had this incursion of the Capitol Building happened six months sooner, and had the dead woman been a member of Antifa or BLM, this entire board would be jumping for joy.

If someone breaks the window on my home and pokes their head through, they will be a dead mother fugger. And I will not be waiting to find out if it is a he or a she, nor will I be waiting to find out what sort of weapon said person might or might not be equipped with.

The Capitol Police are tasked with keeping Congress Critters and Senators safe. Their job is to protect the elected Government of this nation. That is what they did when they killed Ms Babbitt. It was a good shoot.

I am sorry as hell that the good lady died. I am sure she simply got caught up in the excitement and adrenaline rush of the mob.

I am also sure it was Antifa plants pushing the mob onto bigger and more intrusive acts.

The bottom line is, when you start smashing windows, and begin "breaking and entering", you better know you are committing illegal acts. And you better be prepared to suffer the consequences, be that immediately or delayed.

A perpetrator puts them self at no less risk, just because he/she may be on "our side".

Besides, powers that be needed a dead body, so they can prefer "felony murder" charges where they choose.

I strongly suspect it was Antifa on site that "took over her mind and thwarted her better judgement".

Be it Q or A. she excercised her free will.

oh....she also ranted on about "by God..!!"
in her social media posts..so maybe some
xtra delusion that storming DC was divinely
approved ..

Anyone seen the video "everything wrong with the shooting of Ashli Babbitt".

You forgot the part about none of the antifa or BLM were ever held accountable all summer. Ever. Ever. Never.

No LD, I have not forgotten that. That is another crime of itself.

Did you miss the part about wishing for the death of several hundred vermin?

Play stupid games you win the stupid prize

Babbit and Chauvin are both winners

My question is, there were cops in that room with her and some of other rioters, why didn't they try and stop her?

Local Dirt,

how many were arrested this summer?

This is nonsense! It would be interesting to know this person's mental/emotional/ideological state of mind - better to understand what drives such nonsense.

Justified or not?

The way to find out is with a trial.

Based on the video, the defense counsel might not let me be on the jury.

I love when Lil' Miss Mining Camp talks real life.

LOL

Post it it a link, eh?

I think it was all fun and games to the people who participated in it. But they were incredibly naive to think that they could rub the Federal Government's nose in the dirt without bad results.

The Fedguv *will* kill you. The Fedguv *will* lock you away in the rape dungeon.

That's not Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson hanging out in D.C. these days. Get over that notion.

The MSM have been lying for so long that they don’t know the difference between truth and lies.

She has definitely sucked up too much CO2 through those 3 masks.

LOL.

Would anyone here try to climb through a smashed out window during a riot at the U.S. capital?

AMEN

The people supposedly being protected are enemies of our Republic. Justifying the killing is disgusting.

The people being protected were and are the legally elected government of this nation.

Those of us, and yes I am one, who disagree with the way they do business and the laws they pass, are rapidly becoming the minority in this nation. Or quite possibly are already the minority.

That is the thing about this nation. Those in the minority must live under the laws favored by those in the majority.

Legally?

AMEN to that.

AND touche'.

Anyone?

According to the highest legal authority in this nation. YES

The other choice is armed insurrection. Insurrection by every definition. Treason to the standing government.

Better be prepared to pay the price.

There is absolutely zero upside to such action. That is not how we swing the pendulum back to the Right.

Riot? That was a mostly peaceful protest.

Horseschit.

The highest legal authority in the US is compromised, or corrupt. You pick. Doesn't matter. It's not working for US CITIZENS.

It is not working for you and I.

It is working just fine for the rapidly increasing liberal majority.

Should ANFA and BLM rioters have been shot when they threw bricks at police? How about when they set fires?

Hmmm.
Actually the highest legal authority declined to hear a bunch of cases and thus declined to rule....

If a woman cries rape, but nobody hears it...
Did it actually happen?

Have you read Justice Thomas's dissent on "declined to hear"?

You are free to make up your own mind but might I ask you to listen to this take on it:
https://rumble.com/ve3qj-justice-thomas-blistering-cert-denial-dissent-viva-frei-vlawg.html

Since you are asking, I don't know what I would do in those circumstances, and one might expect to get put down, handcuffed and arrested for climbing in. But - would an unarmed woman normally expect to be shot in the face at almost point blank range in that circumstance? If such LE reaction were to be normal procedure, just think about how many looters in how many situations in how may cities would be shot in the face for climbing in through a broken window,

Some states allow a home/ business owner to
shoot a break/enter intruder in the face at PBR.
naturally LE are also permitted to do the same
in certain circumstances....so there you go ,
a regular citizen can do what cops can do.


You don't know what you would do as a protester
Likewise if you were Capitol building security you
still dont know what you might do..



Breaking into the Capitol building is not normal
or common for citizens , so I would not expect
a normal LE type response from security assigned
to protect elected officials which the armed mob
was attempting to reach.

AshB chose to be part of that armed mob
forcing their way to the chamber, yet you
think it unreasonable she got shot for leading
the way for a pack of armed felons.

They were pushing their luck way beyond what
any reasonable person would attempt, so one
would be a fool to think that security needs to
be more reasonable in response at that stage.

Clearly there's a point where security does not
negotiate which an armed mob , and AshB for
the benefit of the rest of her mob showed where
that was and what one can expect if they decide
to continue.

Security did not go hunting for AshB,
she ardently went looking for and poking
the lions at the gate and got more than
she bargained for...

Some states, some circumstances, and from that you want to make a grand conclusion? You are continuing the leap to ridiculous. Why not take a poll and find out how many experienced and thinking people here agree with you? No - I meant a real/honest poll.

Polls have nothing to do with the LAW.
Now, including the Constitution the nation
is a nation of Laws not dumbfck polls.
You don't like the laws?, then do something
to formally change them ..(hint- you won't
achieve that through internet polls)

Some laws permit a regular citizen and LE
to shoot a felony intruder....there are laws
that also permit a regular citizen and LE
to shoot someone who is life threatening
another party....there are many good citizens
who appreciate such laws being in place.

Since you like polls , run one to find out if
folks like being able to shoot an intruder
&/or shoot a perp who is about to harm another.

WOW ! You must be an expert on shooting people.

Starman,

What are the laws concerning the 4th Amendment and the Capitol Building, as they relate to uniformed LEO's?

The data does not show that there is a "rapidly increasing liberal majority." The Left (not liberals) now controls the Democratic Party. The Left also controls the media, entertainment including sports, education and increasingly, large corporations. However, that does not mean that they have a real majority of voters. That's why the Democrats want to import lots of illegal immigrants from Central America and make them citizens. They need to change the electorate in order to maintain control. They were only able to beat Trump in 2020 by radically and unconstitutionally changing the election laws in battleground states and then counting mail-in votes without any real authentication as well as other election shenanigans in the large cities.. Even then, they barely won. That's why they are trying to consolidate control now. The battle isn't over.

No just common sense and logic which you lack.

#1 Follow the law and greatly mitigate ones
chances of getting shot by a good citizen or LE.

#2 Use the Law to one's advantage if one finds
themselves up against a perp./armed mob...coz
that's what laws are designed and enacted for.

If that does not compute with you
it could be down syndrome or some
other cognitive disability.

quote=Starman]

No just common sense and logic which you lack.
#1 Follow the law and greatly mitigate ones
chances of getting shot by a good citizen or LE.
#2 Use the Law to one's advantage if one finds
themselves up against an armed mob...coz that's
what laws are designed and enacted for.

If that does not compute with you
it could be down syndrome or some
other cognitive disability.
[/quote]

My 13 week old puppy knows more about the law then you.

I double checked with a buddy a week after the shooting , he used to work for Capitol police for 7 years, then went to another agency.

Yep like it or not use of deadly force was justified According to their agency’s policies. I don’t agree but that’s the law. The protesters were set up by the Dems and professional instigators. and you could see that coming from a mile away especially after last summer.

Maybe just deal with facts and the actual law instead incoherent rambling.


Post the CP’ s use of force policies regarding forced entry into the Capitol. Pretty simple

Yet I had to correct you when you wrongly argued
the law of Ilinois regarding Kyle Rittenhouse...
irrelevantly citing how the law applies to you
as an adult rather than the actual case of
teenage Rittenhouse..TFF.




For starters Policy is not Law.

But You double checked CP policy and
categorically state it was a "legal" shoot.

in the recent past I have posted reference to
SCOTUS rulings regarding Fed. LE and what
they have range to do under the law, but AshB
defenders didn't seem interested in such.

CCCC prefers polls over understanding of LAW.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ekQGipzU7E49/

Am I being defensive or are you because you know that you are a hypocrite? The simple fact is the house chamber was the line that could not be crossed without exception and she crossed it and she is dead because of it. They are not going to prosecute or release the guys name and they shouldn't. What amazes me is how stupid you have to be not to understand that. What kind of idiot thinks they can threaten the lives of elected officials without ramifications. Are you really that stupid to think that only the president's life is protected? You have to be full blown retard.

So in our state right now we are fighting a stand your ground right. But yet y’all are saying it’s ok to shoot a unarmed person. Who in the hell would be in fear of their life by this girl. But it’s ok to have rapist come in my house rape my wife and daughter and me not be able to do anything. Plus come and take any piece of my property and me not have the right to protect it. So what did she do to deserve to be shot for?

Folks keep singling out AshB as unarmed ,
Ignoring she was part of an armed mob.

If you had an armed mob breaking into
your property , would you give leniency
to anyone of them if they got too close
to your family or friends?..I suppose if
you can't see a weapon you must safely
assume the felon doesnt have one...LoL.

AFAIC, any adult who willfully choses to run
with such a mob in the act of felony is not
exempt from equal treatment, especially
when they are the individual leading the pack
through the window.

Starman, you may be a self-conscious ignoramus - which would explain and maybe excuse some of your rambling - but there is no excuse for your trying to state what is in my mind or what I prefer. Because, that you simply do not know - you are ignorant of that - even though you repeatedly try to say that you do. I suggested a poll because that might help you gain some light on your personal subject.

better explain what SCOTUS means to starfish

Its a sad story , but with prior military experience and as a mother with the responsibility of young children, she shouldn't have joined a violent armed mob breaking into capitol. ( I'm not talking about the protestors on the mall) First thing you do when you see a violent armed mob destroying schit is run the other way and not join it. Every adult knows this.

The useful idiots that broke into the capitol and vandalized it and then stole schit while taking selfies did a huge disservice to people who supported Trump. Hard to feel sympathy for dumb adults who did incredibly stupid things.

CCCC you have a serious aversion to discussing
LAW pertaining to the LE response in the Capitol
building against a felon.



If you want an opinion poll then do one, but
it means zilch to me since education in the
prevailing law is what really matters here.

Well, Starbucks, you almost got it right. I understand the LAW quite well and completely, and often discuss it with various interesting people, but I do have a a serious aversion regarding any attempt to discuss anything with you because of your proclivity for pseudo mind reading and your mad dog ad hominem tendencies.

Completely ?..LoL.

If you actually had any reasonable understanding
of SCOTUS rulings in relation to Fed LE use of force
policy , you wouldn't be whining about AshB.

I'm happy to discuss SCOTUS/use of force.
Where do you want to start ?

Not whining - disgusted. Seems like nothing makes you happy, so why stoop to discuss. If you are seeking a happy moment, why don't you go whack a Christian?

Disgusted at AshB breaking the law or
disgusted at security acting within the law ?

If you are discontent with the action of that
officer , you can cite the policy and law he
contravened.




Opinion Polls , now personal happiness ,.wtf? you got
any more subjective dumbschit crap that doesnt
relate to the law of the land when committing felony ?
Perhaps throw in your scatterbrain faith in bronze Age
Bible story myths?



Find me a real one.

👍
Thanks, bud.

Always got yer back pard😎

My post above indicated that street talk had identified David Bailey as the agent that shot Babbitt.... for what it's worth, here's an article that refutes that:
https://www.theepochtimes.com/with-...l&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-02-25-3
If this article is accurate, I stand corrected and apologize for the misinformation...

Gateway pundit this morning is showing photos of Babbit's shooter, no name but the photos are clear, shouldn't be a problem to ID him. They are saying he was a lieutenant in Capitol Police.
Pictures shows him waving his pistol in a group with finger on trigger too, poor training?

too many stupid bitches,, we need to git rid of a few..

Another question would be, how would they know she was unarmed? Who is to say if she were armed, she would have put the gun somewhere on her person so she could crawl through the barricade? If the officer was told to shoot anyone who comes through that barricade, then he did absolutely nothing wrong. This has been investigated and it was not recommended to bring the officer up on charges which would lead one to believe that the officer was following orders.

Whoever the pos coward is, he needs to be hung in front of the Capitol Building.

My opinion is that it was unjustified, but legal. Seems contradictory but that's how I feel. Is there a civil lawsuit there somehow?

What policy or ROE was the officer who shot Ashli operating under?

It is not contradictory. It often happens that deadly force is authorized doesn't deliver the best possible outcome. The law necessarily has to be structured so as not to judge an officers actions through the lens of hindsight though.

Nobody considers this was a False-flag event?

Anybody see Ashlee’s dead body?

If what ribka has stated is true (and I have no reason to doubt what he said) then I'm fine with the shoot.

The problem I have is that not one journalist has dug into the what and whys of the event.

Yet every officer involved shooting between Gentle George and the Capitol received national levels of attention and investigation.

Pfffft.

I haven't even heard a statement from the Capitol Police.

I'm down.

Let's hear the SCOTUS rulings on deadly force at the Capitol Building and the White House.

You two are dumber than dogschit.

While I wouldn't want to be in the officer's shoes after the fact, I kinda think he deserves some grief by living with his actions for the rest of his life. I have 2 county sheriffs in my family, and I'm quite sure neither one would felt threatened enough to fire.

It's like 2 turds rolling down a hill bumped into each other and stuck together.

Lol.

Zero fugking knowledge or experience with anything relating to the subject.

But by God, here they go.

CCCC understanding the law completely should
be able to explain what the Legal Standard is
for Fed LE use of force.

And yet smarter than the rest of you which begs the question "What is dumber than dumber than dogschit?"

You wouldn't know the 4th Amendment from a di lldo.

Do yourself a favor, and STFU.

"Fed LE use of force."

LOL

I wonder where he dug up that bullschit?

Flav could never achieve a formal education
nor any recognized profession ..all he got is
the brilliance of 91k posts on the CF.




You might be surprised how many Fed agencies
that graduate their people through FLETC use
the term "Use of Force"
FLETC which trains about 80 agencies (including
Capitol Police) also applies the same term.

"Federal LE use of force."

LMFAO

don't run away girls, just answer the question. how many were arrested last summer?

https://www.facebook.com/schmeggin

Depends where you live.

How many were arrested in DC, Lil Miss Mining Camp?

Obviously, the answer to my question is you. The fact that you feel the 4th amendment somehow pertains to this situation is a dead giveaway.

Is that Sycamore?

Did you go with the diaper today or did you decide to risk it and go with the big boy pants?

"Fed LE use of force."

I can't stop laughing.

You stupid bitches couldn't double lock a set of cuffs.

LOL

Speaking of diapers, which brand does your wife make you strap to your face?

LOL

We're all ears, Law Dog.

he’s intimately familiar with dil dos

Bet he's a school teacher.

LOL

You also can't stop driving and texting
while drunk and now you even disagree
with FLETC.

To top it off you believe bubba Ribka
when he says " I double checked CP policy,
and it's the law .."

except that Policy is not Law.

The blind leading the blind.

I love that you think you know what you're talking about.

You clueless bitch.

You're kinda approaching something that might be an intelligent statement.

But you've still a ways to go.

RimFromTN has a chalk holder shaped like a dil do.

Lol.

LOVED the screen shot of an expired UoF policy manual.

LMAO

Ok. Quick review.

Is this Starfish or RimFromTN?

Protecting a federal installation.

Occupied by federal judges, and AUSA's.

How many deadly force scenarios resulted from those sieges? And keep in mind they lasted months. Not minutes.

Big deal , It was just a common example.
They still employ the term UOF. which
you claimed was bullchit.

You are like barbers, barmen and cab drivers
who "know so much" , but never went beyond
barber, barman or cab driver living off tips.

Uhhh, yeah dumb fugk.

"Use of Force."

Not to be confused with made up bullschit like "Fed LE Use of Force."

Do yourself a favor, and STFU.

You are hilarious. Please do not stop.






You failed to respond to this tape of that Mayor Moron.

And funny how all the video evidence of many physical assaults on Federal officers just disappeared off youboob.

Are not CP Federal ? So in the context of AshB,
are we discussing Fed.LE Use of Force?

You sure are petty and desperate.
Do you steal other people's peanuts
at the bar?

LOL

Just STFU.

You don’t know a GD thing. So stop trying.

Flav = No formal education and no profession
just fleabitten top dog of CF internet alleyway
telling others to STFU.

Your break downs of this shooting tell me all I need to know.

You’re FOS.

And you have ZERO knowledge on the 4th Amendment.

Strong effort, regardless.

LOL

Are you somehow of the opinion that it doesn't?

Detail your gripe concerning AshB
and 4th Amendment.




You already called it a legal shoot.
What else do we need to discuss?

So let's look at this through Graham v Connor.

Severity of the crime at issue?: riot, property destruction, trespass. I don't know if those actions are felonies in D.C.

Was the suspect resisting or attempting to flee?: I would say she was actively attempting to gain entrance with malicious intentions

Was the suspect an immediate threat to officers or other citizens?: I think anyone with a brain could articulate the ramifications if that barrier was breached. They weren't smashing through it to shake hands.

They siezed her.....permanently. Was it justified? Possibly. Just depends on how the soulless lawyers handle it

LMAO

Seriously. Are you a school teacher?

Correct.

Destruction of property is not a justification for deadly force for law enforcement.

“Malicious” means nothing. Explain why you think she was there to cause egregious bodily harm or death.

You tell me what that woman could have done if she gained access to that corridor. And explain how you knew she was a deadly threat.

She chose to jump in the lions mouth
after repeatedly being told to get back
by LE.

And please (this is directed to everybody) please stop insinuating that because a crime is a felony that it makes the use of deadly force more easily justified.

Because it makes you sound like a fugking idiot.

So why didn’t all those feds in Portland shoot the rioters?

I appreciate the offer, but I don't have to explain s hit to you. Those qtards were there thinking they were going to "arrest" (ie kidnap) members of congress for some nutjob tribunal.

Do you think they were going to take pics and hold hands? Or were they there to do harm?

Face it, more than likely the contingentcy plan for the capital police/security was that door way was a red line. Nobody gets through it and deadly force is authorized to see to it. Same as jumping the fence at any military instalation.

F uck Qtards. She got what she wanted....to be a martyr.

I would guess because there weren't U.S. congressmen and women hiding in the basement in Portland, but I wasn't there.

^^^Translation: I don’t actually know anything and I tap out now.^^^

Cute guess.

Thanks for being stupid.

Or you know they were just there apart of a tour group and got turned around. Poor lady.

Drop some knowledge on me. What would you have? What was the correct course of action, oh great one?

I love that people like yourself proclaim to “know”, and then abruptly admit to not knowing schit.

Again, please share the correct course of action. Educate us all. I need to learn from the best.

Cant say. I wasn’t the shooter.

LOL "dumber than dumber than" WTF you been drinking all day FhaggFMTenn?

So you don't know s hit?

Cant say.

I wasn’t the shooter.

So you don't know s hit? Thanks for the information.

Well I have a thorough grasp of the 4thAmendment (which you don’t) but I cannot claim to have the perspective of the shooter in question at the time the application of deadly force was applied.

But apparently you do.

So let’s hear it, dumb fugk.

No I'm waiting for your justification on whether it was lawful or unlawful. You know with certainty, so share it with us.

I conced you know what is correct, now articulate it.

Don't play it safe and 4 putt. Go for the green.....

If Trump was there with those other elected
officials, are you OK with LE capping someone's
ass with a backpack(possible IED and hidden weapons)
after defying LE commands while trying to force their
way where they clearly know they shouldn't ?

Would anyone in their right mind try such
and not reasonably expect the chance of
getting perforated ?

I believe YOU are the one that claimed it was a justified use of force.

Because YOU, are an armchair bound dumb fugk.

So YOU should start explaining the totality of circumstances.

You fat bitch.

LOL

I don’t know the SOP’s for the White House or the Capitol Building.

So YOU'RE just going to ride the "gee golly I don't know" middle of the fence? But I thought YOU knew everything? YOU have no answer for this? YOU know I'm wrong, so articulate how you're right. It's simple even for a golfing b itch.

So you're f ucking clueless now?

Thats brilliant. Did you think of that one yourself? Anytime anyone is killed by law enforcement regardless of whether or not it was justified violates a person's 4th amendment rights. Wonder why that argument is never used in court. Maybe because its really stupid and only a moron would think of it.

Oh you are an inexperienced little bitch ain’t ya?

Touch a nerve?

LOL

Let’s hear the break down you Biden loving fugk.

PS-You are dumber than dog schit. And Jackson.

LOl

If deadly force was necessary how come the three cops right behind her didn’t shoot her in the back? I’m guessing they are rational and didn’t see a weapon. Oh look out she might scratch your face. Edk

No I'm just pointing out how you don't even have the nuts to say it was lawful or unlawful. If it's a bad shoot, explain to us why. But you wont...which is odd, because you seem to know the answer. We're dying to hear it.

And you're still f ucking clueless apparently.


Touch a nerve? Lol

Based on the video it is unlawful.

But anybody that knows anything about the subject realizes that’s only part of the story.

That’s what makes people like you, complete dumb fugks.

And don’t get kghunty. I told you and your gals to STFU hours ago.

LOL

Isn't that true of everything Starman posts? I doubt he'd know which direction to look for the setting sun if he couldn't Google it.

Let’s sit back and listen to the retards opine.

LOL

Some of his YouTube links have been pretty cool.

The only one that's c unty is you. Let me know when the DOJ indicts the shooter. Lol

I'm guessing you rode a desk for a majority of your career.....just a guess mind you. Lt? Cpt?

One thing we know for sure, after the shooting there is one less Qanon nutjob in the world. I'd say it's a win/win for society.....

Jackson,

How many weeks did you make it in law enforcement?

DOJ has about as much credibility as Barack Obama or Chinese NFL players now. Selective prosecution based on the the political flavor of the day. The vast majority of the DOJ/FBI capitol charges were maybe misdemeanor trespassing and good luck finding a code for that in the USC.

3.5, LT. Lol

Tell me some war stories from the office. Lol


Paper cuts? Copier jams...lol..


Typical brass........lol

Holy dog schitt you’re stupid. You really should always use the google machine before you type any responses. You’re IQ surely doesn’t hit 3 digits and it’s showing.

Flav flip-flops and backtracks..

He knows then suddenly he doesn't know
even after taking Ribkas word to the CF bank...

Fine with the shoot ,
but holds a 4th Amendment Gripe.
which doesn't gel.

It's absolutely amazing to me that some people can laser focus on one day of protests in DC, yet they can blow off 9 months of perpetual violence, destruction and death as if it never happened.

You snow9lakes are 9unny..

I think everyone that participated in a riot should be arrested. Blm or Qtard. And those that committed arson should be in prison. Just because I don't agree with the poor saps that thought they were "apart of the plan" and stormed the US capital doesn't mean I agree with the retards that burned cities down this past summer.

The fact you can't comprehend that is telling.

Telling what? That my memory is longer than your dick?

LMAO.

That you're a retard that thinks about dick....apparently.....again telling....

Simple Jack and StarStink are all too quick to announce that a shoot is “justified.”

And then explain they don’t know anything.

TFF.

Hey maybe StarStink can find you a screenshot of an expired UoF manual.

LMFAO

They’re demotards. What do you expect

And you keep running your suck and waffling....might be...might not....I wasn’t there....can't say for sure....(it's called double speak fyi)

Lol you woulda been nothing but ass and elbows for sure lol

Cute answer.

But you’ve already exposed yourself as a know nothing dumb fugk.

Just STFU.

You've exposed yourself as a desk riding never did s hit "I can't fathom a comment because I wasn't there" GOLFER lol


I'm curious, did you get a rush doing IA's? Lol

How did you arrive at the personal conclusion
that it was "A fine shoot".?

Did you use anything other than what Ribka
told you on the word of mouth CF internet ?

Oh my!

Simple Jack's diggin' ultra deep now.

LMFAO

I didn't.

Can you not read?

True dat defagg

Did they shock your conscious? (Brass speak for...made your naughty parts tingle...) Lol

Come on tell us how it was....lol (emphasis on WAS)

Maybe post your resume' as an encore.

LOL

Easy there, Simple Jack.

No reason to stop being a lady.

LOL

You first, and leave out the loose cattle calls and IA's lol

I know it kills you to point out that you've never arrested anybody.

And I love doing it.

LOL

I think my posts speak for themselves.

YOURS on the other hand...

LOL

You were at an agency small enough for LT's to arrest people? Damn.....that sucks lol what was the point to promote?

Be honest the last time you double locked cuffs was during the Bush administration lol

Watch Simple Jack just keep coming unglued.

LOL

Wouldn't know the 2nd Amendment from the 15th.

I KNOW you have never arrested anybody.

And if you did, you owe them an apology.

LOL

I'm having a good time. All in jest.



Are you feeling sad? lol take a f ucking joke brass-boy

Lol OK LT. Desk riding is hard work.....tell us about it....power points, excel spreadsheets, kissing tha cpt's azz......



Orrrrrr maybe I'm way off. Maybe you were the 5 divorces been on the road for 30yrs guy.....doubt it....but maybe?

You accepted it as A 'fine shoot' after
fully trusting what Ribkas buddy told him.

No I was just pointing out that you and StarKist are one and the same.

And that you've never arrested anybody.

You're purposely omitting the rest of that post.

Because you KNOW you're a do nothing dumb fugk.

Well with covid, it's slowed down for sure. I have no idea the exact number, but maybe a few of hundred? High end maybe 600? 450 seems reasonable....


Quite honestly I avoid arresting s hitheads like the plague...no point anymore. Because folks like you have made it ridiculous

Simple Jack is a badge bunny. Who would’ve guessed??

No, that's ur old lady...

Is your next retort gonna be along the lines of “I’m rubber and you’re glue”

Would be better than obsessing over dicks.....like you lol

You must have me confused with someone else. The only dicks Im paying any attention to is my own....and you

Yep you're right, the meat gazer was local dirt boy. My apologies fine 'tard.

Apology accepted

But you’re still a mongoloid that doesn’t know schitt about the law and deadly force

Did you fully trust and believe Ribkas source
and claim it was a - legal shoot - or not?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.


Would you have done what the dead lady did? Just curious.

No I was busy killing a deer that day

So what she was doing isn't something you would do? Hmm you must not be a Qtard. Perhaps you innately know right from wrong?

what is there to break down? The 4th amendment doesn't apply to storming the capitol and busting through barricades that protect elected officials. Do you know why her family isn't sueing on the grounds that her 4th amendment rights were violated? Because its stupid.

I don’t spend my time amongst large crowds in Democrat controlled cities. Right vs wrong depends on which side writes the history. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.

I guarantee there’s a lawsuit.

Already violated the legal requirement for identification of shooter..

Thank you.

If it's such a clean shoot, why is he hiding?

Call it what you want. That coward pos murdered that girl.

We need to consider bottom-feeder Flav never
attained the level of education that would enable
him to articulate matters of Law in an appropriate
and coherent fashion to any reasonable degree.

His bragging high point in life is that he has
arrested people , yet there are ordinary good
folk out there who have effected Citizen Arrests
without beating their chests about it.




Flav. harps on about 4th Amendment but never
once cared to mentioned Graham Vs Connor.

the fact he accepted it was a Legal shoot based
on what someone on the CF vaguely told him about
Capitol Police Policy ...is truelly cringeworthy.

Jim,

Thank you so much for admitting you’re a dumb fugk.

LOL

Stinkstar,

You did a great job of affirming what you don’t know.

Extra points to me for getting you to admit it.

LOL

Simple Jack. LOL

Thought I would pop some popcorn and bump this back to the top. Raining here and bored.

chronic Flav. F•A•I•L

SOP has nothing to do with determining if Deadly Force
was Legally justified with AshB.

The law judges LE actions in Use of Force under
Fourth Amendment ~ objective reasonableness standard ~
(1985 SCOTUS Graham v. Connor.)
Legal Std. is not based on any LE agencies policy or procedure
FLETC informs all who pass through on that important fact..
and that includes Capitol Police.

And there can be range of LE responses (to
felony activity) that are deemed acceptable.
An officer is not necessarily required to use
the least force or avoid using Deadly Force.
Totality of Circumstance needs to be factored.
ie: task at hand , nature of threat , window of
time , avail. manpower , avail information ,etc...
So...it is not strictly carved in stone as to how
an officer may be required to respond without
the benefit of "20/20 hindsight"..and that is
how the Law views it..what the officer had to
deal with at the time with what he had...not
what is known after the fact.

Which means citing or knowing LE Policy or
Procedure is irrelevant to all except bonehead
CF tards.

Stink Star,

Maybe you can find a picture of the cover of their Use of Force manual?

You dumb bitch.

LOL

Stink Star is REALLY struggling with this one.

LMAO

Flav.returns like a dog returns to its own vomit...

If ya don't like the AshB shoot take it up with Trump..!

Are you saying that you're vomit?

Bottom feeding types like Flav can't cope
with failure hence why alcohol plays such
large part in their life..

good thing when you are at the bottom you
dont have far to fall.

Do you even know what you're arguing?

Flav - but judge I was only following Police
policy and procedure ..

Judge - That's not how the Law works son.

Flav - but judge I was only following Police
policy and procedure ..

etc, etc, etc.

Damn.

You really are stupid.

LOL

Spew up your LE Policy and Procedure argument
nonsense crap again, its doing you wonders ...

Stink Star,

Can 10 unarmed people kill you?

Flav your boat sank to the bottom pages ago
but you still desperately bailing to save it..LoL.

Stink Star,

Can 10 unarmed people kill you?

Rioters breaking through the Capitol Building
were visibly armed..what you didnt see
them using implements to smash through?

and who knows what they could have concealed.

Stink Star,

Since you don't know, I'm going to explain to you.

I'm going to break down what are known as "Graham factors."

Pay attention. And answer like a reasonable person. Not a dumb fugk.

LOL

The answer is a simple "yes."

Next question:

Does prior knowledge disseminated to officers play a part when considering which level of force would be appropriate?

You never mentioned Graham factor before
you talked about not knowing Police SOP.
which is irrelevant...now you are in serious
damage control...But your wreck is already
on the bottom of the ocean...LoL.

Yeah.

You really know you're stuff.

LOL

Flav you are way too late to the party
the free alcohol you came for is all gone.

If you don't like being called out, don't post stupid fugking schit.

Stick to posting other SME's work.

FLAV..you accepted it was a "fine shoot" based on
Capitol Police Policy which Ribka told you about.

No court or judge would accept such utter nonsense.

The funniest thing about all of this is how desperate you are to keep being wrong.

By the way, have you ever met ribka?

Flav. show the CF where LE Policy or SOP
has been accepted and used by a court
as the Legal Std. to determine if Deadly Force
was justified.

That's the STD you used in your fantasy world.


I don't need to , especially after he got the law
of Illinois wrong regarding Rittenhouse ,
then he comes on this thread and says -
"I double checked with a buddy on CP Policy
and it was a good shoot , that's the law .."

But (sober) reality is ...Policy is not the Law.

To claim Policy is Law .is false, misleading and ignorant.

Graham v. Conner establishes standards to determine objective reasonableness in any use of force. Tennessee v. Garner establishes criteria for reasonable use of deadly force.

HOWEVER

Federal grounds have different rules if there are critical sources of information or other such criteria. The use of deadly force is authorized outside of standard self-defense, defense of others, etc..

Stink Star thinks the White House has to operate under the same legal standards as a Dunkin Donuts in Cleveland.

Cant make this schit up.

LOL

One more time...

FLETC informs all including Capitol Police that-
A court does not apply one's own particular LE
agencies Policy when judging one's actions in
regards to Use of Force.

Policy and SOP varies between so many agencies ,
and is not Law. hence the benchmark Legal Std
applied by courts is derived from -
4th Amendment, ~ objective reasonableness Std~.
SCOTUS (1985 Graham Vs Connor.)

Flav. should cite case-law where a court has used
LE Policy or SOP to determine if Deadly Force was
Legally justified or unjustified by LEO.

Do you even know what SOP stands for?

LOL

You are a desperate dumb fugk.

At best.

Fools arguing over a shooting that never happened.

Well that's fugkin' interesting, man.

Nearly 13 pages in ...and Flav. still has no
rational coherent legal argument or relevant
standing precedent case law to ref...and no
more bourbon to drown out his ignorance.

FLETC is wrong in the advice they give to
ALL agencies that pass through the doors
coz Flav has taken the word of Ribka who
double-checked Capitol Police Policy through
an old buddy and has declared AshB shoot
legal on such grounds ...and Flav has stated
he has No Reason to Doubt such sources.

Flav and Ribka what a team...

I love that you keep referencing FLETC.

Have you ever been to one? Or taught at one?

I love how you contradict FLETC.

LOL

You are so close to winning.

I have not looked at this thread, and do not know what others have said.

She was in the wrong place at the wrong time, and I would have no problem if she had been arrested for trespassing on federal property.

I watched the video.

That was murder.
Straight up murder, no question about it.

And Nancy Pelosi is responsible for it.

Damn straight.

That was an execution. And that pos murderer is still being hidden by those elitist swine.