• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Investigation into Babbit shooting closed

Lutherf said:
Why was a use of force investigation not conducted? Why was a murder investigation not conducted? We expect such an investigation every time a cop kills a black man but in this case it was a white chick that supported Trump and the DoJ just DGAF.
Click to expand...

If there is no ground for a charge related to a civil rights violation, the same will be true for a murder charge.
 
pamak said:
If there is no ground for a charge related to a civil rights violation, the same will be true for a murder charge.
Click to expand...
Odd how the "law and order" crowd is all for defending a violent revolutionary.
 
Out of curiosity, how many of you in this thread that believe the charges against Kim Potter are justified also believe that the lack of charges in this case is justified.
 
eohrnberger said:
No argument about treason being difficult to prove in court.
No argument that prosecutors file lesser charges they feel they have a strong case for.
Not even an argument that those rioters are charged to the full extent the law permits fro which there is sufficient evidence.

Just that it appears the evidence has left the prosecutors with evidence to only change "assault, conspiracy and obstruction of Congress or law enforcement.", and not treason or sedition.

So I'd guess you can't really call those rioters traitors, nor call their activities that day as treason. 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...

Which doesn’t change the fact that their actions were treasonous.
 
Schism said:
Interesting. Do you believe the very same standard applies in Portland and Seattle?

How about anywhere that rioters get in the face of police and hurl rocks, bottles, and fireworks? Is that too "deadly force"? <--your words
Click to expand...
Well, no. Why should the same standard apply for false equivalencies?
 
eohrnberger said:
Any less so for the Portland AntiFa who keep attacking the Portland federal court building?
Click to expand...

But....:but....but.....annnnnnntiiiiiiffffffaaaa

I get that whataboutism is all you have, but unlike the Trump cult Antifa didn’t rampage through the Capitol Building screaming about murdering the Vice President of the United States
 
lwf said:
If the capitol police officer had pulled her over on the road and there was a struggle and she was shot, I'm sure there would have been. And who says there wasn't an internal use of force investigation? The video makes it clear that Babbit was a criminal aggressor and the capitol police officer acted in his duty to defend elected officials. He did not approach her, he was not questioning her, or singling her out. He was inside a locked and barricaded door protecting our elected officials, and she broke through this door. What more do we need to know?
Click to expand...
Which still requires some sort of investigation. A video does not negate that fact, no?
 
Tigerace117 said:
Treason has consequences. The Trump cult is lucky more of them weren’t killed.
Click to expand...

Like sooo... many liberals love to bring up, treason assumes due process, not an instant death sentence.
 
Lutherf said:
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.
Click to expand...
Cops were beaten and one even dies after. How much deadly force do you need when it's your ilk?
 
Linuxcooldude said:
Like sooo... many liberals love to bring up, treason assumes due process, not an instant death sentence.
Click to expand...

Not when someone is in the middle of committing it.

Your false equivalence is noted and dismissed
 
Mr Person said:
And where are all those excuses about how the cop did not know that she did not have a weapon, how she wasn't following police commands? Has anyone demanded to know whether she had any health conditions or was on drugs, such that being shot might result in death where it otherwise would not? What about her criminal history? Did she shoplift once when she was a teen?

Funny.... it's a dead black dude and we hear all that.

:unsure:




Oh well, I'm sure the problem is just that I read poopy fake nooz like the NYT, WaPo, The Economist, and the like. I'm sure I'd see the *real* truth if I turned to OANN, newsmax, breitbart, and infowars.
Click to expand...
Yep. Cop shoots unarmed Black guy because Black guy didn't listen to every single word the cop says, in Trumpworld that a justifiable killing.

Armed Trumpsters don't listen to the police, threaten to kill politicians, and 1 Trumpster gets shot, 1 cop gets killed.. ... And in Trumpworld that shooting was not justified. That's just a kegger that got out of hand..
 
Schism said:
What is the false equivalency you're referring to? Please explain in detail.
Click to expand...
Hmm. Frankly I'm surprised you'd need any detail.
Well, start with my first post back at #16. What was I responding to? I was responding to the assertion that the officer that fired was not facing deadly force. As you know, that is transparently untrue. Is facing the breach of an invading force of hundreds a "deadly force" - or isn't it? I think it's safe to say we agree it is. I corrected Lutherf.

Next, what is their intention? Mere occupation? Or did they come with talk of killing members of Congress? With a gallows to hang the Vice President?? With the stated intention of reversing the election and overthrowing the government??? None of those were elements present in Portland or Seattle. I could probably list dozens of other differences which make those events false equivalencies, but I suspect you're bright enough to think of them yourself.

You can start by asking yourself "what was being defended against?" The mere occupation of, or destruction of, property? Or the threat against the lives you are charged with protecting?? Big difference. You should be able to find your way from there.
 
MamboDervish said:
Hmm. Frankly I'm surprised you'd need any detail.
Well, start with my first post back at #16. What was I responding to? I was responding to the assertion that the officer that fired was not facing deadly force. As you know, that is transparently untrue. Is facing the breach of an invading force of hundreds a "deadly force" - or isn't it? I think it's safe to say we agree it is. I corrected Lutherf.

Next, what is their intention? Mere occupation? Or did they come with talk of killing members of Congress? With a gallows to hang the Vice President?? With the stated intention of reversing the election and overthrowing the government??? None of those were elements present in Portland or Seattle. I could probably list dozens of other differences which make those events false equivalencies, but I suspect you're bright enough to think of them yourself.

You can start by asking yourself "what was being defended against?" The mere occupation of, or destruction of, property? Or the threat against the lives you are charged with protecting?? Big difference. You should be able to find your way from there.
Click to expand...
If we used your criteria then the use of deadly force against George Floyd protesters would be fully warranted. You understand that, right?
 
Tigerace117 said:
But....:but....but.....annnnnnntiiiiiiffffffaaaa

I get that whataboutism is all you have, but unlike the Trump cult Antifa didn’t rampage through the Capitol Building screaming about murdering the Vice President of the United States
Click to expand...
Oops. Didn't mean to trigger you.
Still think that calling rioters traitors committing treason is an overreach / hyperventilating for what happened and how it happened. 🤷‍♂️
 
Schism said:
Does striking a police officer under any circumstances warrant use of force by LEO?

Or only in this circumstance?
Click to expand...

I think most sensible, honest people can discern a difference between a shove and beating/tazing an officer until they fall unconscious and have a heart attack.
 
Lutherf said:
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.
Click to expand...
A huge angry mob of crazies attacks Capital police with bear spray, flag poles, crutches, garbage cans, and anything else that they can get their hands on, including police officers shields that were torn out of their hands, while forcing their way into the Capital building, yelling “hang Mike Pence” and “Nancy! Oh Nancy! We’re looking for you!”, and one of those crazies, with a red backpack with who knows what inside, climbs over the group trying to get into the hallway immediately outside of the House chamber and is shot dead.

Deadly force was absolutely justified.
 
Lutherf said:
Out of curiosity, how many of you in this thread that believe the charges against Kim Potter are justified also believe that the lack of charges in this case is justified.
Click to expand...


State Capitol Officer
there are no facts that have been presented anywhere that would justify charges again this hero LEO. He shot a loony toon terrorist who was storming the nations capitol and in mid breach so she got her dumbass shot and killed 🤷‍♂️


Kim Potter??
i had to look her up
Shes the one that shot and killed that kid in Minneapolis

well I'm uneducated of all the details of this case, so i dont have much to go on, i only saw the video and initial report

I saw the video where it seems she thought she had her taser. That doesnt seem reasonable to me, don't know what standard issue is out there but i have held a police taser and they don't feel the same at all but again thats not fair.
Anyway, I'm actually shocked shes been charged and arrested . . . so many cases out there that drag on and on when those cases seem to be based on racism or just malice.
This one I honestly think she made a mistake for some reason . . dont know that reason but at minimum that is gross negligence

She is already charged with 2nd degree, i havent looked up the murder charges in Minnesota but 2nd degree right away seems high and extreme, again based on what I know and that is ONLY the video and why the stop happened.


regardless, these cases arent the same overall in any reality-based, honest, legal way
 
Lutherf said:
If we used your criteria then the use of deadly force against George Floyd protesters would be fully warranted. You understand that, right?
Click to expand...

If those George Floyd protesters are breaking into a government building where elected officials are taking shelter from them with the intent to forcibly stop those officials from performing their duties, then yes absolutely.

You're trying to compare apples and oranges.
 
Lutherf said:
Out of curiosity, how many of you in this thread that believe the charges against Kim Potter are justified also believe that the lack of charges in this case is justified.
Click to expand...

I believe this.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Not when someone is in the middle of committing it.

Your false equivalence is noted and dismissed
Click to expand...

Unarmed...Entering a building that at least one DC policeman dropped barricades and waved them in, so I would say it's applicable.
 
lwf said:
If those George Floyd protesters are breaking into a government building where elected officials are taking shelter from them with the intent to forcibly stop those officials from performing their duties, then yes absolutely.

You're trying to compare apples and oranges.
Click to expand...
Very poorly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom