Uh huh....based on years of experience
And it was certainly necessary. Period.to the contrary: "Law enforcement and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
she was still in the window and was not even on the barricade when he shot. NOT imminent.
"Plus, is it out of the realm to recognize that any other officer, when placed in Byrd’s position, would not have done the same thing? "
Not if they held to their training, there would have been no shot til she was thru the window, and on the barricade.
Babbitt WAS armed.the victim was unarmed and posed no threat
shooting her at point blank was excessive force
people are letting their political hatred deny the facts
Nobody's cheering.the majority of my posts are responses to posters that seem to cheer the murder of a young woman involved in a protest.
See my post above.The majority of those posters obviously have no clue about the Rules of Engagement, or of Use of Force criteria.
Uh huh....
And it was certainly necessary. Period.
Awwwwwwww...
I don't know how you can claim she "posed no threat." There's a lot of context you're ignoring. She could be seen as the tip of the spear of violent rioters breaking into a secured area and chanting for the vice president to be hanged.the victim was unarmed and posed no threat....
WilHaftaWaite said:
"....a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
No, not to the contrary. You can claim the threat was not imminent all you want, yet the side window had been broken out and she was coming right on through. The moment she jumped up on that broken window frame to come through, there was the threat. She didn’t need her feet to hit the floor on the other side to finally make her a threat.to the contrary: "Law enforcement and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
she was still in the window and was not even on the barricade when he shot. NOT imminent.
"Plus, is it out of the realm to recognize that any other officer, when placed in Byrd’s position, would not have done the same thing? "
Not if they held to their training, there would have been no shot til she was thru the window, and on the barricade.
imminent threat running away?You want to talk about "imminent"? No criminal charges filed in the Darrien Hunt case. Here, the officer shot him as he was running away, claiming he could have posed a danger to the shoppers at the mall a quarter mile away! (The city responsible for the officers DID settle the civil suit.... for something like 3% of what Babbitt's family is asking for.)
No, not to the contrary. You can claim the threat was not imminent all you want, yet the side window had been broken out and she was coming right on through. The moment she jumped up on that broken window frame to come through, there was the threat. She didn’t need her feet to hit the floor on the other side to finally make her a threat.
And it was easy to see Byrd with his gun drawn. If an officer has his gun drawn in plain sight, you can’t really argue that Byrd did not have a reasonable belief there was imminent danger of death or serious physical injury.
You’re also quibbling about a split second- so it’s out of bounds to shoot her when she was on the broken window frame, ready to come through, yet it wouldn’t have been had she actually gone all the way through and on the floor? Yeah, right. Now I know your posts are disingenuous.
The Department of Justice and the Capitol Police refused to charge him. I’d be willing to bet they would qualify as “any other officer,” and it would be ignorant for any of them not to imagine themselves in Byrd’s position. They know what Byrd did was justified and necessary. The fact that your posts disagree with that doesn’t matter.
not an imminent one.. The moment she jumped up on that broken window frame to come through, there was the threat.
to be an imminent one, she did.She didn’t need her feet to hit the floor on the other side to finally make her a threat.
not an imminent one.
to be an imminent one, she did.
Incorrect on many levels.
the victim was unarmed and posed no threat
shooting her at point blank was excessive force
people are letting their political hatred deny the facts
Opinion noted.
And laughed at.
You were wrong.
no more than you are.Are you paid to be wrong?
no more than you are.
Nonsense.did you miss them when they were posted before?
she was only halfway thru the window, with a barrier between her and Byrd. the threat from her was NOT 'imminent'. IF he were properly equipped, he could have stopped her with a taser, mace, a baton, or the butt of his firearm. LETHAL FORCE was unnecessary at that point.
wrongI'm not the one who can't understand the situation...
Nonsense.
She was breaking into a secure area and likely planned to harm members of congress. She was a threat. If she did not want to be seen as a threat, she should not have been at the capitol.
agreed.She was a threat.
Babbitt WAS armed.
with what?Babbitt WAS armed.
Apparently, she would have no problem if such a mob was breaking into her home or business.I don't know how you can claim she "posed no threat." There's a lot of context you're ignoring. She could be seen as the tip of the spear of violent rioters breaking into a secured area and chanting for the vice president to be hanged.
Very much an imminent threat.agreed.
but not an imminent threat.
Lethal force was not needed.
Despite multiple warnings not to proceed,[7] Babbitt attempted to climb through a shattered window beside a barricaded door into the Speaker's Lobby and was thwarted when she was shot in her left anterior shoulder[8] by a United States Capitol Police (USCP) officer.[9][10][11][8] After a USCP emergency response team administered aid, Babbitt was transported to Washington Hospital Center, where she died.[12][13] The USCP deemed the shooting was "lawful and within Department policy" and "potentially saved Members (of Congress) and staff from serious injury and possible death".[14][15] Babbitt has been considered a martyr by Donald Trump supporters, and by Trump himself.[16]agreed.
but not an imminent threat.
Lethal force was not needed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?