• 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!

Officer Byrd violated her civil rights

No he shouldn’t.
 
Byrd used excessive force.
He could have warned her.
He could have pushed her back.
He could have tasered her.
But he chose to shoot her.
Attempting a coup has a very high price. She paid a penlty for her treasonous actions.
 
Yep. Any other administration would tell Babbitt’s family to pound sand.
 
the majority of my posts are responses to posters that seem to cheer the murder of a young woman …
No young woman was “murdered”, and nobody here is cheering Babbitt’s death.
 

What would you recommend be done with someone, in a federal building, vandalizing their property, and being told to stand down, suddenly lunging at an officer pointing a gun at them?

 
no, he jumped straight to lethal force. That's the last resort. not the first.
Sometimes the “last resort” action is the necessary first action.

Byrd’s shooting of Babbitt was one of those occasions.

“The investigation revealed no evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer willfully committed a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242. Specifically, the investigation revealed no evidence to establish that, at the time the officer fired a single shot at Ms. Babbitt, the officer did not reasonably believe that it was necessary to do so in self-defense or in defense of the Members of Congress and others evacuating the House Chamber.
 
no, he jumped straight to lethal force. That's the last resort. not the first.
Well that's not true. He didn't "jump" at all. He waited patiently as that angry mob violently broke through the windows and didn't fire a shot until they started coming through.
 
Well that's not true. He didn't "jump" at all. He waited patiently as that angry mob violently broke through the windows and didn't fire a shot until they started coming through.
and firing a shot was his first response. it shouldn't have been.
 
and firing a shot was his first response. it shouldn't have been.
Nope. Waiting to see if that mob would back down and not attempt to breach their barricade was hus first response.

His second response was to warn them to get back.

His third response was to ensure no one breached their barricade.
 
Byrd used excessive force.
He could have warned her.
He could have pushed her back.
He could have tasered her.
But he chose to shoot her.
He did warn her. She was given several verbal warnings, and even some of those on her side yelled to warn her.

He could not have reasonably pushed her back, as there was more than just her as a threat, as the mob she was with was breaking through the glass door at that time. He would have put himself in a much more vulnerable position to be overrun had they made it through there.

He didn't have a taser, or any other less than lethal options available at that moment.
 
Officer Byrd’s shooting of Ashli Babbit was completely justified.
Yes, it was. But some on this board seem to think Byrd should have waited until his face was being pummeled like that of other officers that day. Personally, I wish the Capitol Police had been more forceful collectively that day, but they were faced with an unprecedented situation and were clearly unprepared. I suspect they won't be unprepared in the event the Capitol comes under siege again.
 
u r the one who is refusing to accept that everyone has the same civil rights
He illegally entered the capitol with an angry mob of MAGA terrorists.

She was told not to advance and she came in anyway.
 
So, you do not accept that Ashli Babbitt has civil rights against excessive force.
Let me guess, if those officers had been protecting trump from an unruly bunch of liberals the shooting would have been justified, right?