- Joined
- Jan 2, 2009
- Messages
- 20,404
- Reaction score
- 12,771
- Location
- Washington State
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
That’s not crass at all. I think that was the best outcome given the situation, considering it could have been much worse.
That’s not crass at all. I think that was the best outcome given the situation, considering it could have been much worse.And not to be crass, but he certainly did defuse the situation.
Everybody calmed right down after that.
..
What was she in the process of doing?Well, a lot of the Radical Left still refuse to accept that everyone has civil rights.
Byrd chose to use excessive force over non-deadly actions.
There are conflicting accounts of any verbal warning.
In the video of Bryd shooting the unarmed Babbitt at point blank range there was no verbal warning.
Yepnope
This is all bullshit.Michael Byrd should be charged with violating the civil rights of Ashli Babbitt.
4th Amendment Rights
The Civil Rights Act of 1871, which is codified as 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and commonly known as “Section 1983,” prohibits any person from violating constitutional rights while acting “under the color of law.” In other words, it is unlawful for someone acting in an official governmental capacity to deprive another person of their constitutional rights.Civil Rights Act Section 1983 & Excessive Force by Police
NOTE: This blog article was amended to reflect recent changes to U.S. federal law with passage of the First Step Act (P.L. 115- 391). Since December 21, 2018, the First Step Act required numerous changes to the federal criminal justice […]www.federalcriminallawyer.us
Excessive force is a type of police misconduct where the officer’s actions go beyond the bounds of force that a reasonable officer would use under the same circumstances. These cases focus on the objective reasonableness of the force used – not whether the arrestee was injured. Whether the officer’s use of force was excessive depends largely on the circumstances and facts of each specific case. A judge or jury will weigh the available evidence and applicable laws to determine whether or not the police officer applied a reasonable amount of force.
Of course it did. What was he supposed to do? Wait until the mob poured into the Speaker's Lobby to start shooting?
stop HER. using the least force necessaryWhat was he supposed to do?
Wait until the mob poured into the Speaker's Lobby to start shooting?
She was a terrorist who was illegally in the capitol.stop HER. using the least force necessary
seeing one of their own blocking their entrance might have stopped further incursions.
Backup, as seen in the videos, was already on the way.
She was a terrorist who was illegally in the capitol.
She should never have been there.
protestor.She was a terrorist who was illegally in the capitol.
She WAS NOT a protestor.protestor.
when did she become a terrorist?
when she reached Martyr status?
The mob had broken out a couple of windows and began coming though. Byrd had a reasonable fear for his own safety.stop HER. using the least force necessary
seeing one of their own blocking their entrance might have stopped further incursions.
Backup, as seen in the videos, was already on the way.
The mob had broken out a couple of windows and began coming though. Byrd had a reasonable fear for his own safety.
only saw one broken window, he one she was coming thru.The mob had broken out a couple of windows and began coming though.
There were multiple broken windows.only saw one broken window, he one she was coming thru.
The mob was angry and violent. They were breaking out the windows to climb over the barricade on the other side of the doors. They had broken out 3 windows and Ashli was the first one to climb up, going through one of them. His fear was reasonable.only saw one broken window, he one she was coming thru.
u r the one who is refusing to accept that everyone has the same civil rightsThat is a dopey statement. If a jury finds that her civil rights were violated then so be it. Do stupid, illegal things win stupid prizes. Seems YOU are the one that wants selective civil rights.
post #1Why? Going to trial requires evidence that Byrd violated her civil rights. You haven't presented any.
Yeah. you know what **** that noise. **** it right in the ear.Michael Byrd should be charged with violating the civil rights of Ashli Babbitt.
4th Amendment Rights
The Civil Rights Act of 1871, which is codified as 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and commonly known as “Section 1983,” prohibits any person from violating constitutional rights while acting “under the color of law.” In other words, it is unlawful for someone acting in an official governmental capacity to deprive another person of their constitutional rights.Civil Rights Act Section 1983 & Excessive Force by Police
NOTE: This blog article was amended to reflect recent changes to U.S. federal law with passage of the First Step Act (P.L. 115- 391). Since December 21, 2018, the First Step Act required numerous changes to the federal criminal justice […]www.federalcriminallawyer.us
Excessive force is a type of police misconduct where the officer’s actions go beyond the bounds of force that a reasonable officer would use under the same circumstances. These cases focus on the objective reasonableness of the force used – not whether the arrestee was injured. Whether the officer’s use of force was excessive depends largely on the circumstances and facts of each specific case. A judge or jury will weigh the available evidence and applicable laws to determine whether or not the police officer applied a reasonable amount of force.
Bad take.u r the one who is refusing to accept that everyone has the same civil rights
actually, u r the one who is opposing civil rights, not meYou have not been a supporter of civil rights. We know it, you know it, so why this charade?
opinion not supported by the facts and courtsByrd used excessive force.
warnings were given.He could have warned her.
opinionHe could have pushed her back.
opinionHe could have tasered her.
and Babbit chose to try and enter through a broken window even though it was clear the door was barricaded. Babbit chose to participate in the riot.But he chose to shoot her.
the corrupt Democrats should not be allowed to investigate themselvesopinion not supported by the facts and courts
The DOJ and the Capital Police concluded his actions were lawful and within department policy.
Officer who shot Ashli Babbitt speaks after months in hiding: ‘I saved countless lives’
In an exclusive interview with NBC News, Lt. Michael Byrd said he opened fire only as a “last resort” after the rioters failed to comply with his commands.www.nbcnews.com
warnings were given.
opinion
opinion
and Babbit chose to try and enter through a broken window even though it was clear the door was barricaded. Babbit chose to participate in the riot.
Where is your evidence to support that statement?the corrupt Democrats should not be allowed to investigate themselves
opinion.that's not a legitimate investigation
opinion.of course they are going clear themselves of any wrongdoing
Oh just stop. She was attempting to enter a secure area, she was an unknown threat. Should she be a high degree black belt, she could have killed the people behind the other doors.Michael Byrd should be charged with violating the civil rights of Ashli Babbitt.
You do not take chances with an unknown. Doing so will get you killed.Well, a lot of the Radical Left still refuse to accept that everyone has civil rights.
Byrd chose to use excessive force over non-deadly actions.
There are conflicting accounts of any verbal warning.
In the video of Bryd shooting the unarmed Babbitt at point blank range there was no verbal warning.
You are for violent riots...got it.ok
you are against civil rights
got it
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?