• 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!

Report: U.S. to pay family of Ashli Babbitt, killed by police Jan. 6 (3 Viewers)

Alright, let's assume he used those methods instead. How do you propose he effectively deploy non-lethal force while ensuring he wasn’t overrun by hundreds of rioters in the process? A single officer against an advancing group isn’t the same as a controlled environment where alternatives can be applied without immediate risk.
Again, he wasn't a single officer. There were several officers in the hallway who just moved over to make room for a whole team of heavily armed officers entering the room. Confronting Babbitt as she was trying to come through, and preventing that, would have still left him on his side of the barricade.
 
Distort the truth much?
No, I'll leave that to those on the left.

The officers manning the barricade could not see what was happening in the hallway due to the height of the hastily stacked furniture and windows being heavily spidered with cracks. They didn't know there were officers trapped up against the doors. That small tactical team was sent to extricate those trapped officers back to safety, and that was all they were there to do. It would have been suicidal for them to stay when so heavily outnumbered. You MAGAs would have been soiling your pants if you were in their situation.
They were communicating on the radio. The tactical team was moving to replace the officers at the doorway - who again, were standing there talking to the group in the hall.
 
Of course they kept trying to put the focus on that, because it was transparent attempts to deflect away from dear leader, deflect away from what led to J6 to begin with. Anyone could see that.

Pathetic that anyone would try claim security failures should be the real focus and absolves anyones actions that day and/or what led to that day.
The security failures were the issue. And there's clearly an effort from the left to try to shift away from that.

Had there been national guard troops on hand - as the capitol police chief requested - there might have been scuffles at best. Had the physical security of the building not failed, no one would have entered.
 
The security failures were the issue. And there's clearly an effort from the left to try to shift away from that.

Had there been national guard troops on hand - as the capitol police chief requested - there might have been scuffles at best. Had the physical security of the building not failed, no one would have entered.

Nonsense. Complete nonsense.

It’s nothing more than a deflection.

A deflection to try to shift blame from where and who it belongs.

One officer or thousands of officers, one NG member or thousands of NG members doesn’t change the fact that 100% of the blame lies squarely on those who took the actions that they did that day, 100% squarely on those who became violent, on who incited it, on what led to that day.

Trump cult needs to keep trying to deflect all because they can’t admit the real road led back to dear leader.

Ashli Babbit died because of her own actions that day. Actions she chose to take.
 
The security failures were the issue. And there's clearly an effort from the left to try to shift away from that.

Had there been national guard troops on hand - as the capitol police chief requested - there might have been scuffles at best. Had the physical security of the building not failed, no one would have entered.
There wouldn’t have been the need for beefed up security if the sex offender hadn’t incited a seditious insurrection and it the insurrectionist MAGATS hadn’t stormed the capitol.
 
Again, he wasn't a single officer. There were several officers in the hallway who just moved over to make room for a whole team of heavily armed officers entering the room. Confronting Babbitt as she was trying to come through, and preventing that, would have still left him on his side of the barricade.
Byrd stated he couldn’t see her hands, meaning he had no way of knowing whether she was armed. In a high-risk situation like that, split-second decisions are critical. Additionally, those other officers were positioned at the base of the stairs, not in immediate range to intervene. What exactly do you think they should have done, shouted from a distance and hoped she complied while a mob surged behind her?
 
Nonsense. Complete nonsense.

It’s nothing more than a deflection.

A deflection to try to shift blame from where and who it belongs.

One officer or thousands of officers, one NG member or thousands of NG members doesn’t change the fact that 100% of the blame lies squarely on those who took the actions that they did that day, 100% squarely on those who became violent, on who incited it, on what led to that day.

Trump cult needs to keep trying to deflect all because they can’t admit the real road led back to dear leader.

Ashli Babbit died because of her own actions that day. Actions she chose to take.
If you don't like deflection, don't keep posting it.
 
The security failures were the issue. And there's clearly an effort from the left to try to shift away from that.

Had there been national guard troops on hand - as the capitol police chief requested - there might have been scuffles at best. Had the physical security of the building not failed, no one would have entered.
No, the security failures were not the issue.

The issue was the attack. Trump gathered the crowd, riled them up, and directed them to attack congress, that was the issue.

Nobody had to die for the delusional old man. But some delusional dumbass did, and now we’re paying her family.
 
Byrd stated he couldn’t see her hands, meaning he had no way of knowing whether she was armed. In a high-risk situation like that, split-second decisions are critical. Additionally, those other officers were positioned at the base of the stairs, not in immediate range to intervene. What exactly do you think they should have done, shouted from a distance and hoped she complied while a mob surged behind her?
lol. Her hands were in the window. Perhaps he would have had a better view if he stood up instead of hiding in a corner. A better view of the situation would have certainly given him the opportunity to use better judgement.

There was no high risk situation. And again, quit trying to fabricate silliness about the officers. The reaction team was coming up the stairs, feet away, and got to Babbit within seconds of the shot. The other officers had literally just moved to one side.

What should he have done? Like I said before - stand right in front of her and shout at her, or use force proportionate to the situation. A hit with pepper spray, a baton, or stun gun, would have knocked her back.
Even a good shove.
 
Cult45/47 logic, all the great American patriots were forced to do things such as this because there weren’t enough police to stop them.

————-

 
No, the security failures were not the issue.

The issue was the attack. Trump gathered the crowd, riled them up, and directed them to attack congress, that was the issue.
The security failure was the issue. Without it, there would be no Jan 6 committee. It would have been at best a civil disturbance, and maybe a few scuffles. Democrats don't want to talk about it, because it's a shared failure of congress. Nor do they want to acknowledge their part in driving up tensions that led to the riot.
 
The security failure was the issue. Without it, there would be no Jan 6 committee. It would have been at best a civil disturbance, and maybe a few scuffles. Democrats don't want to talk about it, because it's a shared failure of congress. Nor do they want to acknowledge their part in driving up tensions that led to the riot.
The strike was launched by Trump. He directed his terrorist minions to attack. Security could have been overwhelming but that would not have prevented the attack.
 
lol. Her hands were in the window. Perhaps he would have had a better view if he stood up instead of hiding in a corner. A better view of the situation would have certainly given him the opportunity to use better judgement.

There was no high risk situation. And again, quit trying to fabricate silliness about the officers. The reaction team was coming up the stairs, feet away, and got to Babbit within seconds of the shot. The other officers had literally just moved to one side.

What should he have done? Like I said before - stand right in front of her and shout at her, or use force proportionate to the situation. A hit with pepper spray, a baton, or stun gun, would have knocked her back.
Even a good shove.
You're absolutely right. If I don't know if someone has a weapon, the first thing I should do is move directly in front of [shots fired] oh no, I'm dead.
 
Let me know if you have any questions.

More nonsense. I have no questions, why would I, your posts couldn’t be any more transparent.

If you’re going to quote me quote my entire post.

I’ll repeat, you’re just flailing.
 
You're absolutely right. If I don't know if someone has a weapon, the first thing I should do is move directly in front of [shots fired] oh no, I'm dead.
She was climbing in the window. Hard to handle a weapon while holding yourself up. And yes, moving into a better position to see would have been the appropriate thing to do.

And again, there were probably a dozen officers in the hallway with the person. They knew she didn't have a weapon in her hand.
 
Your posts are deflection and name calling. I'm not interested. Good luck to you.

Good try.

That’s a description not name calling or a deflection.

And it’s reality.
 
The security failure was the issue. Without it, there would be no Jan 6 committee. It would have been at best a civil disturbance, and maybe a few scuffles. Democrats don't want to talk about it, because it's a shared failure of congress. Nor do they want to acknowledge their part in driving up tensions that led to the riot.
Great big steaming pile.
 
You're absolutely right. If I don't know if someone has a weapon, the first thing I should do is move directly in front of [shots fired] oh no, I'm dead.

Yeah, if only Officer Byrd had stepped in closer to tell these great American patriots they shouldn’t have been doing this they wouldn’t have been forced to bash in the windows trying to break in to the speakers lobby, with members just feet away.

How could these great American patriots have known that smashing in windows and breaking in to the speakers lobby through one of the smashed in windows, with the rest of the mob right behind, would be considered a violent act? According to cult45/47 that is.

———

 
Yeah, if only Officer Byrd had stepped in closer to tell these great American patriots they shouldn’t have been doing this they wouldn’t have been forced to bash in the windows trying to break in to the speakers lobby, with members just feet away.

How could these great American patriots have known that smashing in windows and breaking in to the speakers lobby through the one of the smashed in windows, with the rest of the mob right behind, would be considered a violent act? According to cult45/47 that is.

———


I think their irrational posts exemplify exactly why that wouldn't work. My arguments rarely sway them, and they're not even half as irrational as the people who attacked the capitol.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • N
Back
Top Bottom