• 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

dcsports said:
There's no way she could have heard a warning from him. She may not have even known he was there.
Click to expand...
He is not responsible for her not hearing warnings above the sound of her intentions to commit crimes.
 
roguenuke said:
Moving would have put him in a more vulnerable position, especially given that the glass on the doors was being broken rather quickly and would have allowed the rest of the mob breaking it access unfettered to the rest of those trying to evacuate, had they gotten through while he was wrestling with Bobbitt.

He had no less than lethal weapons on him at the time. You cannot use a gun in a less than lethal way as an LEO.

She posed a clear threat as being part of a mob. She posed an unknown threat by having a bag that the LEO in a defensive position, protecting members of Congress, staff and other civilians, could not see into and clearly determine did not hold a threat to those inside. She was told to stop, multiple times. There was clearly a barricade in place to prevent the mob, which she was part of and leading in that moment, from getting into that area as best as possible.
Click to expand...
Moving would have put him into a position where he could see the situation and assess it better, and in a less vulnerable position than the other officers, who weren't shooting people.

Can you source where he had no other weapons? He couldn't have moved in front of her and shouted 'stop'? pointed a weapon where she could see it? Or hit her?
 
dcsports said:
The hyperbole is in your response, as noted. Yes, a backpack sitting in an airport unattended will trigger a response. A backpack on your back will not. No one will open fire on you at an airport for simply carrying a backpack.
Click to expand...
If you are part of an angry mob in an airport, pushing their way through into unauthorized places inside the airport, breaking glass to get in, crawling through any opening, they very well might shoot you if you fail to stop when told to do so. Again, the violent mob part putting people in danger is an important element here that you don't get to ignore.
 
dcsports said:
There's no way she could have heard a warning from him. She may not have even known he was there.
Click to expand...

She didn't, for if she saw a 9mm aimed at her in that aggressive stance, she would of ceased. Yet, I think she saw no other way out of the situation and chose the wrong way out. The three officers being ordered to remove themselves from the entry sealed her fate.....the first one through was getting shot.
 
dcsports said:
Moving would have put him into a position where he could see the situation and assess it better, and in a less vulnerable position than the other officers, who weren't shooting people.
Click to expand...
Nope. This is any excuse by you. He would have been put in a vulnerable position with the situation at hand. There were few officers available.
 
redbeer said:
She didn't, for if she saw a 9mm aimed at her in that aggressive stance, she would of ceased. Yet, I think she saw no other way out of the situation and chose the wrong way out. The three officers being ordered to remove themselves from the entry sealed her fate.....the first one through was getting shot.
Click to expand...
Don't go through. That's the option she had.
 
roguenuke said:
He is not responsible for her not hearing warnings above the sound of her intentions to commit crimes.
Click to expand...
You mean, through the door with a bunch of people shouting on the other side?
 
roguenuke said:
Don't go through. That's the option she had.
Click to expand...

It's a shame she didn't, then she would be alive and the democrats would not have a talking point, but in seeing how those three officers backed away from the entry, opened up the kill shot to come. She happened to be the first one through.
 
roguenuke said:
Nope. This is any excuse by you. He would have been put in a vulnerable position with the situation at hand. There were few officers available.
Click to expand...
Shooting at an unarmed person is bad policing in any situation. And again, there were probably a dozen officers in the hall with her. Several moved to one side to make room for the reaction team, that was seconds away.
 
dcsports said:
Shooting at an unarmed person is bad policing in any situation. And again, there were probably a dozen officers in the hall with her. Several moved to one side to make room for the reaction team, that was seconds away.
Click to expand...

Yes, strange how they removed those three officers guarding the entry while the staircase next was full of armed police and they permitted them to break the glass, just standing there waiting......now we know what they were waiting for, for quick advancement once the kill shot was implemented. A swift deterrent, no doubt, but unnecessary, imo with the amount of police on scene.

This whole day screams foul play from the beginning to end and this is just another cog in the fubar, imo. This kill was a narrative sealer, along with keeping the false narrative of officer Brian Sicknick being bludgeoned to death by withholding the autopsy......then the firing of flashbang grenades, rubber bullets, and teargas on the peaceful crowd outside the bldg. It stinks to high heaven.
 
dcsports said:
Shooting at an unarmed person is bad policing in any situation. And again, there were probably a dozen officers in the hall with her. Several moved to one side to make room for the reaction team, that was seconds away.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't. It depends on the situation. There was no way he could see the officers in that hall when the violent mob she was with broke the glass to attempt to enter the barricaded room he was defending.
 
redbeer said:
It's a shame she didn't, then she would be alive and the democrats would not have a talking point, but in seeing how those three officers backed away from the entry, opened up the kill shot to come. She happened to be the first one through.
Click to expand...
They were being threatened by an angry violent mob and their backup was moving in. They didn't know she would be boosted up by part of that mob to climb inside the one window they had been able to break so far.
 
dcsports said:
The hyperbole is in your response, as noted. Yes, a backpack sitting in an airport unattended will trigger a response. A backpack on your back will not. No one will open fire on you at an airport for simply carrying a backpack.
Click to expand...
You're not putting all the pieces together very well. Acting alone in an airport is different from acting within a violent mob. Walking around an airport is different than breaking into the nation's capitol. You're either intentionally avoiding looking at the overall picture, or you cannot fathom complexities in threat assessment.
 
roguenuke said:
No, it isn't. It depends on the situation. There was no way he could see the officers in that hall when the violent mob she was with broke the glass to attempt to enter the barricaded room he was defending.
Click to expand...
He positioned himself poorly to assess the situation. But, he could have heard discussions on the radio. And again, this group hadn't shown themselves to be violent - the other officers were standing there talking to them seconds before. The reaction team was moving into position without resistance.

Look, we're circling through the same points. It's clear that many are trying hard to justify the officer shooting an unarmed person. Good luck on that.
 
Xilnik said:
You're not putting all the pieces together very well. Acting alone in an airport is different from acting within a violent mob. Walking around an airport is different than breaking into the nation's capitol. You're either intentionally avoiding looking at the overall picture, or you cannot fathom complexities in threat assessment.
Click to expand...
You were the one that tried to make a bad comparison to an airport. Having a backpack that 'might' or 'could' contain a weapon doesn't mean that a person is using a weapon to threaten an officer. Otherwise, see #815.

I really appreciate the calm discussion without name calling.
 
dcsports said:
He positioned himself poorly to assess the situation. But, he could have heard discussions on the radio. And again, this group hadn't shown themselves to be violent - the other officers were standing there talking to them seconds before. The reaction team was moving into position without resistance.

Look, we're circling through the same points. It's clear that many are trying hard to justify the officer shooting an unarmed person. Good luck on that.
Click to expand...
No. He positioned himself in the best place for the given layout to assess the threats to the highest extent for the given situation. The discussions on the radio included the mob attempting to break through into the Chamber itself.

We have the fact that it was a justified shooting on our side. You have excuses in defense of the actions of a mob and the man who caused it.
 
dcsports said:
There's no way she could have heard a warning from him. She may not have even known he was there.
Click to expand...
Those are maybe some of the dangers which come from participating in a violent, armed mob.
 
roguenuke said:
No. He positioned himself in the best place for the given layout to assess the threats to the highest extent for the given situation. The discussions on the radio included the mob attempting to break through into the Chamber itself.
[deflection removed]
Click to expand...
He positioned himself low in a corner where he couldn't assess the situation. He was clearly not thinking like a police officer, and panicked.
 
dcsports said:
You were the one that tried to make a bad comparison to an airport. Having a backpack that 'might' or 'could' contain a weapon doesn't mean that a person is using a weapon to threaten an officer. Otherwise, see #815.

I really appreciate the calm discussion without name calling.
Click to expand...
You seriously don't see why I brought up a backpack in an airport to illustrate a threat in a more common situation that I would expect the average person to have experienced post-2001? If you can't see why at that point, God help you.

You were saying: "You can let your imagination run wild about what 'could have been' in a backpack." I was pointing out that if you walk into a government facility and drop a backpack in the middle of it, security doesn't care what 'could have been' in a backpack. They'll treat it like an imminent threat. Does that clear it up for you?
 
Last edited:
redbeer said:
She didn't, for if she saw a 9mm aimed at her in that aggressive stance, she would of ceased. Yet, I think she saw no other way out of the situation and chose the wrong way out. The three officers being ordered to remove themselves from the entry sealed her fate.....the first one through was getting shot.
Click to expand...
I mean, she could have just not participated in the aggressive actions of a violent and armed mob in the first place.
 
roguenuke said:
They were being threatened by an angry violent mob and their backup was moving in. They didn't know she would be boosted up by part of that mob to climb inside the one window they had been able to break so far.
Click to expand...

Three officers were standing at the doors and not even attempting to stop those breaking the glass. You can see they are hitting the glass right in between the officers and they do nothing. Once the team arrived in the stairwell, those three officers were ordered out of the way, clearing the way for the kill shot. It mattered not who climbed through, just who was the first. It was very well coordinated and planned to deter the crowd and it worked.

I understand they were not about to allow anyone to cross that point, but a hard hit on the head would of accomplished the same goal. The shot and kill was a much stronger deterrent, of course......just would like to know who gave these orders and this coordination or was the shooter on his own discretion.
 
dcsports said:
He positioned himself low in a corner where he couldn't assess the situation. He was clearly not thinking like a police officer, and panicked.
Click to expand...
Where should he have been that would not have made him vulnerable to attack but still same distance?
 
Ikari said:
I mean, she could have just not participated in the aggressive actions of a violent and armed mob in the first place.
Click to expand...

Yeah....lol.....derp, derp.
 
redbeer said:
Three officers were standing at the doors and not even attempting to stop those breaking the glass. You can see they are hitting the glass right in between the officers and they do nothing. Once the team arrived in the stairwell, those three officers were ordered out of the way, clearing the way for the kill shot. It mattered not who climbed through, just who was the first. It was very well coordinated and planned to deter the crowd and it worked.

I understand they were not about to allow anyone to cross that point, but a hard hit on the head would of accomplished the same goal. The shot and kill was a much stronger deterrent, of course......just would like to know who gave these orders and this coordination or was the shooter on his own discretion.
Click to expand...
They could not engage physically. They were also outnumbered. The glass didn't get broken to the main extent until they moved.

They cleared the way for more people to handle the situation. It had nothing to do with anyone knowing she would crawl through the window.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom