Report: U.S. to pay family of Ashli Babbitt, killed by police Jan. 6 (1 Viewer)

[roguenuke]

Yes, I saw when you changed your stance.

It was based upon proximity to the Congress members. My question was why that mattered. Are they more important than Joe plumber?

They are as important as anyone else. Pretend they were children in there.

Plus, are you suggesting that we should divert funding for Secret Service protection of the President to ensure everyone, including "Joe plumber" has equal protection as the President or any members of Congress?

 

[Xilnik]

Yes, I saw when you changed your stance.

It was based upon proximity to the Congress members. My question was why that mattered. Are they more important than Joe plumber?

That's a question I cannot answer in the depth I'd like to now and will revisit tonight. Short answer: it depends on personal values/beliefs and the criteria of comparison.

 

[mike2810]

No imminent threat to life. No weapon present for starters.

opinion noted.
coming through a broken window with many more behind her.

How would you protect the members of Congress from the protesters trying to entering the chamber?

 

[Cope]

She had a weapon and a backpack. She had a mob that she was leading (numbers, violent mob can be considered similar to a weapon). Her size isn't really relevant since a small woman can still hurt someone, especially with training.

If the exact or similar circumstances of this case happens again, go ahead and call me out if I don't support that shooting though.

What was the fear for life for Brown then? He was a big guy, but he wasn't armed. Are you saying that unarmed people can still be a threat to others given a situation?

Backpacks are not life threatening. In THIS case.
No weapon was present.

Of course un-armed people can be a threat but not simply for crawling through a window.

 

[Cope]

opinion noted.
coming through a broken window with many more behind her.

If you go with the 'mob' being a threat. Why were they not shot prior?
Basically, why her?

How would you protect the members of Congress from the protesters trying to entering the chamber?

I'd protect them once an actual threat materialized.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

None of that has **** all to do with it being an imminent threat to life.

It specifically does.

Woman, weighs half as much as shooting officer.
No weapon present.

How much does a woman have to weigh to be able to trigger an IED in her backpack?

 

[roguenuke]

Ok. The circumstances of THIS case.

Woman, weighs half as much as shooting officer.
No weapon present.

FEAR for life!

Now what?

So if you have a circumstance where a mob of people have chased you inside your home, they appear to be unarmed, at least from what you can see, would that be a similar circumstance? What if you are locked in a room, where your family is in the closet, you in the main room, doors locked and barricaded. You can't see outside well, enough to know there are people outside the door, trying to get in. Cops have been called, but you can't know when they get there. A person has broken through the top vent, with the smallest attacker crawling through. Are you going to shoot? What if your spouse is also armed? But the door is splintering as the person is crawling through? At what point do you stop the threat?

 

[Cope]

It specifically does.

How much does a woman have to weigh to be able to trigger a IED in her backpack?

Was there an IED?

Was there actual suspicion that there was?

Or is that conspiratorial nonsense made up from whole cloth to justify the over-reaction?

 

[Cope]

So if you have a circumstance where a mob of people have chased you inside your home, they appear to be unarmed, at least from what you can see, would that be a similar circumstance? What if you are locked in a room, where your family is in the closet, you in the main room, doors locked and barricaded. You can't see outside well, enough to know there are people outside the door, trying to get in. Cops have been called, but you can't know when they get there. A person has broken through the top vent, with the smallest attacker crawling through. Are you going to shoot? What if your spouse is also armed? But the door is splintering as the person is crawling through? At what point do you stop the threat?

Are there stand your ground laws at work?

 

[roguenuke]

Backpacks are not life threatening. In THIS case.
No weapon was present.

Of course un-armed people can be a threat but not simply for crawling through a window.

They had confirmed bombs placed right before the attack. They have reports of possible firearms and clearly do have melee weapons. If someone attacks your house, do you have to wait to see a weapon before you can shoot them?

 

[roguenuke]

Are there stand your ground laws at work?

There were at my work in the military, another government property.

But go ahead and change that to you are in an office building, perhaps the armed guard or they allow you to be armed there. Same scenario. Can the armed person shoot the first person through to protect those others from the mob breaking through?

However, you just said that Congressmembers are not more important than Joe plumber. Your attempt to make the claim that these laws only matter for a person's home indicate that anyone's family is more important than members of Congress and their staff and press and security there than those attacking or others.

 

[mike2810]

If you go with the 'mob' being a threat. Why were they not shot prior?
Basically, why her?

Was she not the first going through the broken window?
doors were blocked.

Have you read the investigation reports?

I'd protect them once an actual threat materialized.

Pretty vague. How you going to do that when there are many trying to get into the chambers. Reports say the protesters outnumbered the security details.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Was there an IED?

Was there actual suspicion that there was?

Or is that conspiratorial nonsense made up from whole cloth to justify the over-reaction?

The only pertinent question is, “did Byrd have a reasonable belief that his life and the lives that he is sworn to protect were in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death?”.

That is the legal standard.

DOJ correctly concluded “yes”.

 

[Fledermaus]

Not to the officer, even if you want to call a pocket knife the 'big scary weapon' that made him fear for his life.

OMG...

Either intentional ignorance or simple ignorance on display...

I mean, except for the very relevant fact that the 'investigation' was an internal one. You know, EXACTLY like the scenario I laid out.

The difference being you liked this one, and not the others ones.

Please share the requirement that the investigations/reviews be public.

 

[Fledermaus]

Backpacks are not life threatening. In THIS case.
No weapon was present.

Of course un-armed people can be a threat but not simply for crawling through a window.

Boston Marathon ring a bell?

 

[Cope]

They had confirmed bombs placed right before the attack. They have reports of possible firearms and clearly do have melee weapons. If someone attacks your house, do you have to wait to see a weapon before you can shoot them?

Then why weren't they shot for breaking the outside barricades?

If you had the justification inside through a window, you had it outside at the first barricade.

 

[Cope]

OMG...

Either intentional ignorance or simple ignorance on display...



Please share the requirement that the investigations/reviews be public.

Good grief dude.

Bye

 

[Fledermaus]

Then why weren't they shot for breaking the outside barricades?

If you had the justification inside through a window, you had it outside at the first barricade.

Last line of defense.

The final barricade.

 

[Fledermaus]

Good grief dude.

Bye

Good grief, your ignorance is either intentional or simple.

And, please share the requirement that the investigations/reviews be public.

 

[Cope]

The only pertinent question is, “did Byrd have a reasonable belief that his life and the lives that he is sworn to protect were in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death?”.

That is the legal standard.

DOJ correctly concluded “yes”.

Then why would they pay Babbitt's family ...

 

[Fledermaus]

Then why would they pay Babbitt's family ...

Because TRUMP...

 

[Xilnik]

Then why would they pay Babbitt's family ...

Why indeed...

 

[roguenuke]

Then why weren't they shot for breaking the outside barricades?

If you had the justification inside through a window, you had it outside at the first barricade.

It doesn't require other officers to take the same action for it to be justified.

Also, note the circumstances were different. They were giving as much leeway as they could. She overstepped.

 

[roguenuke]

Then why would they pay Babbitt's family ...

Because Trump is in charge and she died defending his BS. Her actions were due to his BS claims.

If this went to actual trial, they wouldn't get a thing.

 

[Taylor]

They had confirmed bombs placed right before the attack. They have reports of possible firearms and clearly do have melee weapons. If someone attacks your house, do you have to wait to see a weapon before you can shoot them?

Castle doctrine doesn't apply here.