Ashli Babbitt’s Killer is a blm Militant

#152
#152
bamawriter said:
Not sure how that's a response to what I posted. Are you saying that I may need to shoot a judge?
Click to expand...

I’m saying if you shoot someone that’s an actual threat and you don’t shoot to kill there's always a chance they can take you to court and you could lose. How would you like to lose everything because you defended yourself from some pos?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#153
#153
NorthDallas40 said:
It wasn’t. The level of force in response didn’t fit the situation.

57 year veteran of being able to avoid being shot while trespassing at the head of a violent mob here
Click to expand...

I don't know enough to make that call. At first I would have agreed with you, but when I saw reports that there were people stuck in that room I had second thoughts.

If those reports are accurate, I'd equate it to the President being somehow trapped in a room and the head of a mob breaking through one of the windows. I doubt anybody would have second thoughts about opening fire in that case.
 
#154
#154
LouderVol said:
I asked in the post you quoted, was she actively taking part in the violence? Because all summer long we heard that 90% of the protestors were peaceful, and thus had valid reason to be there. While it was only the 10% doing damage that fell into the rioter category, and even then it was wrong to use lethal force.

So again was she part of the 90% that were peaceful or 10% that were violent?

If she is was in the 10 I will say the shooting was probably justified. But if she wasnt violent it's a bad shoot.

Funny to see anti gunners ruling a shooting of someone they oppose a good shoot without knowing the specifics.
Click to expand...

She certainly wasn't "staying between the velvet ropes taking selfies" as some have described the behavior of the mob.
 
#155
#155
C-south said:
I’m saying if you shoot someone that’s an actual threat and you don’t shoot to kill there's always a chance they can take you to court and you could lose. How would you like to lose everything because you defended yourself from some pos?
Click to expand...

I think this hypothetical is strained. If I'm justified in killing someone, then I'm every bit as justified in wounding someone. I'm just as likely to be drug into court by the deceased's family as I am a living party. I run the risk of catching the wrong judge either way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tyler Durden
#156
#156
bamawriter said:
I think this hypothetical is strained. If I'm justified in killing someone, then I'm every bit as justified in wounding someone. I'm just as likely to be drug into court by the deceased's family as I am a living party. I run the risk of catching the wrong judge either way.
Click to expand...

It’s not a hypothetical at all. You do you.
 
#157
#157
clarksvol00 said:
I don't know enough to make that call. At first I would have agreed with you, but when I saw reports that there were people stuck in that room I had second thoughts.

If those reports are accurate, I'd equate it to the President being somehow trapped in a room and the head of a mob breaking through one of the windows. I doubt anybody would have second thoughts about opening fire in that case.
Click to expand...
Nope. He advanced on her and shot her point blank range while she posed no threat to him. He executed her. That was his choice. He should have to explain that choice to a jury of his ... and her... peers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, StarRaider, SpaceCoastVol and 1 other person
#158
#158
davethevol said:
Yep. If you shoot, you shoot to kill.
Click to expand...

This really isn't how it should be couched and you damn well better never use this if you find yourself in a SD shooting. Hog "used "ready" to kill which still works but if you're even remotely trying to argue SD you fire to "end the threat". Those actions may or may not end up being fatal but never use force with the stated "intent" to kill.
 
#159
#159
NorthDallas40 said:
Nope. He advanced on her and shot her point blank range while she posed no threat to him. He executed her. That was his choice. He should have to explain that choice to a jury of his ... and her... peers.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to make that call based on the few seconds of the video I've seen and the fact that I have no idea what else went on before, who else was in that room, or any other circumstances.
 
#163
#163
VolsSportsFan said:
ROFL.....the people that have defended cops shooting minorities over MIGHT having a gun are now losing their sh** over a person breaching a barrier in the got dam Captiol building.

I swear to god the insanity.
Click to expand...
Any cop that shoots any individual regardless of race over what they MIGHT have without seeing any form of imminent threat or weapon being drawn is using excessive force.

Your turn at another dumbass over generalized statement reply.
 
#164
#164
bamawriter said:
Is this a serious question? You're referring to Babbitt, right? She was crawling thru a window that had just be smashed out to get around a barricaded door.
Click to expand...
Did she smash the window? Is trespassing generally considered violent? I havent watched any of the videos which is why I asked.
 
#167
#167
LouderVol said:
Did she smash the window? Is trespassing generally considered violent? I havent watched any of the videos which is why I asked.
Click to expand...

It doesn't appear she broke the glass. And trespassing can be considered violent or non-violent depending on the circumstances. Given that she was clearly participating in a breaking and entering or burglary (not sure how it's defined in federal jurisdiction), the kind of trespassing she was doing was inarguably violent.
 
#168
#168
LouderVol said:
Did she smash the window? Is trespassing generally considered violent? I havent watched any of the videos which is why I asked.
Click to expand...
Someone else smashed to window since the door was barricaded. She was the first to try to advance through it
 
#170
#170
bamawriter said:
Which is a hypothetical statement.
Click to expand...
No. It’s a fairly straight forward statement of your intended response to what you are ducking behind claiming it’s all hypothetical.

I’d submit instead that unless you have specific training you have no damn idea whatsoever what the hell you would do frankly.
 
#171
#171
NorthDallas40 said:
No. It’s a fairly straight forward statement of your intended response to what you are ducking behind claiming it’s all hypothetical.

I’d submit instead that unless you have specific training you have no damn idea whatsoever what the hell you would do frankly.
Click to expand...

Not being able to say for sure what I would do makes any imagined scenario "hypothetical." If you'd prefer "speculative," then I'm happy to go with that. But they're synonyms, so it's really just splitting hairs.
 
#172
#172
hndog609 said:
This really isn't how it should be couched and you damn well better never use this if you find yourself in a SD shooting. Hog "used "ready" to kill which still works but if you're even remotely trying to argue SD you fire to "end the threat". Those actions may or may not end up being fatal but never use force with the stated "intent" to kill.
Click to expand...
I should clarify I’m taking this position from a home invasion perspective as a homeowner.
Oh, I wouldn’t admit that my goal was to kill. That being said, I’ve been told (as I know others have been) by both law enforcement and lawyers that if you are ever in a real self defense situation where you have to shoot someone, you better make sure they don’t survive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#173
#173
bamawriter said:
Not being able to say for sure what I would do makes any imagined scenario "hypothetical." If you'd prefer "speculative," then I'm happy to go with that. But they're synonyms, so it's really just splitting hairs.
Click to expand...
I’ll agree you have absolutely no idea what you would do so you splitting hairs thinking you have the composure to try and wound instead of kill is ridiculous. And thus any further parsing of how you might respond is a waste of time.

Now a trained and bonded LEO doesn’t have that same response expectation do they. They are to be held accountable for each decision they make, especially if it results in the death of a citizen whom in this case was completely unarmed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top