Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum banner

21 - 40 of 52 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
647 Posts
It’s pretty simple. If a cop perceives a threat and has his weapon in his hand pointed at the person and the person fails to obey commands while continuing forward progress, the officer has the option to use deadly force.

So from what I’ve seen all those things took place.

Should he have waited until she could reach out and touch the gun ?

We both have our opinions but I doubt the officer went to work on Jan 6 planning to shoot a person.

It sounds crazy to even have to say......but maybe she shouldn’t have been trying to breach a door at the capital during a riot and then maybe should’ve stopped when she saw the pistol aimed at her. Her not stopping is reason enough to believe she was an eminent threat.

She was trained by the military. She knew better. I think she was mentally ill.,,,.
 

·
Super Moderator
1-6 months, natural disasters or economic collapse
Joined
·
9,509 Posts
I won't cast aspersions upon the dead. I also make no assumption that she saw the officer who fired.
The video I saw of the incident showed a wide angle of the gun being produced from the side of the hallway. If I had to take a wild guess, I'd say he was 40-50 degrees to the left of dead ahead of her down that hallway.
We have no way of knowing if she knew the officer had his gun pointed at her.

Since we're playing the maybe game...
Maybe the officer shouldn't have been pointing his gun at an unarmed person who was making no threats against anyone, but only committing acts of vandalism.
Could any officer claim this same protection as long as they pull their gun out and point it upon first contact in all interactions?
That's a dangerous precedent.
There must be a perceived threat of force or deadly force before a gun is produced. Vandalism does not rise to the occasion.

We both agree she should not have been conducting herself in the manner we see in the video.
If only everyone would abide by the rules of civility... and unicorn farts powered our electric grids.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
647 Posts
If an officer perceived a threat, they can pull their weapon and point it at you.

If you advance and are not obeying commands to stop, the officer can use deadly force.

Example. If my car tag came back stolen and a cop initiated a traffic stop on me......he would follow felony stop protocol.

That means he would get me out of the car at gun point.

If I turned and started to to approach the officer and disobey commands, and he perceived a threat he can use deadly force.

I actually had that happen. Except I complied. Some how my tag was reported stolen, It wasn’t stolen.

You think a cop can shoot an unarmed naked person and it be ruled justified ? It sure can

Google search “ gil collar killed by police “

There’s a difference between having to shoot and the legal authority to shoot.

Did these cops have to shoot ? Maybe not, but they have the law on their side and hind sight is 20/20. These cops might would do things differently if they could tell the future but at the moment they reacted, lawfully.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,958 Posts
I think she was mentally ill.,,,.
I am not condoning what she did, but to suggest she was mentally ill is way over the top and a ridiculous accusation. More logically, she had deep-rooted beliefs and was willing to go to the extreme to protect them and try to derail an injustice and threat to her beliefs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,168 Posts
Its all rather simple;

White bitch deserved to die. Media and Government have spoken. Get back to work and make your tax payments on time you pasty white devils.

(This has been a public service announcement from your over-seer-ers!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
If people should be mad at something, it should be the nut jobs who push the consistently failing an evolving Qanon conspiracy. This false narrative was one of the driving forces that motivated this woman to storm the Capitol, in an attempt to interrupt a constitutional process concerning the US election. That whole failed insurrection certainly brought on a lot of loss and will be remembered forever.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,162 Posts
If people should be mad at something, it should be the nut jobs who push the consistently failing an evolving Qanon conspiracy. This false narrative was one of the driving forces that motivated this woman to storm the Capitol, in an attempt to interrupt a constitutional process concerning the US election. That whole failed insurrection certainly brought on a lot of loss and will be remembered forever.
Hmmmmm. And how is this different from the nut jobs who pushed the consistantly failing russia collusion conspiracy?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Hmmmmm. And how is this different from the nut jobs who pushed the consistantly failing russia collusion conspiracy?
I’m speaking specifically to the original post... We could go on all day in a game of off topic, compare and contrast. I didn’t claim the false Qanon conspiracy narrative is the same or different as anything.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
647 Posts
I am not condoning what she did, but to suggest she was mentally ill is way over the top and a ridiculous accusation. More logically, she had deep-rooted beliefs and was willing to go to the extreme to protect them and try to derail an injustice and threat to her beliefs.
We all have our beliefs and opinions.

She claimed to be doing “ Gods work “

“ Gods Work “ by storming the capital in a riot.

Sounds a bit mentally ill, That's my opinion and it’s a valid one.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
647 Posts
Hmmmmm. And how is this different from the nut jobs who pushed the consistantly failing russia collusion conspiracy?
They never stormed the capital while at gunpoint.

Would you have went through that door while being commanded to stop by an officer of the law with a gun pointed at you ? I doubt you would.

It’s suggests the person wasn’t in touch with reality to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,477 Posts
The problem here is hypocrisy. Kill any non democrat/communist and be protected. Kill some one that is in a liberal favored class and your a$$ is theirs. The difference in the comparisons of shooting and actions is clearly a political one. Burning and looting zones of homes or businesses is allowed with no interference while the US capitol is a free fire zone. If anyone deserves abuse it is our elected representatives that sell us down the river every damned time they can. That was no insurrection. Insurrection would be nailing the doors and underground passages shut , set the place on fire like the British in 1814 then shoot anyone escaping. That would be insurrection.
 

·
Super Moderator
1-6 months, natural disasters or economic collapse
Joined
·
9,509 Posts
If an officer perceived a threat, they can pull their weapon and point it at you.

If you advance and are not obeying commands to stop, the officer can use deadly force.

Example. If my car tag came back stolen and a cop initiated a traffic stop on me......he would follow felony stop protocol.

That means he would get me out of the car at gun point.

If I turned and started to to approach the officer and disobey commands, and he perceived a threat he can use deadly force.

I actually had that happen. Except I complied. Some how my tag was reported stolen, It wasn’t stolen.

You think a cop can shoot an unarmed naked person and it be ruled justified ? It sure can

Google search “ gil collar killed by police “

There’s a difference between having to shoot and the legal authority to shoot.

Did these cops have to shoot ? Maybe not, but they have the law on their side and hind sight is 20/20. These cops might would do things differently if they could tell the future but at the moment they reacted, lawfully.
We have no way of knowing if she was given any order from that officer, or even knew of his existence.
It's a terrible precedent to claim that any cop can pull his weapon for any threat, issue any command in a random direction, receive zero feedback that anyone knows of his existence, and he then shoot at a person. We have no indication that he gave any commands or that she heard and ignored his possible commands. Nor whether she knew he was there at all to ignore his threat of force and proceed.
This should go to a court and have a jury decide.
Internal investigations are insufficient in such a complicated matter.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
647 Posts
We have no way of knowing if she was given any order from that officer, or even knew of his existence.
It's a terrible precedent to claim that any cop can pull his weapon for any threat, issue any command in a random direction, receive zero feedback that anyone knows of his existence, and he then shoot at a person. We have no indication that he gave any commands or that she heard and ignored his possible commands. Nor whether she knew he was there at all to ignore his threat of force and proceed.
This should go to a court and have a jury decide.
Internal investigations are insufficient in such a complicated matter.
The precedent was set years ago, this is nothing new. What’s new is the issue has become political.

I’ll never actually know more than they’re telling because I wasn’t there.

So my opinion is based on who was breaking the law when the incident occurred and in what context.

Well it was a riot, that’s the context. His job is to protect the people in the chamber. He did his job in my opinion.

She’s on video trying to climb through the broken door. You don’t think they told her to stop ?

She was a military police officer I believe. She knew better......
 

·
Super Moderator
1-6 months, natural disasters or economic collapse
Joined
·
9,509 Posts
The precedent was set years ago, this is nothing new.
Kauboy said:
...that any cop can pull his weapon for any threat, issue any command in a random direction, receive zero feedback that anyone knows of his existence, and he then shoot at a person.
No... this precedent has never been set, and doesn't match what you first described, but appears to be the chain of events shown in the videos we have.

The fact that we'll never actually know should be a red flag.
A civil servant in the people's house shot an unarmed woman, and they tell us nothing.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
647 Posts
No... this precedent has never been set, and doesn't match what you first described, but appears to be the chain of events shown in the videos we have.

The fact that we'll never actually know should be a red flag.
A civil servant in the people's house shot an unarmed woman, and they tell us nothing.
She was participating in a riot and was crawling through a door that had the glass broken out of it.

I’m not going to second guess a cop that’s reacting to that.

She started the chain of events that led to her own death.

You protest outside, not by breaking glass out of doors and crawling through.

I won’t lose any sleep over it after watching the video. I’m fine with it.

That’s pretty much all I can add to this one.

Goodnight 🤙
 

·
Super Moderator
1-6 months, natural disasters or economic collapse
Joined
·
9,509 Posts
She was participating in a riot and was crawling through a door that had the glass broken out of it.

I’m not going to second guess a cop that’s reacting to that.
She was indeed, but was neither causing nor threatening harm to any person.
Yet you second guessed Officer Chauvin's decision to keep the unconscious Mr. Floyd on the ground after he had passed out.
In court testimony, a witness agreed that it was common to keep a combative subject on the ground even after they fell asleep or lost consciousness, due to the real threat that they could awaken and continue resisting.
Why does this young woman's killer get a pass when Officer Chauvin was simply following protocol and received your added scrutiny?

A jury should have heard this case, just like they did against Chauvin. Too many unknowns being intentionally kept quiet.
That's all I'm saying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,144 Posts
What were/are the ROE for Capital Police during the mass of people coming in? Every dept, and mil, has different ROE.
Deadly Force is also different between, LE/Mil ( within each branch its different too, depends on what you are doing).
Was she a threat, apparently to David Baily it was. He is the most likely suspect. One other one that slips my mind.
After seeing the video, I dont think she was, but we didnt see it from his angle.
Whats really disturbing is he shot at her while there were 3 to 4 officers behind her..
Comms were very poor..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kauboy

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,350 Posts
Discussion Starter · #40 ·
She was indeed, but was neither causing nor threatening harm to any person.
Yet you second guessed Officer Chauvin's decision to keep the unconscious Mr. Floyd on the ground after he had passed out.
In court testimony, a witness agreed that it was common to keep a combative subject on the ground even after they fell asleep or lost consciousness, due to the real threat that they could awaken and continue resisting.
Why does this young woman's killer get a pass when Officer Chauvin was simply following protocol and received your added scrutiny?

A jury should have heard this case, just like they did against Chauvin. Too many unknowns being intentionally kept quiet.
That's all I'm saying.
I have nothing to add. I just wanted this post to be bumped up. @Kauboy said it as good as it could be said.
 
21 - 40 of 52 Posts
Top