@shooter What does that have to do with the statute a prosecutor travels under? Feds won’t charge. So Minn would have to. The statute determines not the Head of Homeland Security.
Keep up. I stated what is standard policy for ICE and other agents under Homeland security in interactions with civilians. You insisted that I misstated the policy. I said nothing about motivations or justifications for legal prosecution. But if you want to go down that side road, I would think that willfully not following standard operating and training procedures could indicate criminal negligence.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
@ohio-guy I’m saying that is very useful in a civil action. However this lady was an instigator there to create problems. Who knows what a jury would do. In a criminal action the relevant statute will determine his culpability and when A PERSON believes he’s at risk etc not the HOmeland Security Director. Does that make sense?
@shooter You have no idea about anything. You should get in that bubble that was posted and get on your big wheel and let people who don’t have a bias talk.
Yes he is but for different reasons. Scheffler wasn’t looking to cause trouble and be disruptive. This thing was.
BTW….What are you fixing for the game tonight. 2 meatloafs on the smoker 10 minutes ago
Just got done making up a quick sweet heat mix for some wings tonight. Youngest doesn't eat wings (she might be the pickiest eater ever), so I'm also ordering a pizza tonight for her.
Lol, do you even read? She was purposely interfering with ICE operations.
And she was shot at least twice by someone who was not in the path of her vehicle and who was not following written procedures on guidelines for deadly force (my point, which your post has nothing to do with).
Is this hard? She should have complied. The penalty for not complying should not have been assassination, however.
You literally said she wasn't a protestor, when everything suggests she's been an activist. I didn't say she deserved to be shot and killed, but my point is she made a series of stupid choices, beginning with impeding on ICE movements and then not complying. I view it similarly to Babbitt in the sense that, neither technically posed a direct threat, but they put themselves in a position where an armed federal law enforcement individual was fearful for potential aggression.
Charles Darwin is looking down on this and feeling validated.
I relayed the substance of the interview with her ex-husband and his description of what she was doing. Period.
I didn't say she deserved to be shot and killed
play stupid games and win stupid prizes has been expressed here many times, maybe not by you, but by many others that you seem to agree with
she made a series of stupid choices, beginning with impeding on ICE movements and then not complying.
Absolutely true-- I am glad that you agree with me.
Charles Darwin is looking down on this and feeling validated.
Hmmm... I thought you claimed that you didn't say she deserved to be shot and killed. The Darwin awards generally describe someone who did something so stupid that they died, and deservedly so, and it's great that their genes have been eliminated.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
The fact that this ICE agent might have had little to no training in this area has nothing to do with how he acted and ended up killing someone? I'm not sure I follow what you're saying here.
What specific training would have made a difference?
In a shoot-don’t shoot scenario, instinct and instantaneous risk assessments rule.
The fact that this ICE agent might have had little to no training in this area has nothing to do with how he acted and ended up killing someone? I'm not sure I follow what you're saying here.
What specific training would have made a difference?
In a shoot-don’t shoot scenario, instinct and instantaneous risk assessments rule.
Not getting in front of a moving car would be a pretty big one.
Training to follow established procedures and written rules. Like never positioning yourself in front of a car. Like never using deadly force when your life or safety is not in danger. Like never using deadly force on an already identified / identifiable fleeing suspect unless other lives are in immediate jeopardy (They had her license plate number). Like not firing two more shots through the side window at point blank range after you have shot her in the head once already.
This all isn't particularly nuanced.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Training to follow established procedures and written rules. Like never positioning yourself in front of a car. Like never using deadly force when your life or safety is not in danger. Like never using deadly force on an already identified / identifiable fleeing suspect unless other lives are in immediate jeopardy (They had her license plate number). Like not firing two more shots through the side window at point blank range after you have shot her in the head once already.
This all isn't particularly nuanced.
Thats not how this went down. He was not in front of the vehicle until it backed in an arc leaving him in front. She immediately shifted to D ( back up lights turned off) and gunned it ( left front wheel spin). He shot before she headed to right.
@co-hoosier he put himself in that position. What reason was there? Don't go anywhere toward the front or back of a car. They have more limited authority, I was reading stories that they can't go out and catch non-immigration criminals. So what was their goal here? They had no indication she was a hardened criminal, they had her car and plates. Why escalate?
The issues are more procedural, not something like murder. Think back to the Jan 6 shooting, you pointed out the agent could have retreated. So could this guy. I saw an FBI firearms guy said they always teach not to use your firearm in this situation. Get out of the way. That is it. Firing from the front in no way stops a vehicle. Proof, this vehicle sped up after she was dead. He then said firing from the side isn't allowed as you are no longer in danger.
Then we get into other procedures. A doctor lived in one of the houses and was prohibited from going to the car though he insisted. The ambulance was not let through, the paramedics had to get out a block away.
Training to follow established procedures and written rules. Like never positioning yourself in front of a car. Like never using deadly force when your life or safety is not in danger. Like never using deadly force on an already identified / identifiable fleeing suspect unless other lives are in immediate jeopardy (They had her license plate number). Like not firing two more shots through the side window at point blank range after you have shot her in the head once already.
