RobAnybody
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,945
Have you somehow not seen the video?
Warning: NSWF: https://www.nbcnews.com/video/capit...babbitt-s-death-captured-on-video-99180613572
Jan. 6th commission
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
Warning: NSWF: https://www.nbcnews.com/video/capit...babbitt-s-death-captured-on-video-99180613572
Jesus. That's hard to watch. There are a million things to say, it feels like. Liking the comment, because I'd not seen it before. Might not survive the CFC terms and conditions.
There is a NSFW warning. I think it meets CFC regs. For me, the bottom line is two things:
1. This woman is a victim of Trump and his sycophants' lies and it's tragic.
2. The conduct in the video of the insurgents, if instead it was a bunch of people during a riot in Ferguson, Missouri, or protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin at the doors of a retail store or restaurant, and the owner/security shot one of the intruders... the owner/security would be unequivocally praised... by the same people who are muddying the waters about the lady being killed by the agents defending Congress in Washington DC.
Last edited:
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
when posters here are cool with considering people ground pounding a cop's face or a guy with a knife about to drive off with kids that are (per law) being kidnapped as "unarmed shootings", color me unimpressed if *now* we're saying a threat to nobody in particular is okay to shoot. at least in some of those cases, the "unarmed" guy was assaulting someone.
shooting her was as egregious as how floyd was killed. none of this "qi when convenient" crap.
Yes, any death is tragedy, but if you think that casual police brutality against someone already restrained is at all comparable to a woman being shot and later dying when she was actively attacking a police emplacement, I don't know what to tell you.
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 10,978
This is not a true statement.
"shooting her was as egregious as how floyd was killed. none of this "qi when convenient" crap."
No. Absolutely not. There is zero similarity between four cops killing a suspect who is lying on the ground cuffed, and shooting a rioter in the leading edge of a riot where a mass of rioters has just forced their way into a building verbally threatening the lives of several people in the building.
So I'll ask you again. Have you watched any videos of that day posted on sites other than hyperconservative or Trumpist ones? Or even just the one linked to here in the last page?
Floyd won't be comparable. Floyd is mostly famous for being the straw that broke the camel's back. It's best view in context than as a single event. I'm not even sure comparing it to a private property owner works, since protecting a government is an entirely different category. Sommer is correct, though, that a private owner would be held to a lower standard. But that's true in general, and rightly so.
There will be a point at which security would have to use lethal force, and it's not like people were blind to that fact. The question as to why there weren't more non-lethal dispersion efforts being used upstream is a failure of the entire system than a damnation of the specific shooter. Two AR-15s are in that hallway nearly immediately, but there's no teargas in the hallway?
The Hollywood in me asks where the warning shot was, but the real world doesn't have warning shots.
It's an insurrectionist disguised as a civilian. That's a dangerous job, and people volunteer for it.
There will be a point at which security would have to use lethal force, and it's not like people were blind to that fact. The question as to why there weren't more non-lethal dispersion efforts being used upstream is a failure of the entire system than a damnation of the specific shooter. Two AR-15s are in that hallway nearly immediately, but there's no teargas in the hallway?
The Hollywood in me asks where the warning shot was, but the real world doesn't have warning shots.
It's an insurrectionist disguised as a civilian. That's a dangerous job, and people volunteer for it.
Lexicus
Deity
This even sells it short because she was literally in the process of smashing her way through a barricade on the other side of which were members of Congress sheltering, and the person who shot her was a member of the detail protecting those members of Congress and had instructed the person who was shot to stop.
@Sommerswerd had the correct take, this woman was a victim of Trump and co's lies
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
forget "non-lethal" force options, police in several cases didn't use any force or even take actions that suggested the people entering the building were doing something illegal.
there should be a big difference between the leading group who actually forced their way in, vs the people who walked in calmly. charges wrt 1/6 haven't been making that distinction consistently though (including fake charge i linked earlier), which fails sniff test.
there should be a big difference between the leading group who actually forced their way in, vs the people who walked in calmly. charges wrt 1/6 haven't been making that distinction consistently though (including fake charge i linked earlier), which fails sniff test.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
goose and gander and whatnot. if we're making this claim elsewhere, it doesn't get to go away when you don't like the target this time
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Your attempt at deflection doesn't change the fact that the claim you made is a lie.
edit: who is making that claim elsewhere?
Last edited:
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
i will check linked video when i'm in position to do so to see if imminent threat of severe harm was in play here.
but no-takebacks on the lie part when we start talking about unarmed shootings/bias crap again later lol
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Why? You stated very clearly: a threat to nobody in particular is okay to shoot
Did you read somewhere there was no threat, did someone tell you? In that case, where and or who?
"lol" is not an argument. And there's nothing to lol about.
I bolded the lie by the way. It's shooting someone that is no threat to nobody in particular. Not unarmed shooting/bias or however the hell you're trying to reframe your statement.
There were a lot of people who were more worthy targets to be shot than her, but she put herself in the mass of aggressors worthy of castle doctrine enforcement.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
"castle doctrine", good joke lol
That's what the various mentally incapacitated imagined they were doing that day - storming the castle for their king.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Indeed.
Maybe the cop could have interviewed each and every one while they went through the broken glass in the door.
Hi. What's your name? Are you planning any violence towards the members of the house in the next room? And could you please stop breaking windows and doors to get to them? Thank you, have a nice day. Next!
Every time you use this phrase... It seems like nearly, if not every time you use it, its disingenuous at best.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
