Sure it is.
You don’t know for sure what someone’s intent or capabilities are. But you can make decisions based on what might be true.
See above.
I’m just saying, everyone around her, knew there was a gun. Everyone around her yelled “he has a gun!”. But somehow Babbitt didn’t, right?
1 Like
Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
Officer Byrd had reason to believe he was in imminent danger from the angry violent mob behind those doors. He acted accordingly. While Ashli Babbitt’s death is tragic and very sad, she put herself at the front of a violent mob and made the choice to climb through the window.
2 Likes
Tucker Carlson was promoting the new documentary film “Capital Punishment” I paid 9.99 to see it. Quite upsetting and bone chilling. The website appeared on Tucker Carlson channel
2 Likes
Maybe it was the presence of the feds that caused the trouble. That is what our forum libs claimed about the courthouse in Portland.
2 Likes
You begin your premise with what appears to be a personal preconception of the deceased. Throwing in “terrorist” to try to elicit an emotion laden response doesn’t carry any weight. The situation at the capital was a riot by US citizens. In use of force situations, which I have actual experience in, an officer has to show restraint until specific criteria are met. Use of Deadly force is in essence capital punishment for the actions of the person subjected to that force by the officer. Because of the often finality of deadly force, it is not to be employed until the officer detects the elements of the use of force policy (rules of engagement) under which the officer’s agency operates. Only the observed actions of the individual can reach that criteria. Law enforcement use of force isn’t combat free fire zone situation. You have to identify a specific and immediate (not gut feeling derived potential future) threat, that the individual is engaged in at that exact moment to justify deadly force.
4 Likes
Like this?
The act of trying to climb through the window didn’t in and of itself create an imminent threat. He had lesser force options at his disposal, while still retaining deadly force as a follow on option if he actually was placed in an imminent threat situation.
2 Likes
I know this is a complete hypothetical, but what if they found a gun in her backpack after she was shot? Even less likely, what if they found a bomb.
Byrd still wouldn’t have a defense, correct? That information would be completely immaterial, correct?
Did you even research that incident before you posted? The individual involved walked up to an officer outside the perimeter, told the officer he had a gun, then pulled an object and assumed a crouched shooting stance, triggering the officer to react and shoot the individual.
https://www.npr.org/2020/08/10/901122007/shooting-outside-white-house-interrupts-trump-briefing
4 Likes
“What if” is not grounds for deadly force. It is why officers are supposed to be trained in shoot/don’t shoot scenarios.
3 Likes
Semi drivers during Rodney King: did they need to be threatened personally by every rioter running up to their big rigs?
During a home invasion: if 5 guys kick in my door do I have to wait and verify they are a physical threat to me?
Yes the rules of using deadly force change when you’re outnumbered. It always has and always will be different because the more people against you the less each person has to do to be a threat.
5 grade schoolers aren’t a threat but send 50 at a single person and you bet your rear end they are a threat. Not because they individually got more threatening, but because “strength in numbers” is such a basic concept of conflict even the animal world uses it
2 Likes
I understand that.
But I’m asking you a hypothetical.
If you truly believe in your stance, you need to be prepared to say that it literally does not matter what was in that backpack.
Are we prepared to say that?
“A male subject and a USSS officer were both transported to a local hospital,” the Secret Service reported. “At no time during this incident was the White House complex breached or were any protectees in danger.”
Now on J6, the VP, SOTH, and all of Congress were in danger.
The shooting was blocks from the White House.
It was a simple yes-no question. Did you hear Byrd in the video or not?
“Everyone” did no such thing. 
“Literally everyone”? Are you sure? That’s absurd, even for you.
You watched the video … did you hear anyone say either of those things?
Who was on the other side of that door? Besides armed policemen that is …
(Unarmed terrorists … what a concept.)
