Who shot Ashli Babbitt?

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@Smyrna

Just stop. If you need to rewatch the video…catch up. She was the only one climbing through…which means she did NOT pose a threat that warranted that piece of ■■■■ to take her life.

I don’t accept your conditional.

[Smyrna]

@TheDoctorIsIn

I disagree with your conditional.

That’s ok my man. That’s the difference to a degree in our confidence going through life. I’ve got this and I don’t need to shoot someone who poses that small of a degree of threat and I’m an amateur. Byrd was a professional and I hold him to an even higher standard.

[e7alr]

Can’t actually analyze and make a coherent arguments about the situation? This just makes your thought processes look vapid.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@Smyrna

That’s ok my man. That’s the difference to a degree in our confidence going through life. I’ve got this and I don’t need to shoot someone who poses that small of a degree of threat.

I don’t think you quite grasped what I was trying to say.

[e7alr]

Which indicates that you should never be placed in the position to make a law enforcement use of force decision.

[Guvnah]

I’m going to stand in the camp of people saying she put herself in harms way, and she got harmed.

Sadly, the harm was fatal.

I have posted in other threads that flash-mob lootings would be stopped in their tracks if just one gunshot were fired. Maybe you hit someone, maybe not. But that’s all it would take in most cases to redirect the mob.

Buffalo hunters knew that if you dropped the leader of the stampeding herd, the rest would stop. For humans, it doesn’t even have to be the front guy. Just the crack of a single gunshot makes most people stop in their tracks and flee.

The incident at the Capitol was similar. A mob was breaking in. One guy with a gun against a pounding mob. I contend that Ashley Babbit wasn’t singled out, but was just the one person in the mob who took the bullet. It could have just as easily been someone else around her. And shooting just one person DID stop the mob.

Whether or not it was proper protocol for a LEO legally to fire that shot, it was certainly the proper action to end the threat. And it did.

[e7alr]

Yes, and it wasn’t met to justify pulling the trigger.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@e7alr

Which indicates that you should never be placed in the position to make a law enforcement use of force decision.

What?

I assure you, I’m well aware that I will never be placed in that “position,” but I can’t help but think you also didn’t quite grasp what I was saying.

[Guvnah]

@TheDoctorIsIn

Had Babbitt made it through, there’s no reason to believe that all of them wouldn’t have come through right behind her, through all the windows.

Actually, had Babbitt made it through, she would have opened the door from that side and the mob would have rushed in.

[Oldandtired]

Law enforcement does not get to shot first and find out if the person was armed later. If they do they stand trial for shooting an unarmed person. This little coward got away with murder.

[Samm]

@Sknyluv

@Smyrna

…as the guards supposedly protecting the inner doors stood just a few feet away, did nothing to stop her and just watched her get shot to death at point blank range.

Ok. Ask yourself. If someone is participating in a riot inside of the US capital building and they are breaking through doors with armed officers on the other side … do you think getting shot is a potential outcome in that situation?

Only if the officer on the other side 1) is poorly trained and doesn’t know the law with regard to the use of lethal force, or 2) is so panicked that he forgets his training and the law regarding the use of lethal force.

Which do you think it was, 1) or 2)?

[e7alr]

But he wasn’t one guy with a gun. There were 3 more officers there who moved out of the way and stood to the side watching.

[e7alr]

Try restating it, I might agree.

[Bill.in.PA]

There were a 500,000 people protesting. Only a handful did anything violent.

By the standards of set by BLM/Antifa, J6 was not “mostly peaceful”. It was “almost completely peaceful” except for the multiple deaths of unarmed protestors at the hands of the police.

If this had been a BLM/Antifa “protest”, the Capitol and a large portion of the surrounding buildings would have been burned to the ground.

[Samm]

@WorldWatcher

While I’m saddened that the actions of Ms. Babbitt that day caused her to present herself at the head of a violent mob, to breach the final law enforcement barrier and to attempt to lead the mob into the Speakers Lobby and through the door into the House Chamber where representatives of Congress, their Staff and civilians were present. A situation where she presented a clear and present danger of death or bodily injury to those present.

Her family will not be getting an award from the court. She set the stage for her own death at the hand of a brave law enforcement officer that was holding the line.

WW

No such situation occurred. She was unarmed, and the only people left in that hallway at the moment she put her head through the broken door window were three or four armed police officers.

[e7alr]

Must step away for about 2 hours. Lets keep this going.

[enki]

@Guvnah

I’m going to stand in the camp of people saying she put herself in harms way, and she got harmed.

Sadly, the harm was fatal.

I have posted in other threads that flash-mob lootings would be stopped in their tracks if just one gunshot were fired. Maybe you hit someone, maybe not. But that’s all it would take in most cases to redirect the mob.

Buffalo hunters knew that if you dropped the leader of the stampeding herd, the rest would stop. For humans, it doesn’t even have to be the front guy. Just the crack of a single gunshot makes most people stop in their tracks and flee.

The incident at the Capitol was similar. A mob was breaking in. One guy with a gun against a pounding mob. I contend that Ashley Babbit wasn’t singled out, but was just the one person in the mob who took the bullet. It could have just as easily been someone else around her. And shooting just one person DID stop the mob.

Whether or not it was proper protocol for a LEO legally to fire that shot, it was certainly the proper action to end the threat. And it did.

well said.

[Sknyluv]

@Samm

@Sknyluv

Ok. Ask yourself. If someone is participating in a riot inside of the US capital building and they are breaking through doors with armed officers on the other side … do you think getting shot is a potential outcome in that situation?

Only if the officer on the other side 1) is poorly trained and doesn’t know the law with regard to the use of lethal force, or 2) is so panicked that he forgets his training and the law regarding the use of lethal force.

Which do you think it was, 1) or 2)?

Got it. I guess Babbitt should have considered the overall training of the officers before deciding to enter the Capitol, break some windows, and then try to enter through said window.

[Samm]

@enki

There is very clear video of what happened that day. Everyone at that door knew there was an armed officer with his weapon ready on the other side of the door. One of the rioters even called it out.

Still, they smashed the window and she attempted to crawl through.

¯_(ツ)_/¯

That is not sufficient cause to use lethal force.

[Guvnah]

@e7alr

There were 3 more officers there who moved out of the way and stood to the side watching.

I’m with you that there were lots of examples where the cops and guards and security guys did not try to control the situation (all over the Capitol), and some even opened doors and move ropes and barriers to facilitate the crowd moving in.

The three were on the mob-side of the door.

Still even if there were 5 guys with guns on the shooter’s side of the door, it was a crowd much larger than their contingent, and it was a crowd out of control. In that moment, a bullet was the equalizer between the crowd and the guy tasked with maintaining security on his side of the door.